The Center for Ecology and Sustainable Development (CEKOR) and the Coalition for Sustainable Mining in Serbia (KORS) said that replacing the thesis that renewable energy sources will be expensive to integrate into the system if no coal reserves are left, ie thermal power plants that will work only in walk quietly until the need arises to make up for a period when there is no wind or sun.
“It is deliberately forgotten that Serbia has huge potentials for the construction of reversible hydropower plants Djerdap 3 with more than two gigawatts (GW) of potential installed capacity and Bistrica with more than 600 megawatts (MW) that would far exceed the required regulatory potentials in ‘quiet and dark’ periods windless and dark “, the two associations stated in response to the letters from the Electric Power Industry of Serbia (EPS), the Electric Network of Serbia (EMS) and the Energy Agency of Serbia (AERS) to the Ministry of Mining and Energy of Serbia.
In letters to the competent ministry at the end of last year, EPS, EMS and AERS stated the negative consequences of the integration of producers of electricity from renewable sources into the electricity system and asked for a change in policy.
They demanded a change in the Law on Renewable Energy Sources (RES) and a postponement of the implementation and enactment of all bylaws that provide incentives for producers of electricity from renewable energy sources.
The reason for the appeal of the two state-owned companies is the large number of submitted requests for connection to the RES network.
For EPS, EMS and AERS, the provisions of the Law on RES are disputable, which are the cost of balance responsibility on EPS, as well as the right of electricity producers from RES to priority access to the electricity system.
They proposed as a temporary measure to suspend all further activities from or in connection with the issuance of conditions and manner of connection through the Connection Study until the adoption of these amendments to the Law on the Use of RES.
CEKOR and KORS stated that the transition from thermal plants to renewable sources should not be stopped and that modern reversible hydropower plants have shown that they are technically far superior in reactive replenishment of required energy, ie voltage equalization in relation to thermal power plants.
“It is financially, ecologically and energetically impossible for Serbia to have a reserve of coal because there is a far better, more environmentally and economically and energy-friendly solution, and that is reversible hydropower plants,” the associations said.
It is added that reversible hydropower plants can be built in the same or shorter period than thermal power plants because, for example, the Kostolac B3 thermal power plant has been under construction for eight years and is far from being completed.
And when Kostolac B3 is built, it will produce, as those associations stated, huge losses because taxes on carbon dioxide (CO2), and taxes on sulfur, nitrogen, and heavy metals in particles, not to mention, will burden it so much that can be used only with huge annual grants from the budget, ie which is the only thing possible in a market economy through a drastic and dramatic increase in the price of electricity from 600 to 800%.
CEKOR and KORS stated that reversible hydropower plants will have far better technical potential for regulation, that they will not cause dramatic pollution and a large number of deaths, as well as additional huge investments.
“For the use of reversible hydropower plants, it will not be necessary to increase the production and use of coal for the same amount of electricity on the grid, because in order for thermal power plants to continue to operate, it will be necessary to equip them with electrostatic precipitators and desulphurisation systems.” and KORS.
They pointed out that because of that, thermal power plants will pollute the environment dramatically more, that huge money will be spent on opening new mines and on CO2 emission taxes that will be introduced around 2025.
Apparently, as they stated, EPS and EMS did not have time or simply have not been able to think about these projects in the last ten years or there are some contracts with some suppliers of machinery, filters and services (German, Chinese, Japanese companies) to Serbia will continue to buy their goods and services.
The latest attempts to ensure the sustainable use of coal in Serbia by advertising the need to provide a reserve due to the introduction of renewable sources, ie to provide heating for New Belgrade, Obrenovac, Lazarevac, Pozarevac, are just a well-known arsenal of the coal sector. for the future of Serbia, an extremely dangerous arsenal of artificial provision of demand for heat and energy from coal “, the associations pointed out.
According to KORS and CEKOR, EPS and EMS “forgot to tell the citizens of Serbia a few ‘little things’ about the continued use of coal, and that is that the construction of a new thermal power plant with all accompanying installations and providing coal takes at least 10 years.”
During that time, as they stated, the money tied to the budget that will be thrown to foreign coal companies could be invested in the insulation of hundreds of thousands of households, and that work could be completed in the next five to ten years.
“The total fund of houses and apartments could be isolated and change the way of heating by about 10 billion euros, and only for opening new mines by buying foreign machines, EPS plans to spend between six and ten billion,” said CEKOR and KORS.
E2 portal (Beta)
Source: E2 Portal by www.e2.rs.
*The article has been translated based on the content of E2 Portal by www.e2.rs. If there is any problem regarding the content, copyright, please leave a report below the article. We will try to process as quickly as possible to protect the rights of the author. Thank you very much!
*We just want readers to access information more quickly and easily with other multilingual content, instead of information only available in a certain language.
*We always respect the copyright of the content of the author and always include the original link of the source article.If the author disagrees, just leave the report below the article, the article will be edited or deleted at the request of the author. Thanks very much! Best regards!