DECARBONISING EASTERN EUROPE
P R E PA R E D B Y D R S T E P H E N M I L L S
PRESENTATION FOR JOGMEC, MAR 2022

PRE S E NTATI ON O U T L I NE
• Brief look at the current situation• Importance of coal power in Eastern Europe• Issues of environmental pollution, funding…

• What is being done to address these issues• Case studies of selected coal-using countries• The future for coal power in the region

Disclaimer: Views, findings and publications of theInternational Centre for Sustainable Carbon do notnecessarily represent the views or policies of the IEA
Secretariat or its individual member countries.

E A S TERN E U RO PE

Albania, Belarus, Bosnia,Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia,Hungary, Kosovo,Macedonia, Moldova,Montenegro, North
Macedonia, Poland,Romania, RussianFederation, Serbia, Slovak
Republic, Turkey, Ukraine…

Image: World Atlas, 2022

T H E E U – REGI O N A L I MPA C T A N D ME MBE RS HIPEU Member States Bulgaria, Czechia, Croatia, Hungary, Romania, Poland and Slovak Republic
Candidate countries Include Albania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia and Turkey
Potential candidate countries Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo
For full EU membership, countries must fully transpose and implement EU legislation by the timeof accession

Members must also agree to the EU’s plan for carbon neutrality by 2050

WH Y C OA L PO WE R PE RS ISTS IN T H E REGIO N• Use of indigenous energy resources, reducing importdependency• Enhanced national energy security• Coal is affordable, cost-effective• Easy availability of coal supplies• Most affordable, reliable way to meet growing demand• Diversification of energy sources• Drives economic and/or social development• Helps provide universal access to electricity• Employment

REGI O N A L C OA L PO WE R
• Around 50 major coal-fired power plants in
Western Balkans and Ukraine• Total installed capacity of ~35 GW• Roughly 70% (26 GW) are in Ukraine and fire hardcoal
• Remaining 8.7 GW are lignite-fired and locatedmainly in Serbia, BiH, North Macedonia,Montenegro• Poland is largest regional producer and user of hardcoal and lignite• Turkey is also a major coal user (>25 major plants
totalling 20 GW)

Country

PolandCoalgenerating
capacity(MW)
31,225

Electricity
from coal – %in a typicalyear
68-70

BiH

2156

65-75

Kosovo

1288

95-98

Montenegro

225

45-55

N. Macedonia

1283

50-51

Serbia

4353

67-71

Belarus---0Ukraine

2184

30

Moldova2520

0Turkey

20,32333-36

Individual country
reliance on coal forpower generation

S U S TA IN ABLE D E VE LOPMEN T GOA L S
The potential of clean coal technologies to contribute towards meeting the United Nations
Sustainable Development Goals in Eastern Europe
SELECTED UNITED NATIONS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS (SDG)
Goal
7 – Affordable clean energy
9 – Industry, innovations andinfrastructure

Aims
Ensure universal access to affordable, reliable and modern energy services by 2030. This includes
enhancing international collaboration to facilitate access to clean energy research and technology,
including cleaner fossil fuel technology
Build resilient infrastructure, promote sustainable industrialisation and foster innovation. The aim
is to upgrade certain aspects of industry by 2030 in order to make them more sustainable, withincreased resource-use efficiency, whilst adopting clean and environmentally sound technologies

12 – Responsible consumption,production

Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns. Aims include the environmentally soundmanagement of wastes throughout their life cycle, and significantly reducing any adverse impacts
on human health and the environment

13 – Climate action

Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts

17 – Partnership for the goals

Revitalise the global partnership for sustainable development through improved international
cooperation on topics that include energy technologies with a low environmental impact

E N VI RO NMENTAL I S S U ES
• Excessive emissions of SO2, NOx, and particulates from some plants• Not just a national problem, but a transboundary issue• Some units are being equipped with FGD, low NOx burners,
improved particulate control systems• Some older capacity should be closed but the output is needed• Efforts are underway in some countries to minimise emissions, but more needs to bedone

REGI O N A L I N FLU E N CES
External influences• Include China, Russia, the USA, Turkey, Italy, and the Gulf States• Each has tended to focus attention on specific countries• Can involve combinations of political, economic and security issues

EU is biggest trading partner and investor• But plans to eliminate coal power• Not all countries willing/able to end coal power soon
• Some countries sought finance from elsewhere• Strong non-EU ties developing - for example, between Serbia and Russia

D EC A RBO NI SI NG E A S T ERN E U RO PEA N
PO WE R S EC TO RS• National strategies and plans at different stages• Some driven by EU requirement for carbon-neutrality by 2050
• Different ways forward and suggested timelines for phasing out coal
• Reflects national circumstances
Some countries are unable or unwilling to abandon coal-fired power generation soon as
there are no affordable large scale alternatives available
Czechia (Czech Republic) as an example
Government’s Coal Commission studying options
available• has suggested ending coal power by 2038
• but coal is country’s only major energy resource• this provides 46% of electricity + 25% of residential
heating

PO L A N D 1••••Poland is an EU member stateRelies heavily on hard coal and lignite
Both are used to generate up to 70% of country’s electricity
Government will not end coal use entirely until 2049

5.3 GW Belchatow power plant(courtesy PGE)

Coal’s share in energy mix may fall to 20% by 2030, and 11% by 2040
- mainly replaced by natural gas plants – but not without risk
Several HELE technologies currently in use:
• supercritical pulverized coal combustion (Belchatow)• supercritical circulating fluidized bed (Łagisza)

Some power utilities have announced closure plans

460 MW Lagisza SC CFBC plant(courtesy PKE)

PO L A N D 2• Coal power currently provides much of Poland’s electricity• A main driver of the country’s economy• Polish hard coal and lignite provides energy security
Main alternatives are intermittent renewables and natural gas- but both have their drawbacks
Completely replacing Poland’s coal power is likely to be a long and expensive process

T U RK E Y 1
•
••
•
•
•

Electricity demand has increased steadily
Around 88% of total energy and 70% of electricity is from fossil fuelsHigh dependence on energy imports
Coal is the main indigenous energy resource - mainly lignite
Government incentivising the greater use of Turkish coal for power generation
Coal demand, production, and consumption has increased

1440 MW Elbistan B
power plant (courtesy TKI)

T U RK E Y 2
New projects - between 37 and 44 GW of coal-based projects in the pipeline• 6 projects announced• More than 20 in pre-permit development• 6 permitted• 2 under construction
Some will use imported coal; around 20 using domestic lignite or hard coal
Individual projects range in capacity from 150 MW up to 3.5 GW
Some being funded and developed by Chinese organisations
Also other projects at earlier stages

S E RBI A 1• Main indigenous energy resource: 7 Gt of proven lignitedeposits

Serbian mining operation (pixabay)• Lignite provides half of total primary energy supply and much of
the country’s electricity• Electricity market dominated by national power utility
Elektroprivreda Srbije (EPS)- owns all major power generation + mining assets- produces 37-40 Mt/y of lignite- supplied to three power major power plants(Nikola Tesla, Kolubara A, and Morava)

Serbia has applied to become an
EU Accession Country

S E RBI A 2• Lignite-fired power plants generate around 70% of Serbia’s electricity• Remainder produced mainly from hydropower• New 350 MW SC lignite unit under construction (Kostolac B3)• China Machinery Engineering Corporation leading construction• Second Kostolac project being developed also with Chinese involvement• Belt and Road Initiative project of up to 400 MW
National Spatial Plan 2021-2035 envisages continued use of lignite for power generation- foresees possible development of new thermal projects

BO S N I A 1
•
••
•
•
•

Bosnian lignite-fired power plant (Pixabay)

Energy resources limited – imports oil and gas
Lignite resources of around 5.3 Gt
Lignite production approximately 7 Mt/ySeveral new mines planned
Most lignite supplied to the power sector
Much generating capacity outdated and needs
modernisingBO S N I A 2• 5 main lignite-fired power plants• Various new mining and power projects underconsideration• Government has proposed increasing generation
capacity over next decade• Aspires to build four new lignite-fired power plants

New Tuzla 7
project is mostadvanced(Pixabay)T H E FU T U RE FO R C OA L IN T H E REGIO N ?
Sometimes conflicting requirements• Requirement to meet EU environmental standards• EU, COP 26 - aspirations to move away from coal
But lack of affordable, reliable alternatives• Coal, lignite often the only indigenous energy resource• Fossil fuels provide a combined total of nearly two thirds ofelectricity in Albania, Bosnia, Kosovo, Montenegro, North
Macedonia and Serbia
Alternatives to coal?
• Renewables - but cost, intermittency…
• Switch to gas – cost, possible shortages, security of supply
Coal’s future?

Sugozu power plant, Turkey (courtesy STEAG)FU T U RE 2Future coal power developments projects likely to take two forms:
New projects• Capacity range: 135 MW – 3.5 GW• Projects, for example, in Bosnia, Serbia, Turkey, Ukraine…
• Some projects based on HELE - SC and USC• But also some smaller subcritical units
Modernisation of existing capacity• Projects in Bosnia, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia, Ukraine• Plant upgrades and/or modernisation• Deployment of emission control systems

FU T U RE 3 – C C U S POT E NT I AL

• Little interest in carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS)• Most projects uneconomic and/or power plants unsuitable• Only limited data on possible CO2 storage options• Lack of enthusiasm for CCUS projects currently

THANK YOU FOR YOUR AT TENTION

Dr Stephen Mills
Steve.Mills@icscarbon.org