• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer

Bankwatch

  • About us
    • Our vision
    • Who we are
    • 30 years of Bankwatch
    • Donors & finances
    • Get involved
  • What we do
    • Campaign areas
      • Beyond fossil fuels
      • Rights, democracy and development
      • Finance and biodiversity
      • Funding the energy transformation
      • Cities for People
    • Institutions we monitor
      • European Bank for Reconstruction and Development
      • European Investment Bank
      • Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank
      • Asian Development Bank (ADB)
      • EU funds
    • Our projects
    • Success stories
  • Publications
  • News
    • Blog posts
    • Press releases
    • Stories
    • Podcast
    • Us in the media
    • Videos

Home > Archives for Press release

Press release

Leading green NGOs in Europe tell the EBRD to step out of coal

Brussels – As the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development today closes the public consultation period on its upcoming energy strategy, a coalition of the ten largest environmental organisations working at the European level, the Green 10, is calling on the bank to phase out fossil fuels from its future lending, beginning with coal, and to rule out lending to risky energy sources, such as nuclear and shale gas.

A draft energy policy presented by the EBRD this summer indicates that the bank plans to continue investing in fossil fuels, including coal. Furthermore, the bank is not considering restricting its current lending to the nuclear sector. The EBRD is now also opening the door for the financing of shale gas.

The review of the EBRD’s energy strategy comes at a time when the negative effects of over-reliance on fossil fuels for the climate, the environment and human health have been broadly recognised. As a result, international financial institutions such as the European Investment Bank have recently introduced significant limitations to their coal lending, and EBRD shareholders like the US and the Nordic countries have said they would halt financing of coal abroad.

In this context, Green 10 asks of the EBRD not to buck the trend but instead to act responsibly and contribute to this global wave of progressive action towards decarbonisation by introducing strict Emission Performance Standards for energy related investments and a shadow carbon price.

Mark Fodor, CEE Bankwatch Network: „The EBRD claims that that their new energy policy supports sustainability, but how can they seriously say that when the document leaves the door open for coal? The EBRD know what needs to be done – it’s about time they had the courage to do it.”

Louise Duprez, EEB: “The fossil fuel industry is responsible for thousands of premature deaths, tens of thousands of hospital admissions and millions of lost working days in Europe every year. The EBRD stopping its funding for this industry would be a much-needed step towards breaking our addiction to coal – essential to allow Europeans to breathe fresh air and have a healthy environment.”

Wendel Trio, CAN Europe: “The EBRD should support global efforts to reduce carbon pollution and needs to put a ban on coal funding. The EIB and the World Bank have joined efforts to protect the climate and are phasing out funding to coal projects. The EBRD should join them, so that other public lenders also follow their example. The world urgently needs this kind of leadership.”

Jorgo Riss, Greenpeace: “As proposed in the draft energy policy, the EBRD is set to continue its old approach of funding the nuclear sector, including extending the lifetime of existing reactors, as happened recently in the case of nuclear reactors in Ukraine. In the interests of the environment and human health, the EBRD needs to stop financing nuclear energy.”

Magda Stoczkiewicz, Friends of the Earth Europe: “The EBRD must urgently move away from financing fossil fuels, and must not open up financing for new unconventional fossil fuels like shale gas. The bank has indicated it would be open to financing shale gas but these operations pose serious threats to the climate, our environment, our health and local communities. Instead of financing risky and costly fracking, scarce public resources would be better spent developing safe, clean renewables and energy savings which are in dire need of support across the EBRD’s region of operations.”

Tony Long, WWF European Policy Office: “It is time for the EBRD to finally say goodbye to old-fashioned coal and say “no more” – once and for all. The EBRD must join the growing movement in international development finance led by the World Bank and the European Investment Bank in ending funding for coal projects given their disastrous impacts on climate and health. Clearly the way forward is with renewable energy sources. Coal investments are merely locking future generations into the clean-up costs from a particularly nasty, toxic energy source.”

Green 10 members: BirdLife Int’l, CAN Europe, CEE Bankwatch Network, European Environmental Bureau, Friends of the Earth Europe, Greenpeace, International Friends of Nature, Health&Environment Alliance (HEAL), Transport&Environment, WWF.

High dust emissions and low efficiency levels pose serious risks to Montenegro lignite project, new analysis shows


Podgorica, Montenegro — Failure to comply with the latest EU pollution standards poses serious risks for the planned 220 MW Pljevlja II lignite-fired power plant in Montenegro [1], according to an analysis [2] published today by NGOs CEE Bankwatch Network and Green Home. The research examines environmental data published in July [3] by the Montenegro government on the seven preliminary bids received for the project from Chinese and European companies [4] and finds that:

  • Only one of the offers is in compliance with the EU Industrial Emissions Directive for dust emissions.
  • None of the offers reach the efficiency levels associated with EU Best Available Techniques.
  • These weaknesses present high economic risks for the project due to additional costs to ensure compliance once the Industrial Emissions Directive becomes binding in Montenegro [5].

“EU accession countries like Montenegro risk stacking up extra costs for themselves if they build power plants that don’t comply with EU pollution legislation, as they will soon have to refit them”, commented CEE Bankwatch’s research co-ordinator Pippa Gallop. “EU pollution legislation is evolving rapidly and accession countries have to run fast to keep up. Any new planned energy installations built now need to take this into account”, she added.

As well as failing to comply with EU standards, none of the offers is in line with the new pollution standards for new coal plants in China. This means that all the companies – including the European ones – are offering technology in Montenegro which they would not be allowed to construct in China.

“The Montenegro government has so far failed to react to the fact that it the preliminary offers for Pljevlja II are environmentally substandard, and looks set to allow the country to become a dumping ground for second-rate lignite technology”, commented Jelena Marojevic of Green Home.

“We need investment into our energy sector, but this must focus on cutting energy wastage and developing the country’s wind, solar and biomass potential, not building more dirty coal plants”, she added.

Contacts:

Pippa Gallop, Research co-ordinator
CEE Bankwatch Network
pippa.gallop at bankwatch.org
Tel.: +385 99 755 97 87

Jelena Marojevic-Galic, Programme director
NGO Green Home, Montenegro
jelena.marojevic at greenhome.co.me
Tel.: +382 67860220

Notes for editors:

[1] Pljevlja II is planned in Montenegro’s northernmost and most polluted city, Pljevlja. It is expected to have a capacity of around 220 MW, and should be constructed at the same site as the existing 210 MW Pljevlja plant and use lignite from nearby mines.

[2] The analysis is online at:
https://bankwatch.org/sites/default/files/Pljevlja-inadequate-standards.pdf

[3] The data was published (in Montenegrin only) at:
http://www.gov.me/sjednice_vlade/28, the first document in the table

[4] The companies which have submitted preliminary bids are:
– China Gezhouba Group International Engineering Company (CGGC)
– Istroenergo Group IEG/SES Tlmace, Slovakia
– Skoda Praha, Czech Republic,

– China Machinery Engineering Corporation (CMEC)
– China National Electric Engineering Co. Ltd., CNEEC
– Powerchina – Hubei Electric Power Survey & Design Institute

– China Environmental Energy Holdings CO. LTD. (CEE HOLDINGS)

[5] The Industrial Emissions Directive 2010/75/EU is not yet binding in Montenegro, however it is an obligation for EU accession and Chapter III of the Directive has been proposed for adoption by the Parties of the Energy Community Treaty, of which Montenegro is a part. The proposal will be discussed at the Ministerial Council of the Energy Community on 24 October this year in Belgrade and would have to be adopted from 1 January 2018 for new plants, and by 1 January 2022 at the latest for existing plants. Even if the proposal is not finally adopted at the meeting, Montenegro will still have to comply with the legislation some time in the next few years as part of its accession requirements.

In Georgia, locals voice opposition to mega dam during consultations despite intimidation

Khaishi – A public debate over the fate of the Khudoni dam in western Georgia turned tense today as locals opposing the project were intimidated by authorities and the project developer, Transelectrica LTD. Despite the threats, villagers in Khaishi turned out in significant numbers to the consultation to express their opposition to the project.

Today’s public hearing is part of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment procedure that must be completed before the 700 megawatt, USD 1.2 billion project can be implemented. The debate was attended by Georgia’s deputy energy minister Ilia Eloshvilli, Transelectrica representatives, and locals from Khaishi. (Photos are available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bankwatch/sets/72157635584455743/)

The Khudoni dam project is one of over 40 hydropower plant projects shaping up in Georgia today. Authorities argue that the country needs more dams to meet domestic electricity needs, even though the country is already a net exporter of electricity.

Over 2,000 indigenous Svans would be displaced if the project goes ahead.

Transelectrica, an international company created to invest in Georgia’s energy sector and registered in the Virgin Islands, bought the land where the Svan homes are located for one dollar from the Georgian state. The land sale was possible because Svans do not hold property rights to their land, and in recent years local authorities have prohibited Svans from registering their property.

Bankwatch representatives in Khaishi today were told how, one day before the consultations, the deputy head of the regional police department and the Transelectrica director present in the village warned locals not to put up posters critical of the project or protest against it. Before the consultations began today, an unprecedented police presence was visible in front of the municipality building where the debate took place. Despite this, villagers came out in important numbers to protest the project and demand their lands back.

“The company and authorities here are working too closely together for locals not to suspect some wrongdoing,” comments Dato Chipashvili, Bankwatch Georgian campaigner. “People were not allowed by officials to register their land, which made it easier for the company to purchase it for one dollar. This and the fact that apart from tax money there are no real benefits from this dam project make us all suspect that corruption is involved.”

The Khudoni dam was designed by the Soviet Union and construction began in 1979. Fierce protests by locals and members of the pro-independence movement convinced authorities to halt construction works in 1989. However, successive post-Soviet Georgian governments once again began looking for investors for the Khudoni project. In 2005, the World Bank approved a technical assistance grant for Khudoni to prepare a host of preliminary studies, environmental impact assessments and a resettlement action plan, which further stimulated the Georgian government to proceed with the project.

„The Khudoni dam is not needed in Georgia, it would only profit the companies that will export the electricity,” adds Chipashvili. „If our authorities are indeed interested in the well being of people like those in Khaishi, they would offer support for the construction of local, micro power plants that are capable of generating cheap electricity to power the community.”

For more information about the Khudoni and other hydropower plant plans in Georgia watch this film:

Contacts

Dato Chipashvili
Bankwatch/ Green Alternative Georgia
datochipashvili at caucasus.net
Tel: +995558277283

EBRD gives up Kolubara B lignite power plant project in Serbia

Subotica, Serbia — The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) confirmed Friday September 6 that it is no longer interested in financing the 750 MW Kolubara B lignite power plant project near Belgrade in Serbia. The project is proposed by Serbian electricity company Elektroprivreda Srbija, with Italy’s Edison as a strategic partner.

In an e-mailed answer, the bank confirmed that “We have also informed the client that, should the project become active again, it will have to be assessed against the new energy strategy which has far more stringent rules and would make our possible participation very difficult.”

This decision comes as the EBRD is in the process of reviewing its energy lending strategy. While the bank has shown little interest in dropping coal lending in the future document, it is still possible that significant pressure from campaigners and decision-makers around the world might force the bank to follow the example of the World Bank and the European Investment Bank in significantly limiting coal lending.

“The Kolubara B was poorly thought out from the beginning, and has developed glacially. Friday’s announcement by the EBRD is another nail in its coffin”, said Zvezdan Kalmar of environmental group CEKOR. “The fact that construction of the plant began in the 1980s means that it will be virtually impossible to ensure that the technology used meets the latest EU standards that Serbia will soon be obliged to adhere to. We advise Edison to leave this sinking ship as soon as possible and concentrate on sustainable renewable energy projects instead”, he concluded.

Serbia is currently developing a new energy strategy, and is planning a series of new lignite-fired power plants such as Kostolac B3 and Nikola Tesla B3 in a move which campaigners say is out of line with trends in countries such as the UK, Netherlands, Spain and Germany [1]. Serbia’s interest in building more lignite power plants also threatens to put the country on a collision course with the EU as it has to comply with progressively stricter EU climate requirements as part of the EU accession process. [2] However interest from western investors has been limited so far [3].

“Serbia has so far stayed far too attached to lignite, ignoring the trends going on in the US and western Europe, and to date the EBRD has been at least tacitly supporting this direction, despite the bank’s mission to promote sustainable development in its countries of operations,” adds Kalmar. “We hope that the EBRD’s decision to give up Kolubara B is just the starting point of a bigger process of dropping dirty projects and eventually eliminating coal lending altogether.”

Contacts:

Zvezdan Kalmar, CEKOR
zvezdan at bankwatch.org
Tel.: +381 655 523 191

Notes for editors

[1] A recent analysis by Poyry for the UK government concluded that no new coal plants are likely to be built in Germany, Spain and the Netherlands in the foreseeable future. See
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/poyry-report-to-decc-outlook-for-new-coal-fired-power-stations-in-germany-the-netherlands-and-spain

[2] Serbia currently has no CO2 emissions reductions targets, however it will have to comply with the EU’s existing targets on 20 percent reductions by 2020, as well as with the new EU targets for 2030 currently under discussion.

[3] Instead, Chinese companies backed by state banks are showing increasing interest in Serbia and the wider central and eastern European region, but of the various projects on the table, including Kostolac B3 and Nikola Tesla B3 in Serbia, only the Stanari plant in Bosnia and Herzegovina has had its final contract signed and started construction. Campaigners are expressing concerns that the contracts are often being negotiated outside of clear and transparent tender processes, raising concerns about possible corruption and failure to ensure that the technology used is of the highest quality. One example is the Pljevlja II plant in Montenegro, in which a special law is due to be passed in order to enable the government to bypass a tender procedure:
https://bankwatch.org/news-media/for-journalists/press-releases/montenegrins-criticise-plan-bypass-tender-procedure-pljevl

Pressure builds on EBRD to quit coal lending

The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development lags behind other major international financial institutions that are moving away from supporting dirty energy projects.

As the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development holds a series of consultations on its draft energy policy this week, pressure is growing on the bank to stop financing new fossil fuel projects, starting with coal.

Despite major international public lenders such as the World Bank (WB) and the European Investment Bank (EIB) announcing tight limitations to their coal financing over the past months, the EBRD appears committed to keep financing the dirtiest of fossil fuels.

During the bank’s public consultation on Wednesday in Belgrade, Serbia, 350.org, SEE Change Net, CEKOR, Fractal, Bankwatch and other groups will be delivering to the EBRD a petition signed by 16 725 people asking the bank to stop financing fossil fuels, starting with coal. A similar event took place Monday in Istanbul and another action will take place this Friday in Moscow.

„The EBRD’s new Energy Strategy is under the umbrella of the bank’s Sustainable Energy Initiative and thus low carbon transition appears to be a central theme of the draft EBRD energy policy,” comments Bankwatch’s EBRD coordinator Fidanka Bacheva-McGrath. „Yet in practice this only translates into a slight reduction in coal investments while the general support to the fossil fuels sector continues as usual.”

Activists are not alone in their calls for the bank to clean up its act. EU Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard recently called on the EBRD, EIB, and the World Bank — which have a combined annual lending pot of €130 billion — to end support for fossil fuels in their energy lending policy reviews. Of those three banks referred to by the EU Commissioner, the World Bank and the European Investment Bank have already announced virtual withdrawals from coal lending.

Bacheva-McGrath adds: “Although the EBRD has a smaller portfolio than the WB and the EIB, this regional bank is the biggest public lender in its countries of operation, with a significant role to play in either entrenching fossil fuels in the region’s energy sector or alternatively leading the major shift to low-carbon economies.”

Between 2006 and 2011, while the current energy policy of the EBRD was in place, the bank’s annual coal lending actually increased from 60 million to 262 million euros, according to Bankwatch calculations. In this period, fossil fuel lending represented 48 percent of the institution’s overall energy lending portfolio.

The importance for the climate cannot be overstated: according to a 2012 report by the Carbon Tracker Institute in London, 80 percent of fossil fuel reserves must remain underground in order to keep global warming below 2°C.

„This year can and must constitute a turning point for global action against climate change,” comments Tim Ratcliffe, European Campaigner for 350.org. „One of the biggest imperatives right now is to put an end to public support for fossil fuels. The WB and the EIB have recently made it clear they want to put an end to dirty coal financing and pull their weight behind the low-carbon transition. If the EBRD does not follow suit with the upcoming energy strategy, it will not only get stuck with a portfolio of stranded assets, but also it will find it impossible to be a driver of change in its regions of operations since many private actors will have already moved faster than the EBRD and onto the low-carbon path.”

Notes for editors:

(1) See the 350.org petition Divest EBRD From Fossil Fuels:
http://act.350.org/sign/EBRD

(2) Read the EBRD draft energy policy proposed for public discussion this week:
http://www.ebrd.com/pages/news/events/energy-policy-belgrade.shtml

(3) Read a press briefing on energy lending by European public banks (the European Investment Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development):
https://bankwatch.org/sites/default/files/briefing-EnergyLending-22Apr2013.pdf

(4) Read report Invest in Haste, Repent at Leisure for more information on Europe’s development banks investing in fossil fuels:
http://seechangenetwork.org/index.php/publications/invest-in-haste-repent-at-leisure.html

(5) On 16 September, Bankwatch is organising a google hangout with experts to discuss the EBRD energy review. If interested in attending, please email claudia.ciobanu at bankwatch.org. Invitations to follow.

Montenegrins criticise plan to bypass tender procedure in Pljevlja II coal plant procurement

Montenegrin NGOs Green Home and MANS have today sharply criticised Montenegrin government plans to choose a strategic partner for the EUR 300 million, 220 MW Pljevlja II lignite power plant [1] without conducting a proper tender. Instead the government has stated that it plans to sign an intergovernmental agreement and enact a special law on the project [2], thus signalling, according to the groups, that it plans to use a loophole in the law to avoid a tender procedure. [3]

The groups are also expressing concern about the environmental impacts of the construction of a new lignite power plant in Montenegro’s most polluted town, where a 210MW lignite-fired power plant is already operating.

The government has received preliminary offers for the project from five Chinese companies and three central European ones [4].

“The government’s abrupt statement that it will not hold a regular tender procedure and will decide on the investor, pass a special law and sign an intergovernmental agreement by the end of the year raises suspicions that deals have already been made behind closed doors,” said Ines Mrdovic of anti-corruption watchdog group MANS. “There is no good reason why this project should bypass regular procedures and be served up as a fait accompli when its benefits to the public have not been proven,” she added.

“There is also no clarity about what environmental and social costs will be borne by the investor and what will be subsidised by the public,” added Jelena Marojevic of environmental group Green Home. “Nothing has been said about how much expropriation will cost, or environmental protection measures, or decommissioning and rehabilitation of the existing facilities, and who will pay,” she continued.

Further doubt of the project’s value to the Montenegrin public has been cast by government admissions that the electricity from Pljevlja II may be intended for export to Italy rather than covering Montenegro’s own needs. [5]

Green Home and MANS are asking the Montenegrin government to publish an analysis of the economic justification, public interest and financial sustainability of the project, as well as an analysis of the health impacts of the new plant on Pljevlja’s already heavily pollution-impacted population before taking any decisions on Pljevlja II. It is found appropriate to continue with the project a regular tender procedure must be conducted.

For more information contact:

Jelena Marojevic
Green Home
jelena.marojevic AT greenhome.co.me

Ines Mrdovic
MANS
ines.mrdovic AT mans.co.me

Pippa Gallop
CEE Bankwatch Network
pippa.gallop AT bankwatch.org

Notes for editors:

[1] The Montenegro government and utility Elektroprivreda Crne Gore (EPCG) plan to construct a new 220 MW lignite plant at the site of the existing Pljevlja lignite power plant in Montenegro’s northernmost and most polluted town, Pljevlja. The plant would use lignite from the nearby Pljevlja mine. The process of finding a strategic investor is currently ongoing and several informal offers have been received (see note 4), notably from several Chinese companies.

[2] The further planned process is outlined at http://www.gov.me/sjednice_vlade/27 Item 22, p.8 and http://www.gov.me/sjednice_vlade/28 Item 1, p. 12-13 (both items in Montenegrin language), the latter of which states “Bearing in mind that the Working Group has examined all aspects of the project that it has withdrawn from publication of a tender due to its very difficult implementation, the following activities are proposed.”

[3] According to the Montenegrin Law on Public Procurement, it is allowed to avoid a tender procedure and sign an intergovernmental agreement on a project if the project is declared to be a project of special public interest.

[4] Chinese companies:

China Machinery Engineering Corporation (CMEC)
China Gezouba Group International Engineering Company (CGGC)
China Environmental Energy Holdings CO. LTD. (CEE HOLDINGS)
Powerchina – Hubei Electric Power Survey & Design Institute
China National Electric Engineering Co. Ltd., CNEEC

European companies:

Skoda Praha, Czech Republic,
Istroenergo Group IEG, Slovakia
‘Mixed consortium of firms’ Poland

Rusatom Overseas from Russia and SNC – Lavalin International from Canada also showed interest but did not submit offers.

[5] http://www.gov.me/sjednice_vlade/28 p. 72 and 73

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Footer

CEE Bankwatch Network gratefully acknowledges EU funding support.

The content of this website is the sole responsibility of CEE Bankwatch Network and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the European Union.

Unless otherwise noted, the content on this website is licensed under a Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0 License

Your personal data collected on the website is governed by the present Privacy Policy.

Get in touch with us

  • Bluesky
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • YouTube