Basic
information
|
Base-year emissions Mt CO2 |
2007 emissions Mt CO2 |
Change 2006– 2007 % |
Change 2007/base year % |
Kyoto target % |
Slovakia |
73.3 |
47.0 |
-4.1 |
–34.8 |
–8.0 |
EU-15 |
4232.9 |
4052.0 |
–1.6 |
–5.0 |
–8.0 |
EU-27 |
5564.0 |
5045.1 |
–1.2 |
–9.3 |
No target |
|
2007 GDP Growth % |
2008 GDP Growth % |
2009 GDP Growth (est.) % |
Gross Inland Energy
Consumption Change Feb.2009/
Feb.2008 % |
Slovakia |
10,4 |
6,4 |
-2,6 |
-8,7 |
Source: EEA Report No. 5/2007
Greenhouse-gas emissions have been stable
during last 10 years despite quite strong economic growth. Nevertheless, the
Slovak government expected growth of emissions in the next several years. This
view was not shared by the NGOs, as the economic growth does not always need to
be accompanied by a rise in emissions. Since 2009 when the economic crisis led
to considerable decline of
the industrial production (-25% in first half of 2009), the
emissions are likely to decline even in several years to come.
Public
attitude towards Climate change
Weather-related extremes are frequently
considered by the public as the main climate-change-induced impacts. Actually
this is becoming the trend in mainstream media in recent years and the public simply
follows this explanation of such events. Unfortunately, there is practically no
information presented on the scientific background of climate change (UNFCCC
reports), international political negotiations, or even debates that could shed
light on the whole climate-change policy issue. Due to the devastating floods
and storm (High Tatras) in recent years, it seems that the majority of the
public is well aware of the extreme-weather aspect of climate-change impacts.
Resulting economic damages and problems with
rising insurance costs are known and have been a hot topic in otherwise lacking
discussions on climate change. Having warmer temperatures here in Slovakia is
considered by some people to be beneficial due to the potential savings on the
ever-increasing costs of heating. Kyoto Protocol is known as the term related
to climate change politics but the public is practically unaware of its content
except for the fact that the USA did not signed it. The reason of U.S.
rejection is not known and it seems that public is not much interested in this.
Making sacrifices in exchange for reduction of GHG emissions through higher
costs of energy seems to be highly improbable now and even in the near future.
Energy prices are steadily increasing. The public and the government are
strongly dissatisfied with this trend.
From the economic perspective, the
energy-saving measures, with their huge potential, seem to be the most
attractive. They can have a strong positive effect on GHG-emission reduction as
well as on costs. In contrast to the
widespread lack of knowledge about renewables, the public is aware of the
potential of energy conservation, especially in insulation of housing,
including old and energy-inefficient multi-story apartment buildings in cities.
The lack of funds is the biggest obstacle to the realization of this measure.
There have been several hot climate change issues
mentioned in Slovak media during 2007-08. One of them was the lack of snow and
resultant damage to the tourist industry in some regions (High Tatras). The
international news such as the melting of Arctic ice as well as droughts and
floods in some regions of the world are considered as other bad news which we
cannot influence.
NGOs
activities
Slovak environmental NGOs take the climate change
only as a side issue. There are only few
people dealing with CC, but practically none of them on a professional
day-to-day basis. One or two NGOs are trying at least once a year to organize
seminars where lectures are devoted to recent climate change; these are mostly
about outcomes of COP meetings or about recently reported scientific evidence
of climate change. Unfortunately there are only sporadic contacts between NGOs
and politicians taking part presumably during international conferences. It seems
that the situation is deteriorating with time and that cooperation was much
better 5-10 years ago when vital contacts were stimulated also by the
government. In general Slovak NGOs have only a minor chance to influence the
domestic climate-change policy.
The IPCC 4th Report on climate
change was used only by the FAE as the basic information material for its
climate-change activities. Those few NGOs dealing with this issue are fully
aware of the potential of renewables and of energy savings as the main tools in
combating climate change.
Media
coverage of climate change
It seems that journalists are not willing to
deal with the climate-change issues except as regards weather-related events or
some corruption scandals, e.g., over allocations of quotas in the emission
trading system (ETS). The international negotiations are usually mentioned in
media during the time of COPs but the deeper look into the debates is always
missing. The content of the articles clearly follows the content of
international agency news. The only exception, during which the media
concentrated on climate change, was the heated debate between the Slovak
government and the European Commission over the allocation of permits for ETS.
The debate escalated after the government sued the Commission. By the time the
dispute was settled, public debate ended. Afterwards it reappeared sporadically
whenever large emitters complained about their CO2 caps.
Future post-Kyoto commitments are not
considered by the media to be an important topic. The debate on EU
burden-sharing is missing entirely. It seems clear that journalists do not
consider climate-change negotiations to be very important. Their education in
this area could help definitively. Nevertheless, the big question is, how many of them would be interested when there are more
interesting domestic and international political issues?
Adaptation to climate change is an unknown
phrase in Slovak media as of yet. Even
the most comprehensive sources of information, like the governmental site (ministry
of environment), do not deal with it. Non-technical information that would be
absorbed easily by the public is missing and the only sources of such
information are NGO web pages (Greenpeace and FAE).
The IPCC 4th Report was mentioned
very briefly by the media a the time of its
publishing. Since then the references to this document have disappeared
completely from Slovak media.
Policies
and Measures
Unfortunately, there is no public discussion of
post-2012 targets. The government did not present it as a topic. There have
been brief reports that Slovakia will support the idea of strong economic
growth for which higher emission allowances of GHG are thought to be necessary
in the future. In general, the Slovak government follows the position of Czech
Republic, Hungary, and Poland, which is somehow harmonized in the framework of
V-4 (Visegrad Four).
The NGOs are on the side of stronger emission
cuts than the governmental proposals but it is evident by now that there will
be almost no support for this stand from media or the public.
Emission
trading system (ETS)
Since
Slovakia sued the European Commission and several industries benefited from
over-allocation of CO2 permits within the framework of the ETS, climate-change
politics have become an interesting business. Unfortunately ETS is still
considered by the industry as the potential way of profit-making and not as an
opportunity to change how energy is used. It has been mentioned by the leading
Slovak newspaper Sme (July 28, 2008)
that the profit arising from over-allocated quotas for even one
pulp-mill company was more than 28 mil. EUR (at the price of
20EUR/ton CO2). Sme also reported that there are 5 other companies who
received more than 200.000 tons of over-allocated quotas and that at least one
of them, a coal company, received almost 100% more quotas than they would need
according to their CO2 emissions in previous years. The company argued that the
profit will be used for environmental purposes.
According
to Slovak NGOs the whole ETS as it is designed now is a complete failure.
Furthermore the ETS is considered to be too complicated. Rising corruption and non-transparency seem
to be its weakest points. Thus, only full auctioning with tough national caps
can effectively lead to the reduction of GHG emissions. Introducing this tough
system seems to be hardly possible in Slovakia as well as in other central and
eastern European countries. Slovak NGOs believe that all of these problems can
be overcome by completely abandoning the ETS and by replacing it with a system
of carbon/energy taxation. In contrast to the ETS, such a tax could cover all
GHG emissions. The tax on the level of a few percentage points of the energy
price (fossil fuels) could create huge revenues. And if these revenues could be
allocated completely to renewables and to energy-saving measures, then we could
see the real turnover to a sustainable energy future. The results of ETS do not
support this change at all.
Future
targets
The EU
proposal to reduce GHG emissions to 20 or 30 per cent below 1990 levels for the
period beyond 2012 does not seem to be too aggressive for Slovakia, as there
was 33% reduction achieved already in 2005. The government can easily push for
this target with not much to do domestically.
Renewables
and energy savings are frequently mentioned as the means of GHG reduction, but
effective governmental tools (support) are missing and the potential is still
unused. Informing the public about the roles of renewables and energy savings
in this time of climate change is lacking as well. Slovakia has the feed-in
tariffs in place, which are quite interesting for some renewables (0,15 EUR/kWh for biogas electricity), and beginning just this
year, they are also guaranteed for several years (12 years for new
installations). The lack of long-term guarantees hindered the investments in
this area. Support for energy savings is a bit complicated. Recently offered
state or local subsidies even for most acute purposes (insulation of buildings)
are simply not able to cover the needs. Actually the biggest chance
for development of renewables and energy savings in next years come from
the structural and cohesion funds available for public entities and even for
private companies. Up to 95% of investment cost for public projects in the
least developed Slovak regions can be covered from EU funds.
The main
progress in energy savings was achieved by the collapse of old socialist and
ineffective heavy industries and their replacement in recent years by modern
technologies. Renewables are still waiting for their development. The chances
are good that the potential of RE will be realized, but lack of investment, of
skills and even of information creates barriers. The only sector in which
moderate development is visible by now is in biomass heating (replacement of
expensive natural gas and of some old coal-fuelled heating plants). Especially
on the individual level, people are cutting themselves free from district
heating systems (natural gas) and are buying biomass burners. The price of
biomass heat, even without state support, is half the price of natural-gas
heat. This development has meant that some centralised heating systems are now
struggling for survival. Unfortunately, the replacement of natural gas by
biomass, which could help these facilities, is not considered.
Revival
of Coal and Nuclear Industries
There are
two proposals for new coal power plants to be built in the eastern part of
Slovakia (Trebisov and Strazske) that are pushed strongly by private investors.
However, their fate is unclear, as there was strong public opposition to these
projects. “Clean” coal-burning as the way forward is not mentioned, nor is
carbon capture and storage.
Nuclear
power is considered by the government as the most important future energy
source but climate change is not used as the argument for their construction.
The main reason given for completion of two reactors (440 MW each) in Mochovce
is energy security (independence from imports of electricity). As the Slovak
government owns only 34% shares in the power utility (SE) that owns the partly
constructed units 3 and 4 of the nuclear power plant Mochovce, there is only a
small chance for the government to influence the final decision of Enel
(majority owner of SE) to complete the units.