font_preload
PL / EN
Polish Briefing 8 January, 2019 9:00 am   
Editorial staff

Polish Briefing: Energy strategy pilloried by the critics

What goes on in Poland on the 8th of January.

Energy strategy pilloried by the critics

The Financial Times has asked Polish critics about the Polish energy strategy, which is consulted socially until January 15 this year.

According to Marek Józefiak from Greenpeace Poland, the fact that decreasing the share of coal in the Polish energy mix is ​​only planned for the period after 2030 is absurd because it should assume the removal of this source altogether if the world is to achieve global climate goals.

Robert Tomaszewski from Polityka Insight indicates that the objective of the participation of Renewable Energy Sources in the Polish strategy, officially called the Energy Policy of Poland until 2040 (PEP 2040), is 21 percent by 2030, and the EU – 32 percent. In turn, the EU energy efficiency ratio is to be 32,5 percent, and the Polish “only” 23 percent.

What about the Polish nuclear power plant?

The Financial Times reminds that Poland wants to reduce emissions through the construction of a nuclear power plant with a capacity of 1-1,5 GW until 2033 and 6-9 GW by 2043. The newspaper stresses that the government has not yet made a final decision in this matter, which can be resolved after adopting the final version of the strategy.

The nuclear plan is criticized by Krzysztof Bolesta, a former adviser to the Minister of the Environment of the Republic of Poland Marcin Korolec. – I do not think that this plan is realistic. It is too expensive … we would have to buy technology, and there are few suppliers on the market who can say that they will build the nuclear power plant on time and in budget – he told the Financial Times.

The energy strategy was included in the public consultation, which is to end on January 15. After taking them into account, the government is to present the final shape of the PEP 2040, determining the fate of the nuclear power plant and other assumptions commented on by the interlocutors of the British daily.



Shares