We have no doubt that the future lies in decarbonization and "green", i.e., renewable energy sources (RES), but we do not want to silently watch this transition take place at the expense of the poor inhabitants of the Balkans, and in favor of the rich energy lobbies.
In the past, lignite was seen as a gift of nature in BiH and Serbia. Lignite was domestic oil. One ton of oil is the energy equivalent of five tons of lignite.
The calculation is simple:
1 ton of oil ~ 6,29 barrels x $60 = $377 or €343 (€1=$1,1)
5 tons of lignite x 15 € = 75 € (in BiH 1 ton of lignite is extracted for 15 €)
The calculation says that, in terms of energy, "BiH oil" is cheaper than real oil by about 80 percent (343/75) or, in popular terms (though methodologically incorrect), almost five times. You don't need to spend foreign currency on it, and at the same time, it provides a large number of jobs.
The European Union (Energy Community) is undoubtedly preparing the ground for the closure of coal-fired thermal power plants (TEP) in the region. When producing 1 MWh of electricity in a coal-fired thermal power plant, 1 ton of CO2 is produced. The current price of CO2 emissions is approximately 30 euros/ton (a growing trend is planned). If our thermal power plants were to accept the obligation to pay for CO2 emissions (30 euros/MWh), it would almost double the price of electricity and lead to the unprofitability of operating thermal power plants, and they would go bankrupt.
This process has already begun quietly and behind closed doors, since recently in Montenegro CO2 tariffs have been paid for 1/3 of the total production of the Pljevlja thermal power plant (24 euros per ton).
Is it possible to justly reconcile the demands of the EU (closing an entire economic branch, which leads to the loss of thousands of jobs with the loss of capital for the state and small shareholders in TE) and the legitimate interest of the citizens of Republika Srpska and the local community? Yes! It's possible.
It must not be forgotten that thermal power plants in the Republic of Srpska (BiH) are joint-stock companies that have their own capital. When a political decision is made in Germany to close a coal-fired power plant, it is compensated for, and another German example, the Datteln power plant, should be looked at.
When Bulgaria closed the Kozloduy NPP, it was compensated. And the Netherlands is compensating for the closing of the Hemweg coal-fired power plant...
We highlight three possible scenarios for the closure of coal-fired thermal power plants in the Republic of Srpska (and the same can be applied to Montenegro and Serbia).
The first model. The EBRD ("EU" or a third party) buys significant shares in mines and thermal power plants and gradually shuts them down over a realistic number of years, paying fair compensation to the workers and the community. And on the surface of the mine and TE can get a concession for a solar power plant.
The second, fairest model.
If citizens will pay incentives for more expensive electricity from renewable energy sources (RES) and if thermal power plants in RS (BiH) will pay compensation for CO2 emissions, then let a part of those funds be returned to thermal power plants - joint stock companies to compensate for losses.
For example, if a mine and thermal power plant of 200 MW have a capital of 200 million euros, a dedicated "fund for compensation of workers and the construction of RES" should be established at that joint stock company. A part of incentives for RES and fees for CO2 emissions would be returned to that dedicated fund. After a certain number of years, the value of that fund would grow to a sufficient amount to compensate: workers (for severance pay because they lose their jobs), capital (old megawatts from coal-fired thermal power plants are replaced by new "OIE megawatts" in the amount of €200 million) and local communities .
If the first or second model is not realized, the third, "black and wicked model" is certain, which is that citizens pay incentives for more expensive electricity from RES and that this money corruptly goes to privileged individuals, which we wrote about in the article "on the return on capital". That is, that our poor citizens finance the rich RES industry of the West through incentives, which we wrote about in the article: Do the poor nations of the Balkans finance the rich West - "Superhik", and through the negative example of Croatia.
The result of the third "black model" would be enormous losses of mines and thermal power plants due to the agreement to pay compensation for CO2 emissions, e.g. as in Bulgaria (only in one year "TE Marica Istok 2" made a loss of €435 million).
The financially exhausted state will then be forced to send the mines and thermal power plants into bankruptcy, in which the workers will be left with "short sleeves" as well as the shareholders (the state owns 80%).
The message of this announcement is that, without reasonable and fair negotiations with the Energy Community (EU), the citizens of the Republika Srpska and the region are written in black. They will be left without a valuable resource, and will pay for expensive electricity.
Although Bosnia and Herzegovina emits only 4,5 tons of CO2 per inhabitant, and developed countries more than 15 tons of CO2 per inhabitant, its poor citizens will subsidize the Western RES industry through incentives and, in addition, credit it with our savings so that their banks will also make money.
Only the privileged investors in the RES sector and the related management and corrupt structures will do very well financially.
The RES sector policy must be in the interest of the (citizens) of Republika Srpska, i.e. the countries of the region. Articles of this type, advocacy for the welfare of the community, are a real rarity. On the other hand, the RES sector has huge direct incentives (eg more than €250 million per year in Croatia alone). Due to huge incentives, i.e. money, they have a lot of power, so they exert influence on the media, associations, portals, symposiums, scientists, "commissioned studies"... Only for the citizens, who pay incentives, no one advocates. This article attempts to advocate the interests of citizens, shareholders and local communities.
Bonus video:
