The President of the Board of the Center for Advanced Economic Studies (CEVES), Kori Udovicki, said that the transition to green energy was not to blame for the energy crisis and rising energy prices, nor for the fall in prices during last year’s “lock” due to the Covid-19 corona virus pandemic. supply and demand of energy.

In the author’s text “Green energy (really) for our children”, she stated that the Serbian public has a misconception that the transition to green energy is to blame for the energy crisis and that it is imposed by the “evil West”.

“Some of the recently adopted European green policies have contributed to further spikes in energy prices, but the causes of the current crisis are different, and one is the unpredictability of supply and demand as part of the global economic recovery from the pandemic crisis, especially in China,” Udovicki said.

She added that the second reason is the increased manifestation of climate change, for which green energy is actually the only “cure”.

The impression was created, as she stated, that it is good that Serbia does not give up coal, just a few weeks before the crucial global summit on climate in Glasgow, “which is not even mentioned in Serbia.”

And if it were true that green policies were to blame for the energy crisis, it would be a big mistake, according to Udovicki, to “rejoice” that Serbia has so far turned a deaf ear to the effort to switch to green energy.

According to her, global warming only last year caused extreme climate “events” for which the only solution is the transition to green energy.

As she said, humanity is going through the last train to keep climate warming at an additional rise in global temperature by 1.5 to two degrees Celsius, and above that, life on earth would become unbearable.

That the transition to green energy is not the cause of the energy crisis is confirmed, according to her, by the fact that, during last year’s lock, the prices of fossil fuels “crashed”, oil at one point even had a negative price.

“The already widespread difficulties with forecasts of demand for all types of goods, including energy, were followed by unexpected, record high, growth of Chinese demand for thermal energy, gas, coal, nuclear energy, because in 12 months consumption in China increased by as much as 14 percent. compared to the previous period, although economic growth is relatively slow, “said Udovicki.

She added that China’s demand for gas was growing even faster, and that coal production in that country would have increased more if the safety standards of the mine’s operations had not been “tightened” after a series of accidents in which miners lost their lives.

According to Udovicki, China has not given up coal or reduced its production, and for now it is only “reasonably and understandably” trying to satisfy its insatiable growth in energy needs with an increasing share of renewable energy and much slower growth of coal consumption.

The Chinese authorities have raised the price of electricity for industry these days, and it is only announced for households.

According to Udovicki, the jump in demand and the decline in energy production were also influenced by extreme climate events, which on the one hand increased energy consumption, especially gas due to cold winters and hot summers (for cooling), and floods caused coal production in Indonesia. and Colombia, Brazil has reduced electricity production in hydroelectric power plants, while windmills in the North Sea have produced less electricity because there was no wind.

According to Udovicki, it is certain that “Russia was at least a little ‘hesitant’ with gas supplies in the hope that it would encourage the opening of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline”, and sanctions on the purchase of coal from Australia, which are now, also contributed to China’s difficulties. “quietly bypassing.”

“Greenhouse gas emissions are at record levels and accelerating capacity building for renewable energy production is the only possible long-term response to this, and the wider climate, crisis,” Udovicki said.

She noted that the International Energy Agency estimates that the public sector is currently building three times less capacity on renewables than needed, but that the EU plans to increase investment in the energy transition.

Udovicki stated that the position that coal provides Serbia with energy independence is unacceptable because “it can ‘independently’ rely on renewable sources, since it is significantly endowed with that potential, although there is no precise assessment of them yet.”

According to her, energy independence is a privilege of a small number of countries, but even those like, for example, Saudi Arabia have started investing in renewable sources.

“The real reason for resistance to green energy in Serbia is the political economy. One aspect is that it undoubtedly costs more than coal-based energy, and the other is that a whole range of strong, even corrupt, interests are tied to coal.” but that is not insurmountable and as a reason for the transition to green energy, we should also keep in mind the health costs of the population, “said Udovicki.

Udovicki stated that the awareness of the necessity of changes entered the main political currents at full speed with the adoption of the UN Agenda 2030, ie the global goals of sustainable development in 2015, but that “Serbia is still deaf to them”. //

By Editor

Leave a Reply