2030–2035 scenario annex: Gas...

Scenario one: High volatility, tight LNG markets In a scenario characterised by global LNG...

What the European gas...

The European natural gas market has moved decisively away from its pre-2020 equilibrium....

Policy without borders: How...

Electricity market coupling is often discussed in technical or commercial terms, but its...

Fragmented convergence: Why Southeast...

For much of the past decade, the dominant assumption shaping policy and market...
Supported byClarion Energy
HomeSEE Energy NewsSO2 emissions are...

SO2 emissions are higher in Serbia than in the entire EU

According to a report published by CEE Bankwatch Network, air pollution from coal plants in Serbia, Kosovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia and Montenegro affects not only people in their own countries but also those in neighboring EU countries, particularly in Romania, Hungary and Greece.

The Large Combustion Plants Directive – an EU directive to reduce emissions of dangerous substances, adapted for countries parties to the Energy Community Treaty – legally requires these countries to rein in air pollution from their power plants since 2018. Yet, as the report finds, in 2020, the Western Balkans’ 18 coal plants emitted two and half times as much sulfur dioxide (SO2) as all 221 coal power plants in the EU combined.

In the three years since air pollution limits became obligatory under the Energy Community Treaty, coal-fired power plants in Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia and Kosovo have been emitting SO2 at levels that are at least six times the legal limit.

In Serbia alone, coal plants that are subject to the National Emissions Reduction Plan emitted in 2020 more SO2 than the entire EU coal power plant fleet.

The same year, Bosnia and Herzegovina’s TPP Ugljevik was the region’s worst polluter, single- handedly breaching the combined SO2 ceiling for all four countries. The unit, just like Serbia’s Kostolac B, has a desulfurization system fitted, but it has not been put in operation. Worse still, an additional 700 MW of new lignite capacity is still planned at the TPP Ugljevik.

All four countries with National Emission Reduction Plans – Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo and North Macedonia – are currently facing dispute settlement cases for failing to comply with the pollution limits in the Plans in 2018 and 2019. Another dispute settlement case was opened against Montenegro in April 2021 after TPP Pljevlja continued operating beyond its 20,000 hours quota under the Large Combustion Plants Directive’s limited lifetime derogation.

According to the report, the electricity generated by these coal plants and traded with the EU in 2020, although making up a tiny fraction of EU electricity consumption, produced as much SO2 as half of the EU’s coal power plants combined. When the EU trades electricity with Western Balkan countries, it bears both the impacts and part of the responsibility for the resulting out-of-control air pollution. The EU must also help countries in the Western Balkans to move beyond coal by taxing fossil-fuel based electricity imports and ensuring effective enforcement of the Energy Community Treaty.

Energy Coordinator for the Western Balkans at CEE Bankwatch Network Ioana Ciuta concluded that Western Balkan Governments cannot dream of EU membership while ignoring pollution control rules. To avoid this kind of flagrant non-compliance, enforcement of the Energy Community Treaty must be made a priority. The European Commission and EU Governments must introduce effective penalties.

Supported byOwner's Engineer banner

Recent News

Supported byspot_img
Supported byspot_img

Latest News

Supported byspot_img
Supported bySEE Energy News

Related News

2030–2035 scenario annex: Gas prices, CBAM and export margins

Scenario one: High volatility, tight LNG markets In a scenario characterised by global LNG tightness, regulatory uncertainty, and persistent geopolitical risk, European gas prices remain volatile with frequent spikes. Average prices may moderate, but extreme events become more common. Under this...

Gas–power flexibility models for Serbian industries

Flexibility as a cost-control mechanism Flexibility has become the primary tool for managing gas-driven volatility. In the Serbian context, flexibility does not mean eliminating gas use but managing when and how gas and electricity are consumed. At the system level, flexibility...

Gas vs electricity procurement: Strategic choices fo Serbian exporters

Serbian exporters increasingly face a strategic choice: treat gas and electricity as separate procurement streams or integrate them into a unified energy risk strategy. The latter approach is rapidly becoming essential. Gas procurement indexed fully to TTF offers flexibility but...
Supported byVirtu Energy
error: Content is protected !!