Parliamentary amendments aimed at accelerating Montenegro’s renewable energy deployment promise faster planning, environmental screening and construction procedures for wind, solar, storage and associated grid infrastructure. Residents near Brezna say the changes shift legal power toward developers while weakening protections for private land, water resources and rural livelihoods.
The criticism from the Save Brezna civic initiative focuses on amendments to the Law on the Use of Energy from Renewable Sources alongside changes to spatial-planning and construction legislation. The group argues that the combined package enables the state to designate large areas for accelerated renewable development, shortens parts of the environmental process, and treats private generation projects and their connections as matters of overriding public interest.
Brezna substation upgrade to support up to 400 MW renewables
Brezna in north-western Montenegro is being upgraded from a local 110/35 kV substation into a 400/110/35 kV transmission node intended to accommodate up to 400 MW of additional renewable capacity. The financing includes a sovereign-guaranteed €28mn loan from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, plus Western Balkans Investment Framework grants. The grants reported include €6.4mn for implementation and an earlier €1.1mn technical assistance allocation.
The project scope includes two 300 MVA transformers, expansion of the substation and integration with Montenegro’s emerging 400 kV ring and the wider Trans-Balkan transmission corridor. It is expected to reduce network losses by about 13 GWh per year, which is described as worth more than €1mn annually at recent wholesale electricity values. The upgrade is also expected to cut emissions by roughly 6,000 tonnes of CO₂.
Brezna functions both as a transmission investment and as a connection point for privately developed generation. The dispute highlighted in the debate centers on separating those roles, given that a transmission substation improving system security differs from wind turbines, solar arrays, batteries, access roads and dedicated connection lines that feed into it.
Bijela wind farm permitting timeline and grid connection steps
The largest project linked to Brezna is Alcazar Energy Partners’ 118.8 MW Bijela wind farm, planned primarily in Šavnik municipality with smaller components extending toward Nikšić, Plužine and Kolašin. The wind development is expected to include 17 turbines, associated roads, internal cables, a project substation and a 110 kV transmission line connecting it to Brezna.
The Environmental Protection Agency approved the project’s environmental impact assessment in February 2026. Estimated annual output is about 350 GWh, implying a capacity factor of approximately 33.6%, which the source characterizes as consistent with high-altitude onshore wind and higher than expected utility-scale solar capacity factors in Montenegro.
Alcazar acquired the Bijela project from local developers Simes Inženjering and Sistem MNE in 2023. The project company Vjetro Park Bijela is controlled by Alcazar’s second investment vehicle.
EPCG talks, CGES connection agreements and broader investment plans
A connection agreement was signed with transmission operator CGES in September 2024. Negotiations over a possible power-purchase agreement with state utility EPCG began after a memorandum signed in January 2025.
The company has indicated its total Montenegro investment programme could rise to $500mn, placing Bijela within a broader regional portfolio rather than as an isolated asset. Residents argue that land is already being acquired or subjected to long-term rights for the wind project and related infrastructure.
The Save Brezna initiative says some proposed payments are only tens or hundreds of euros for rights extending over 30 years. Compensation is described as depending on parcel type, area affected, ownership documentation and whether transactions involve full acquisition, lease or easement arrangements.
Land restrictions versus compensation under accelerated public-interest presumption
The amendments do not automatically remove ownership rights or compensation requirements, according to the source description. A declaration of overriding public interest is not treated as a completed expropriation by itself; the state must still establish legal grounds for taking land or creating an easement, define affected property and provide compensation subject to review.
The concern raised is that the presumption changes how disputes begin, shifting residents’ burden toward demonstrating harm from location, route or construction methods that has not been properly assessed or cannot be mitigated. Article 11e of the amended renewables framework is described as placing planning, construction and operation of renewable plants, grid connections, related network infrastructure and storage systems within a presumption of overriding public interest, public health and safety.
The source notes that this language follows direction associated with the EU’s revised Renewable Energy Directive (RED III). RED III is described as requiring EU member states to presume renewable generation plus associated grid and storage infrastructure serve an overriding public interest until climate neutrality is achieved.
Cumulative assessment concerns under Article 11d decision periods
The framework described as more conditional than an unconditional declaration allows rebuttal where developments would cause significant environmental effects that cannot be mitigated or compensated. Member states can restrict application by location, technology or technical characteristics, while Natura 2000, water and protected-species obligations continue to require legally defined assessments and case-specific reasoning.
The source says Montenegro is not an EU member and that Save Brezna disputes claims that immediate adoption of specific RED III provisions was required by the Energy Community framework or the EU Growth Plan. It adds that Growth Plan alignment relates more directly to RED II measures including auction development, prosumers and streamlined permitting.
Brezna-linked solar projects exceed stated 400 MW integration capability
The source highlights another concern through Article 11d introducing decision periods of 45 days, or 30 days for smaller projects and repowering within designated renewable-acceleration areas. These deadlines are described as governing environmental screening—determining whether a full project-level assessment is required—rather than compressing an entire environmental impact assessment into those timelines.
A credible accelerated regime is described as depending on strategic environmental assessment before areas are designated, with baseline data covering settlements, water sources, forests, agricultural use, protected habitats, migration corridors, geotechnical conditions and cultural heritage. The source also emphasizes baseline coverage of combined effects from all projects expected to connect within a zone.
This issue is framed as relevant at Brezna because development extends beyond Bijela. EBRD documentation cited in the source identifies Bijela alongside a proposed 195 MW Dubrovska–Duži solar, a 240 MW Somina solar project and expansion of the Gvozd wind complex among projects associated with broader grid development.
The combined nominal capacity cited exceeds Brezna’s stated 400 MW integration capability. CGES had signed six renewable connection agreements representing approximately 1,327 MW of planned wind and solar capacity by late 2024.
Brezna grid buildout depends on 400 kV lines beyond transformer works
The source describes Brezna’s upgrade as one response within a wider grid programme rather than its endpoint. It says usefulness depends on completion of associated 400 kV lines, system studies, protection schemes, balancing arrangements and reinforcement elsewhere on the network. It also notes that transformer nameplate ratings do not guarantee firm connection capacity under every system condition.
An additional 400 MW, split between wind and solar, could generate approximately 900 GWh–1.2 TWh annually depending on technology mix. The source links this scale to reduced reliance on Montenegro’s 225 MW Pljevlja thermal power plant, improved export performance during favourable periods and potential hourly surpluses during windy or sunny conditions.
The export discussion includes an undersea cable to Italy plus regional interconnectors and market coupling. Cross-border capacity is described as finite and affected by regional production patterns across Albania, Croatia, Greece, Bulgaria and southern Italy during high-renewables periods.
Curtailment differences between high-altitude wind and solar output profiles
The source distinguishes curtailment treatment between wind and solar generation types. High-altitude wind such as Bijela is expected to generate across wider hour ranges including evenings, nights and winter when solar output is absent; its capacity factor and system value are therefore described as materially different from photovoltaic plants.
Auction design for first 250 MW solar portfolio in Montenegro
The source describes Montenegro’s first solar auction as designed for up to 250 MW, with minimum project size of 400 kW, a ceiling price of €65/MWh, and a structure combining a 12-year market premium or contract-for-difference mechanism. It says quota expansion could add up to 20%, adding another 50 MW.
A utility-scale cost range cited for this portfolio implies capital needs of approximately
