Montenegro is Ecological on Paper Only

Q: What are your biggest concerns about the building of hydroelectric power plants on the Moraca?

A: When using hydro potential to produce energy, it is necessary to respect the ecological standards in that area and ensure negative effects are reduced to a minimum. Before making any decision about construction it is also necessary to prove that building such constructions serves the public interest and that there is no alternative that would satisfy both the need for energy and ensure the preservation of resources.

The activities we’ve seen so far have not proved that the construction of the Moraca dams is of the highest public interest and that the benefits of the project will be bigger and more significant for Montenegro’s citizens than the damage caused by loss of land and resources and the negative impact on the environment. 

The reason for that is that no real cost/benefit analysis has ever been done comparing expenses and benefits, while on the other hand the Study of Strategic Assessment Impact, SEA, of the Moraca dams does not contain adequate information about the potential impact on the environment.

This document is incomplete, significant biodiversity and hydrological data is missing and alternative solutions are not taken into account, which is why the study has been sent back for completion.

On the other hand, it is clear that the construction of dams on the Moraca would directly endanger the habitats of rare flora and fauna that are protected at international level: the so-called “emerald areas” of the Mrtvica and Mala Rijeka, which Montenegro has international commitments to protect.

Q: Are all hydroelectric power plants undesirable, or are you worried only about this project? What about smaller hydropower plants?

A: Having in mind the dynamics of the development of society and its evident need for new sources of energy, dams are a necessity of the times in which we live.

But every new construction, including these dams, regardless of whether they are as big as the ones on the Moraca, or whether we are talking about mini-dams, should be carefully planned with minimum impact on the environment and full respect for standards of protection.

Also, before entering the decision-making process, it is necessary at the start of the planning to provide for public participation and carry out consultations so as to take into accounts all the needs and alternatives and in that way reach the highest possible level of agreement. This is missing when we are talking about these kinds of projects in Montenegro.

Q: What alternative is there to the existing energy strategy?

A: It was exactly this necessary degree of dialogue, agreement and public participation that was missing when the Energy Strategy of Montenegro was announced in 2007. Consequently, its realization is encountering obstacles and public opposition.

The existing strategy has not dedicated enough attention to planning and constructing mini-dams with respect to EU standards, improving energy efficiency and cutting losses on the energy network.

More importance should be dedicated to producing energy from alternative sources, such as wind and sun, which are not elaborated enough in the strategy.

Q: Would producing more energy from wind, sun, etc, be adequate, in terms of the amount of energy produced?
 
A: Energy from alternative sources, such as the wind and sun, represent the energy of the future. More and more developed and prosperous countries are turning to these forms of energy, trying to provide the highest possible percentage of energy from these sources, which are much more suitable in terms of the environment impact. The best way is actually a combination of alternative and renewable energy. Unfortunately, Montenegro is paying far too little attention to exploiting this potential, which is not being thoroughly researched.

Q: What do you think about the underwater cable from Pescara to Tivat? How does this reflect on the energy situation in Montenegro and how will it affect the environment?

A: Public discussion of this project, organized at the beginning of last summer, showed that the project will unquestionably have a big negative impact on the environment.

Unfortunately, we were not given the possibility to compare the losses and gains from this project so that a final decision could be brought in the interest of the citizens of Montenegro.

Owing to the lack of data about biodiversity and socio-economic and cost-benefit analysis, the discussion was about satisfying formalities, while we were deprived of many substantial answers.

It’s clear that realization of this project will prompt the construction of many energy plants, not only in Montenegro but also in the region, with the aim of using its capacities for exporting energy.

Q: What are the potentials of the development and promotion of the idea of Montenegro as an ecological state? Can this concept come alive?

A: With the declaration of Montenegro as an ecological state, a strategic decision was taken for it to develop in line with the principles and requests of sustainability. However, 20 years after the declaration, the environment is still low on the list of political priorities while a big gap remains between the “declarative readiness” of numerous important strategies and documents and actual conditions on the ground.

The Energy Strategy is no exception… and in terms of development plans it contrasts with the principles and goals of sustainability, and with other strategies, such as the Sustainable Development Strategy, and international conventions.

It also conflicts with the idea of Montenegro as an “ecological” state. Unfortunately, the influence of the energy lobbies is making our country move in the direction of greater dependence on the will and interests of individuals and against the interests of society and the citizens themselves.

By all means, the idea of an ecological state represents a positive, good model for the promotion and development of society, but the adjective “ecological” is merited by actions – in other words it should be merited by what we do and by the measures we take to protect the living environment and the precious biological diversity that we own.

Q: What are the next steps, now the tender to build the plants on the Moraca has closed unsuccessfully?

A: The fact that there were no interested investors in the tender, which puts the project on hold, represents a clear signal for us in the civil sector that the Montenegrin government should turn towards sustainable energy solutions that benefit the Montenegrin economy, citizens and nature. The result of the tender is not surprising.

The civil sector and numerous domestic experts have been warning the government ever since 2007 that this kind of outcome could be expected, because the project and the way it was being projected by the government was not profitable, and contained big ecological and economic risks.

It is time for the government to clearly and realistically examine the situation and take into account the unprofitability of this project  - unless the waters can be diverted from the Tara river to the Moraca, which isn’t possible owing to parliament’s Declaration on Protection of the Tara.

They should finally divert their focus towards sustainable production of electric energy and find solutions that will reconcile the needs of economic development with the conservation of the environment. Every future potential project on the Moraca will have to show and prove its sustainability and be ecological acceptable, whoever realizes it.