The Polish obstacle on the European road to greener tomorrow
By Magdalena Skrzypek
Politicians hurry out of the meeting room with frowning faces in a clear air of frustration. Only one delegation seems content. “We cannot agree without the burden sharing among the Member States. Otherwise our economy will suffer,” one of the officials tells the press. His body is worn out but his eyes are glowing with hope. Hope for re-election.
This is, most likely, the picture after the summit on 2030 framework for climate and energy policies in October 2014. As the EU is devising its plan to reduce carbon emissions, Poland might put a spanner in the works again. Polish opposition to European ambitions on the climate is no secret. But it is not just because of its coal-reliant economy. There is something else at stake as well: politicians afraid of losing their seats in the next elections.
Energy and climate goals for 2030
The draft for the EU 2030 goals was presented in January 2014. The European Commission called for a 40 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. It also proposed that EU should produce 27 percent of its energy from renewables by the same date.
Unlike the policy adopted in 2008, this time the proposal does not address energy efficiency. The "20-20-20" targets set for 2020 included a 20 percent reduction in greenhouse gas output, a 20 percent improvement in energy efficiency and a 20 percent market penetration of renewable energy.
The EU's carbon targets require unanimous approval. The final version needs to be accepted by MEPs at the European Parliament and EU heads of state at the European Council. So far, no consensus has been reached, but the deadline is fast approaching. According to the March Summit Draft, the European Union will agree on the main elements of the EU’s 2030 climate and energy framework package “no later than October 2014.” The ultimate cut-off point is December 2015, when the COP summit to negotiate a new global climate deal takes place in Paris.
It is not going to be easy to get an agreement from all of the 28 member states. The EU is split between the Green Growth Group represented by Nordic and Western EU countries and the policy pessimists, coming mainly from Eastern and Central Europe. A tough nut to crack indeed and Poland might not make it easier, if the country ends up calling for another postponing of the decision or maybe even vetoing it.
Not the first time
Poland could be perceived as ‘EU climate renegade’, unwilling to implement the EU clean energy directives. One of the examples of the evidently sly behaviour might be the expansion of the Opole power plant launched at the beginning of 2014 by Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk.
Two massive 900 MW units that are being constructed do not meet the EU laws on Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). But from the perspective of Polish law the Opole's extension is perfectly legal, as the government had not written the CCS directive onto national statute.
It also would not be the first time for the country to make some fuss over the EU energy and climate goals. In 2012 the Eastern European country stood alone and vetoed the so called ‘roadmap’ – the European Union 2050 targets for further cuts in carbon emissions. This March, the country ruled out another climate deal, thus squandering the possibility of an early agreement on the 2030 framework.
Needles to say, the others are annoyed. Is seems that politicians try to keep a civil tongue, but the NGOs quite explicitly express their disapproval. Jason Anderson from the WWF European Policy Office told EurActiv that Poland’s moves show a "shocking disregard for climate protection and economic revitalisation." Greenpeace EU Climate Policy Director Joris den Blanken further condemns the country, claiming that, “Poland is adding to its image of an out-dated economy and is holding back progress for the entire continent.”
Poland’s heebie-jeebies
What problem does Poland have exactly? The Polish opposition centres mainly on ‘burden sharing’ and the degree of transition the country needs to make compared to other member states. The country demands the introduction of mechanisms that would allow disadvantaged and lower income countries to be compensated for the colossal burden created by the execution of the 2030 climate and energy goals.
A recent statement released by the Visegrad group emphasises that new commitments should enable countries “to tailor their action according to their development needs to grow in a sustainable manner and preserve their competitiveness.”
The country would indeed need to undergo a complex metamorphosis that would require costly modernization of heavy industry sectors. In its report on the costs and benefits of the 2030 framework, Enerdata’s Global Energy Forecasting team underlines that Poland’s power mix includes only six percent renewables, compared to the almost 25 percent average in the EU.
The Eastern European country is also the second largest consumer of the coal among all member states. Around 90 percent of Poland’s electricity comes from the ‘dirtiest fossil fuel’ in terms of carbon emissions, as estimated by the World Coal Association. No wonder that the 2030 climate and energy goals give the Polish government the heebie-jeebies.
Bad for business
Poland also fears the negative effects of climate package on the economy and the country’s competitiveness. “Strict standards to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in Europe will lead to transmission of these emissions to other countries and the transfer of heavy industry. In other words, European steel mills will move to Ukraine, the Russian Federation, India and the United States,” explains Janusz Steinhoff, Former Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Economy in an interview with the news agency Newseria.
The ex-soviet country currently holds one of the Europe’s most dynamic economies. Still, it has not yet reached the EU average level of economic performance. The implementation of the climate package could hinder the growth and decrease the GDP. “An ambitious 40 perent greenhouse reduction target for 2030 is the most cost-effective milestone in our path towards a low-carbon economy,” said the European Commission President José Manuel Barroso after the framework project was announced in January.
The impact assessment accompanying the 2030 energy and climate proposal states that the sole target will lead to a loss of between 0,1 percent and 0,45 percent of the EU’s GDP. Mining, energy, metal and chemical production are only some of the Polish industries that might suffer from the framework. As a result, some of the workers could be made redundant.
“It is a serious potential risk, as the affected branches account for approximately 40 percent of added value generated by the industry in Poland and employ around 800.000 people," warns Boleslaw Jankowski, PhD, CEO of Systems Research EnergSys Ltd in one of the Polish newspapers.
Keep the government in power
But these are not the only reasons for opposing 2030 climate and energy package. The key issue is political polls, as the government strives to remain in power. The politicians might be too afraid of public opinion turning against them. With the municipal elections this autumn and parliamentary and presidential elections next year, the government obviously does not want to make any unpopular decisions.
Katarzyna Reiter, member of the Polish environment ministry team, told EurActiv that non-binding emission targets for 2030 would be a “sexy” and popular option for the Polish government. And if the demands cannot be met, then why not at least postpone the negative event?
The ruling Civic Platform (PO) has been in power since 2007 and now faces a drop in popularity. European Parliament elections showed that Prime Minister Donald Tusk's party really needs to watch its step. The State Electoral Commission announced a narrow win for the governing party, which gained 32,13 percent of the votes. Law and Justice (PiS), the biggest opposition party, lost only by 0,35 percent, acquiring 31.7 percent of the votes.
EU climate and energy framework is a touchy subject. In 2012 Law and Justice called for a nationwide referendum on the renegotiation of the 2020 package, with the party’s leader Jarosławem Kaczyński, describing it as “a horrible blow to the Polish economy.” Donald Tusk defused the allegations claiming that he actually “mitigated the fatal effects of the agreement.” In his opinion, it was former president Lech Kaczynski, killed in a plane crash in 2010, who was responsible for the shape of the climate package. This time government could not blame it on someone else.
Advantaged mineworkers
It is not just the general public that the governing party wants to appeal to. Donald Tusk seems to be scared of mineworkers holding protests in particular. Silesian miners already scheduled street demonstrations in Warsaw to express their dissatisfaction with the situation of the mining industry in Poland in June. In the end, however, it did not take place.
The PM saved the day by staging talks with the protesting committee. He appointed a special inter-ministerial team and promised to look for ways to ‘heal’ the industry. In a similar situation before, when mineworkers also threatened to strike, Tusk decided to retain their pension benefits. Since then, miners have been one of the few groups not affected by the budget cuts. Yet, their pensions cost Polish Social Insurance Institution more than six billion Polish Zlotys extra every year, as reported by Newsweek.
During protests in Katowice at the end of April, miners addressed the EU climate and energy framework, demanding the veto against the 2030 package and suspension of the rules relating to the implementation of EU climate policy. “People are very worried! We talk about it more and more. The climate package will lead to reductions in mining. Thousands of miners will be given the sack,” says Rafał Jedwabny, from the mine ‘Wujek’.
Russia’s shadow
Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the resulting EU sanctions on Moscow have further complicated the issue. The Ukrainian crisis put EU and Polish dependence on Russian oil and gas in the spotlight. As emphasised by The Economist, last year around 60 percent of Polish gas needs were covered by imports from Russia.
“Excessive dependence on Russian energy makes Europe weak,” proclaimed the Polish Prime Minister, in a column published in the Financial Times at the end of April. He also called for an EU energy union and development of a mechanism for joint negotiation of energy contracts with Russia.
According to Tusk, in order to cut Europe’s dependence on Russian gas, the EU should support exploration of fossil-fuel resources. “No nation should be forced to extract minerals but none should be prevented from doing so – as long as it is done in a sustainable way. We need to fight for a cleaner planet but we must have safe access to energy resources and jobs to finance it,” said the Prime Minister. It seems that the recent events might make Poland’s objections to EU package even more probable.
Time for a change
The European Environment Agency report on air pollution states that Poland has the second-dirtiest air in Europe. Poland needs to confront the issue of climate change and act before it’s too late. “The government of Donald Tusk finally needs to make responsible decisions and lead the transformation towards a modern, green energy,” said Iwo Łoś, coordinator of a Greenpeace campaign on climate and energy, to Newsweek.
It is also high time for Poland to stop being perceived as the environmental backwater of the European Union. “Constant vetoing is evidence of our weaknesses. Instead of establishing ourselves as reliable partners, it creates an image of a rascal who constantly frowns,” warns Andrzej Kassenberg, PhD, head of the Institute for Sustainable Development in an article from Biznes Alert.
Rather than expecting the worst, Poland should see the bright side of the situation. The EU package would give a chance to develop new technologies that could push the national economy forward and increase energy security by diversifying from fossil fuels to renewable energy. “The framework gives us possibility to build a green sustainable economy. We get the goal and we get the funding. It is our time to shine,” tells Cezary Lejkowski, director for climate and energy in Wroclaw Research Centre EIT + to the news agency Newseria.
If only the government realises that climate goals could be an opportunity instead of a threat, there might be a different picture after the EU summit on 2030 framework for climate and energy policies in October 2014.
Politicians hurry out of the meeting room in a clear air of relief. Everyone seems to be content. “It was difficult, but we reached the compromise,” one of the officials tells the press. His body is worn out but his eyes are glowing with hope. Hope for the future of the environment.
Magdalena Skrzypek was born and raised in Poland. Although she is studying journalism, she plans to make the news and not just report it – she sees herself as communications officer in one of the government’s institutions or EU.
Photo by Anna Uciechowska via Wikicommons.
