Bankwatch https://bankwatch.org Tue, 21 Apr 2026 10:03:08 +0000 <![CDATA[Changing the dealer, but keeping the addiction]]> Thu, 26 Feb 2026 12:38:58 +0100 Magda Wiejak 155514 2026-02-26 12:38:58 2026-02-26 12:38:58 Environmental organizations today condemned the new joint statement between US and 12 central and eastern European countries promoting increased imports of U.S. liquefied fossil gas (LNG) to Europe, warning that it repeats the very mistakes that triggered Europe’s energy crisis.  Eliot Garnier-Karcenti from Food and Water Action Europe: ‘Framing fossil gas expansion as ‘energy security’ ignores a simple reality: dependence on imported gas, whether from Russia or the United States, exposes Europe to volatile global prices, geopolitical shocks, and long-term infrastructure lock-in.’   Before Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the EU was 44% dependent on Russia for its gas supplies. Four years later, the United States is well on track to become Europe's largest gas supplier, overtaking Norway.  Diana Maciaga from Polish Green Network: ‘Diversification of fossil fuels is not diversification of energy. 'Replacing one dealer with another does not solve the structural problem. It prolongs it.  It is also politically risky. Building long-term European infrastructure around U.S. LNG assumes a stable partner for decades, an assumption the U.S. regime’s authoritarian turn has repeatedly challenged in the last year.’  Denis Žiško from the Aarhus Center in Bosnia and Herzegovina added: ‘The current administration in the United States has been very direct about dismantling the EU legal order in multiple areas, from supporting far right politicians, dismantling civil society, weaking EU environmental safeguards and attacking digital regulations.’  Gligor Radečić from CEE Bankwatch Network: ‘The statement’s commitment to mobilizing export credit agencies and multilateral financial institutions for gas infrastructure is particularly alarming. Public money should be building renewables, grids, storage and efficiency in the EU and neighbouring countries — technologies that cannot be weaponized or manipulated, which lower bills for both households and industry.’  Contacts  Gligor Radečić, CEE Bankwatch Network, gligor.radecic@bankwatch.org,   Eliot Garnier-Karcenti, Food & Water Action Europe, egarnierkarcenti@fweurope.org   Denis Žiško, Aarhus Center in Bosnia and Herzegovina, denis.z@bih.net.ba   Diana Maciaga, Polish Green Network, diana.maciaga@bankwatch.org  ]]> <![CDATA[EU climate fund commits over half a billion to fossil gas expansion]]> Thu, 18 Dec 2025 10:25:49 +0100 Magda Wiejak 155230 2025-12-18 12:57:30 2025-12-18 10:25:49 The largest share of the EUR 1.8 billion approved was allocated to much-needed investments in electricity grids, renewable energy, batteries, and the decarbonisation of transport. Yet, some funding has once again been directed towards fossil fuel projects, namely, combined heat and power (CHP) gas plants in Bulgaria and Czechia. Although limited in this round, these projects are expected to receive more than EUR 630 million from the Fund in the coming years.   The Modernisation Fund, a flagship EU climate finance instrument, is designed to convert carbon market revenues into investments for the energy transition in 13 lower-income member states. However, by the end of 2024, the fund had already channelled over EUR 4 billion into unsustainable energy – of which more than half went to gas pipelines and gas-fired power plants, according to a Bankwatch report released in May.  In Bulgaria, EU decarbonisation money is supposed to enable a full or partial conversion of CHP plants from coal to fossil gas by 2030. These investments are labelled ‘hydrogen ready’. For this purpose, the Bulgarian authorities have now received EUR 15 million via the Modernisation Fund and are expected to receive an additional EUR 65 million.  In Czechia, support from the Modernisation Fund is meant to help build the Trmice gas plant project. With an initial investment of EUR 5 million, out of nearly EUR 183 million in total that will be requested from the Fund, this plant will have a capacity of 100 megawatts (MW) in heating and up to 150 MW of electricity.  An additional EUR 5 million in fresh EU climate cash is destined for another new gas power station in place of the EME-1 lignite-fired plant. This large-scale project includes 300 MW in heating capacity and 500 MW in electric capacity, as well as a hot water accumulator and energy storage. The total investment via the Modernisation Fund is expected to reach more than EUR 360 million.  Bankwatch and other civil society groups have been calling on national authorities and the Modernisation Fund’s governing bodies to end support for dirty energy. Several gas pipelines and waste incineration projects proposed by national authorities for financing from the Fund ahead of this disbursement round were not approved.  Nevertheless, and despite international momentum for phasing out fossil fuels buildout, national authorities in six Member States are still seeking over EUR 3 billion in EU climate money for anything from waste incinerators to fossil gas pipelines to small nuclear reactors, a recent Bankwatch analysis has shown.  Gligor Radečić, gas campaign lead with CEE Bankwatch Network:  'Once again, climate money is being used to create new emissions and lock the EU deeper into fossil fuel import dependency. Czechia has already shown how not to use the Modernisation Fund funding to decarbonise heating and industry, and is doing it again. Now Bulgaria is following suit, betting on so-called hydrogen-ready gas plants that will never realistically run on renewable hydrogen. It's evident that for a transformation of our energy system we can't rely solely on the Member States’ ambition without changes to the Fund's eligibility rules.'  To learn more about the Modernisation Fund’s misguided investments see here: https://bankwatch.org/modernisation-fund  For more information, please contact:  Gligor Radečić Gas campaign lead, CEE Bankwatch Network gligor.radecic@bankwatch.org ]]> <![CDATA[Latest EU hydrogen push prolongs gas industry hold over Europe’s energy transition – new report]]> Wed, 10 Dec 2025 10:01:23 +0100 Magda Wiejak 155117 2025-12-10 10:17:50 2025-12-10 10:01:23 The report, Hallucinating Hydrogen: Why the PCI/PMI Process Must Be Overhauled, is available here: https://bankwatch.org/publication/hallucinating-hydrogen-why-the-pci-pmi-process-must-be-overhauled  The PCI/PMI list, some of whose electricity projects are truly high-priority, includes over a hundred hydrogen projects, with twice as many hydrogen pipelines as in the previous list. Alarmingly, 42 out of the 59 pipeline projects will most likely ship fossil gas-based hydrogen, according to the new analysis.  Any transboundary energy infrastructure granted the lucrative status of ‘Project of Common Interest’ or ‘Project of Mutual Interest’ is eligible for EU subsidies via the Connecting Europe Facility and benefits from faster permitting.  Yet, while the Commission boasts that PCI/PMI projects will catalyse decarbonisation, today’s report reveals that many of them will make no meaningful contribution to cutting emissions, and their necessity is little more than speculation.  This is no coincidence. The vast majority of hydrogen projects on the list were originally proposed by the fossil fuel industry, and specifically members of ENTSOG, a gas transmission operators’ lobby group.  In fact, as the report authors stress, the rules governing the PCI process – namely, the TEN-E Regulation – give ENTSOG a major role in the process from the early stages such as network development planning, to crafting the methodology for cost-benefit analyses and developing demand and supply scenarios.  EU bodies – including the Agency for Cooperation of Energy Regulators and the European Advisory Board on Climate Change – and civil society have long been warning that the PCI exercise does not serve its purpose.  Bankwatch and Food & Water Action Europe are therefore calling on Members of the European Parliament and the Council to reject the PCI/PMI list to prevent Europe being chained to fossil gas for decades to come.  Gligor Radečić, Gas campaign leader at CEE Bankwatch Network: “While it is expected that some projects are promoted by transmission system operators, since they are often the only actors with the necessary know-how and capacity, it makes little sense that the very same companies - represented by ENTSOG - are also the ones responsible for assessing those projects.”   Eliot Garnier-Karcenti, Senior Energy Advisor at Food & Water Action Europe: “Not voting against the PCI/PMI list would promote a carbon-intensive European Union dependent on fossil-based hydrogen. All European stakeholders are awaiting a review of the hydrogen strategy and the Trans-European Energy Networks (TEN-E) regulation. It makes no sense to support a list that will become obsolete within a few months.”  The report’s warning is particularly timely given the new Grids Package released today by the Commission. As part of the legislative package, the proposed changes to the TEN-E Regulation could determine the future role of ENTSOG – and later also the European Network of Network Operators for Hydrogen (ENNOH) – in deciding on Europe’s transboundary energy infrastructure.   However, the TEN-E regulation proposal, which was leaked to several media outlets last week, has so far failed to eliminate this conflict of interest in the PCI/PMI process. Aside from proposing that the Commission now develops the central scenario, all the other roles remain with ENNOH. Decision makers need to ensure that the revision of the TEN-E Regulation not only democratises the PCI/PMI process but also that it prioritises electrification to truly step up the energy transition.  For additional information, please contact:  Eliot Garnier-Karcenti Senior Energy Advisor, Food & Water Action Europe egarnierkarcenti@fweurope.org +33 6 34 31 56 20 LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/eltgk  Gligor Radečić Gas Campaign Leader, CEE Bankwatch Network gligor.radecic@bankwatch.org ]]> <![CDATA[Another needless threat to the ecosystems we all depend on: The Commission’s panicky, chaotic deregulation drive has to stop]]> Tue, 09 Dec 2025 13:44:41 +0100 Gosia Zubowicz 155103 2025-12-09 15:02:33 2025-12-09 13:44:41 It includes a Communication; a draft Directive on acceleration of permit-granting procedures for renewable energy, batteries and grid infrastructure,[1] and a draft Regulation on guidelines for trans-European energy infrastructure (TEN-E), also weakening environmental permitting.[2] The decision to re-open the Renewable Energy Directive is surprising as it was changed in 2023, and already eroded environmental safeguards. The final transposition deadline was in May this year, yet by July only Denmark had fully transposed it. The Commission started infringement procedures against the other 26 Member States. Although the 2023 Directive is problematic, the rationale for re-opening it half way through transposition is unclear. Even industry has called for more stability: Solar Power Europe has asked the Commission to prioritise implementation of existing EU rules rather than pursuing deregulation. Among the most controversial provisions in the Commission’s new proposals are:
  • A new paragraph that tries to prevent no-go zones for renewables but in fact undermines the whole concept of protected natural areas. Member States are to ‘endeavour not to designate large areas where the installation of renewable energy plants and their related infrastructure is legally or de facto restricted due to environmental reasons (...)’.[3]  But the whole point of protected areas is to restrict certain types of activities: why would hydropower plants be allowed in National Parks or wind parks in old-growth forests? Among others, this contradicts the principle that Member States may introduce stricter environmental protection measures than EU law requires.[4]
  • An existing assumption [5] that renewables and grids are of overriding public interest for when carrying out assessments under the Habitats, Birds and Water Framework Directives is set to be widened. This provision is already highly problematic as a declaration of overriding public interest is needed for only a few of the most damaging projects with significant impacts on protected natural areas. The new proposal would stop Member States being able to restrict the application of this provision in certain parts of their territory and would widen the assumption of overriding public interest to enable land expropriation and other areas of law, except cultural heritage.
  • If satisfactory alternative solutions exist, projects with severe impacts on protected natural areas are – appropriately – currently not allowed to proceed. But the new proposals would restrict the examination of alternatives to the same energy technology as the proposed project. This makes no sense, as it would mean a high-impact technology like hydropower or biomass would not have to be compared to a lower-impact one like solar.
  • The draft TEN-E allows many cross-border electricity transmission projects and storage facilities to be exempted from environmental impact assessments (EIAs) and appropriate assessments under the Habitats Directive if they are part of National Development Plans that have been subject to Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEAs). Similar provisions are already in place for renewable projects but SEAs are less detailed than EIAs and are unlikely to be an adequate substitute. Among others, this deprives the public of a major consultation opportunity during project development. While new obligations to designate and finance an independent facilitator to promote dialogue between the project developer and the general public may be a useful complement, they cannot replace structured and science-based processes like the EIA and appropriate assessments.
Quotes Pippa Gallop, Southeast Europe energy policy officer, CEE Bankwatch Network:  ‘Sustainable renewables and grids are crucial, but re-opening the Renewable Energy Directive is not. The ink has barely dried on the 2023 changes, so revising them already is a tacit admission that they were poorly done. But rather than undoing the damage, the Grids Package digs an even deeper hole into the EU’s well-balanced environmental safeguards. The European Parliament and Council must finally say no and put a stop to this manic deregulation drive.’ Gligor Radečić, Gas campaign leader, CEE Bankwatch Network:  ‘Certain proposed amendments to the TEN-E Regulation concerning the acceleration of permitting raise serious concerns: they lack scientific grounding, conflict with EU environmental law as interpreted by the Court of Justice of the EU, and could prove legally problematic, as in the case of tacit approval mechanisms.’ Contacts Pippa Gallop Southeast Europe energy policy officer CEE Bankwatch Network pippa.gallop@bankwatch.org Gligor Radečić Gas campaign leader CEE Bankwatch Network gligor.radecic@bankwatch.org  [1]  This would amend: 
  • the Renewable Energy Directive ((EU) 2018/2001); 
  • the Electricity Market Directive ((EU) 2019/944); 
  • the Directive on gas markets and hydrogen ((EU) 2024/1788) and 
  • the Energy Performance in Buildings Directive ((EU) 2024/1275).
[2] This would amend:
  • Regulation (EU) 2019/942, establishing a European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators;  
  • the Electricity Market Regulation (EU) 2019/943; 
  • the gas markets and hydrogen Regulation (EU) 2024/1789 
  • and would repeal the current Regulation on guidelines for trans-European energy infrastructure ((EU) 2022/869) on guidelines for trans-European energy infrastructure.
[3]  ‘(...), unless they can demonstrate that those types of plants and their related infrastructure would result in irreversible damage in the area which cannot be mitigated or compensated for during the environmental assessment pursuant to Directive 2011/92/EU and, where relevant, the appropriate assessment pursuant to Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EEC’. [4] Article 193 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. [5] ‘rebuttable presumption’ i.e. it is presumed, but can be disproved during the assessment process. However, the burden of proof is on the public to prove likely harm instead of on the project promoter to prove a lack of harm.]]> <![CDATA[EU Reform and Growth Facility not yet speeding up energy transition in Western Balkans – new report]]> Fri, 05 Dec 2025 08:00:21 +0100 Magda Wiejak 155069 2025-12-05 08:02:58 2025-12-05 08:00:21 The financing instrument is part of the European Commission’s Growth Plan for the Western Balkans, intended – among others – to accelerate the enlargement process. To access the funds, the Western Balkan countries prepared Reform Agendas – action plans covering six policy areas, including energy and green transition. The process was plagued with issues from the very beginning – the preparation of the Reform Agendas was rushed, there were no public consultations, and the resulting documents lacked ambition and focus.  Bankwatch’s analysis finds that around one third of the 100 energy-related reforms in the Agendas are overdue obligations under the Energy Community Treaty that the countries should have implemented years ago. Now they could be awarded EUR 275 million for completing them.  The report questions the decision to reward the countries for their late reforms, but finds that even this is not having the desired effect.  With the complicated political situation in Serbia and Kosovo impeding progress in the energy sector, and Bosnia and Herzegovina only recently having completed its Reform Agenda, only Albania, Montenegro and North Macedonia are completing any reforms. Even they have completed only nine reforms, with a prospect of completing four or five more until the end of December 2025. This means that regionwide, less than 20 per cent of the 50 energy reforms due have been completed.   As the overall deadline for implementing the measures is August 2027, each delay reduces the likelihood of the countries being able to access the full sums available.  Davor Pehchevski, Balkan energy coordinator at Bankwatch - ‘These reforms will speed up the decarbonisation of the Western Balkan economies, mitigate the impacts of the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, and provide benefits such as clean air, increased comfort and decentralised electricity generation for their citizens. However, the governments are obviously struggling to implement what is required of them. Whether it is lack of will or lack of capacity, the whole instrument is at risk of failing.’  Pippa Gallop, Southeast Europe energy policy officer at Bankwatch – ‘With such a tight timeline, the Commission needs to decide swiftly how to get the process on track. But our findings also raise fundamental questions, as the Commission’s proposal for the next EU budget relies almost entirely on similar funding instruments in the region. As the EU institutions decide on the budget in the coming months, they need to probe whether this makes sense. In any case, governments must not be rewarded for overdue legal obligations.’  Contacts  Davor Pehchevski, Balkan Energy Coordinator, CEE Bankwatch Network  davor.pehchevski@bankwatch.org, Tel: +389 71 264 087  Pippa Gallop, Southeast Europe Energy policy officer, CEE Bankwatch Network   pippa.gallop@bankwatch.org, Tel: +385 99 755 9787  Notes for editors 
  1. The report is available here. 
]]> <![CDATA[European Commission fuels hydrogen fantasies – but MEPs can still halt the next array of fossil fuel follies]]> Mon, 01 Dec 2025 12:02:42 +0100 Magda Wiejak 155033 2025-12-01 13:39:20 2025-12-01 12:02:42 The Commission’s Delegated Regulation on Projects of Common Interest (PCIs) and Projects of Mutual Interest (PMIs), unveiled today, includes a list of European transboundary energy infrastructure projects that the Commission and Member States intend to prioritise and subsidise. Over a hundred of these are hydrogen infrastructure projects, the bulk of which are pipelines designed to carry fossil-gas-based hydrogen.  Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and the Council of the European Union now have two months to scrutinise the proposed regulation and raise any objections. If none are forthcoming, the regulation will enter into force. Though the PCI/PMI list itself cannot be amended at this stage, MEPs – recognising the urgency of raising the EU’s climate ambition – can and should reject the list for the misguided direction it takes.  The PCI/PMI process is meant to facilitate the EU’s energy transition by identifying cross-border projects of strategic importance. Projects awarded this preferential status enjoy privileged access to EU public financing and expedited permitting.  Worryingly, over 80 per cent of the hydrogen projects on the PCI/PMI list have been proposed by the fossil fuel industry, with more than 90 per cent of the hydrogen pipelines tabled by members of the European Network of Transmission System Operators for Gas (ENTSOG) – the lobby group for Europe’s gas transmission operators – according to an analysis by Food & Water Action Europe.  The result is an important policy instrument that risks perpetuating Europe’s fossil gas habit and birthing an entire cohort of costly stranded assets.  Civil society has repeatedly urged decision makers to limit hydrogen development to hard-to-abate sectors and to ensure it runs exclusively on renewable sources of energy. Several bogus projects proposed for PCI/PMI status have since been dropped following heavy scrutiny, not least from civil society, yet many others remain.  ‘Most of the hydrogen projects on the PCI/PMI list will transport, store or receive large quantities of fossil-based hydrogen. The proposed hydrogen network is disproportionate. The electrolysers included are not linked to any additional dedicated renewable sources of energy, which will vampirise the remaining energy needed for the transition. For these reasons, this list must be rejected,’ says Eliot Garnier-Karcenti, Senior Energy Advisor at Food & Water Action Europe.  ‘We join the EU’s own advisory bodies – the European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change (ESABCC) and the EU Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) – in questioning the credibility of the PCI and PMI selection process and its implications for the EU’s decarbonisation efforts. The process still grants a central role to ENTSOG, an industry body representing the very companies that stand to profit from PCI and PMI status. This inherent conflict of interest undermines trust in the system. The TEN-E Regulation – and the PCI/PMI process it governs – must shift decisively towards rapid electrification and demand-side flexibility, rather than keeping these solutions on an equal footing with fossil fuel interests,’ says Gligor Radečić, Gas Campaign Leader at CEE Bankwatch Network.  For additional information, please contact:  Eliot Garnier-Karcenti Senior Energy Advisor, Food & Water Action Europe  egarnierkarcenti@fweurope.org +33 6 34 31 56 20 LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/eltgk/    Gligor Radečić Gas Campaign Leader, CEE Bankwatch Network gligor.radecic@bankwatch.org ]]> <![CDATA[CBAM: Western Balkan governments must act now to avoid ‘perfect storm’ – new report]]> Thu, 30 Oct 2025 06:42:18 +0100 Ana Kuzmanić 154813 2025-10-30 06:42:18 2025-10-30 06:42:18 Nevertheless, if they act fast to introduce their own carbon pricing on electricity and heat generation, the governments could mitigate the impact of CBAM and raise up to EUR 4.2 billion per year to fund a sustainable energy transition and support coal-dependent regions. Under CBAM, EU importers of certain goods including electricity (2) from outside the bloc will need to pay for the carbon dioxide emissions associated with producing such goods in the exporting country. This will make imports to the EU from countries with high levels of coal, oil and gas use much more expensive than they have been so far.  EU importers of electricity from the Western Balkans – Italy, Croatia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Greece – will have to find other suppliers or face high CBAM costs. Electricity imports to the EU will likely plummet overnight, slashing income for electricity utilities in the Western Balkans.  Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, and North Macedonia will not pay CBAM fees themselves, but will be affected by a fall in income from electricity exports, as will Serbia to some extent. Kosovo has no EU border but will still feel some impacts. Albania’s hydropower-dependent power sector will only be affected if the country goes ahead with building gas power plants. Until now, the EU has helped prop up heavily polluting coal power plants in the Western Balkans. Around 57 per cent of electricity imported by the EU from Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia is coal-based. CBAM is designed to ensure that the EU takes responsibility for carbon emissions from such imports.  The income from CBAM will go to the EU budget. If electricity exports continue at recent levels, the EU’s annual income from these alone could reach almost EUR 965 million (3).  Had the Western Balkan governments started preparing for CBAM earlier, instead of allowing the EU to generate income from their electricity exports, they could have generated revenue for their own energy transition by introducing national carbon pricing systems themselves.  This could also have contributed to their electricity sectors being exempted from CBAM, which has built-in conditions allowing this if the countries substantially progress in applying EU energy and climate law. However, none of the countries are near to fulfilling these conditions. Still, by introducing domestic carbon pricing, the countries could mitigate the impacts of CBAM (4) and generate significant revenue to spend on a just and sustainable energy transition. Ioana Ciuta, CEE Bankwatch Network – ‘With just two months to go until CBAM takes full effect, we are still hearing wishful thinking from governments and utilities hoping for delays and exemptions. But there will be no postponement and none of the countries are anywhere near gaining the electricity sector exemptions allowed under the CBAM Regulation. They need to stop dreaming and start preparing.’ Pippa Gallop, CEE Bankwatch Network – ‘CBAM could finally force Western Balkan governments to tackle the elephant in the room and start closing their highly-polluting and increasingly uneconomic coal power plants. But coal dependent regions mustn’t be left behind – they need to plan for redevelopment. Western Balkan governments haven’t yet set aside funding for this, and nor has the EU. This has to change.’ Contacts Pippa Gallop, Southeast Europe energy policy officer, CEE Bankwatch Network pippa.gallop@bankwatch.org +385 99 755 9787 Ioana Ciuta, Strategic Area Leader - Fossil Fuels, CEE Bankwatch Network ioana.ciuta@bankwatch.org  Tel.: +40 31 438 2489  Notes for editors
  1. The report is available here.
  2. Electricity, iron and steel, cement, fertiliser, aluminium, and hydrogen
  3. The Energy Community Secretariat has recently put the figure even higher, at almost EUR 1.2 billion. Energy Community Secretariat, Energy Community CBAM readiness tracker 2025, 20 October 2025.
  4. CBAM fees for imports of goods from countries which apply a carbon price can be reduced to take account of the carbon price already paid in the exporting country. So this would reduce the CBAM costs for EU importers and make goods from the exporting country more attractive.  
]]> <![CDATA[Dead end ahead for Western Balkan gas plans, shows new analysis]]> Thu, 25 Sep 2025 07:40:33 +0200 Magda Wiejak 154607 2025-09-25 07:45:38 2025-09-25 07:40:33 Out of the 2,715 kilometres (km) of pipelines planned in 2023, most – 2,551 km – are still on the table (2).  If built, annual import capacity to the region would be increased by 10.5 billion cubic metres – more than three times the region’s total fossil gas consumption in 2023 – at a time when the countries need to phase out all fossil fuels, including gas. In addition, although Albania’s plans for an LNG terminal at Vlore have stagnated, Montenegro’s government recently revived plans for Bar despite fierce local opposition.  The region’s gas power plant plans have increased, from 2.4 gigawatts (GW) in 2023 to 2.9 GW today. Although some have been quietly shelved, new ones have been announced. Alexandru Mustata, Beyond Fossil Fuels – ‘The fossil gas addiction of some EU countries has left people with sky-high bills, caused supply disruptions and brought unsavoury bedfellows. The Western Balkans, far less hooked on gas, can keep their advantage and jump straight into a renewable future.’  Pippa Gallop, CEE Bankwatch Network – ‘Many of the planned projects will fail, as the EU has virtually closed the door on gas funding in the region. And those that go ahead are very likely to become stranded assets. To avoid losing precious time and money, Western Balkan governments need to urgently revise their gas plans in line with current data and double down on energy efficiency, heat pumps, and well-sited solar and wind.’ Contacts Pippa Gallop, Southeast Europe energy policy officer, CEE Bankwatch Network pippa.gallop@bankwatch.org +385 99 755 9787 Alexandru Mustață, Coal & Gas Campaigner, Beyond Fossil Fuels alexandru.mustata@bff.earth   Notes for editors
  1. The briefing is available here: Dead end ahead: How gas plans are distracting the Western Balkans from the energy transition 
  2. A previous regional gas infrastructure overview was published by Global Energy Monitor and CEE Bankwatch Network in March 2023 and can be found here.
]]> <![CDATA[Citizens urge Montenegrin government to halt gas deal with Japanese energy giant]]> Tue, 09 Sep 2025 09:59:20 +0200 Magda Wiejak 154540 2025-10-15 14:21:19 2025-09-09 09:59:20 According to the signatories, the projects not only contravene the Spatial Plan of Montenegro until 2040 – which explicitly excludes gas power plants and LNG terminals – but also potentially constitute criminal breaches, prompting notification to relevant EU institutions. Local authorities and citizens have voiced strong opposition to the project over safety, environmental, and public health risks, as well as the threat of creating new debt dependencies on imported fossil fuels.  Montenegro’s national energy and climate plan, currently being finalised, has drawn extensive criticism for its stance on the development of gas infrastructure. Under its own decarbonisation commitments, the government is obliged to reconsider any projects that would significantly undermine the country’s 2050 climate targets.  Commenting on a proposal for the Minister’s participation at the conference, during which he is expected to formally sign the memorandum, the signatories refuted claims that fossil energy from third countries such as Azerbaijan or Russia would ensure security of supply. In reality, such projects could generate over EUR 1 billion in debt, creating long-term dependency and supply instability. Serbia’s experience highlights the risks: in 2023, its district heating sector recorded total losses of EUR 10 million and an additional EUR 36.4 million in debt, due to volatile gas prices and investment costs.  The signatories also warn that the project is not only economically unjustifiable but also unfeasible. Under its proposed lengthy construction timeline, the gas power plant and accompanying infrastructure would operate for only a few years before full decarbonisation in 2050.  Fossil gas cannot serve as a temporary solution in 2025. Montenegro can no longer afford projects that deepen reliance on fossil fuels and divert the country from its clean energy goals. Resources must instead be directed towards sustainable renewable energy sources and energy efficiency, including solar, wind, geothermal, heating electrification, and energy storage technologies. Any new borrowing or investment in fossil infrastructure would jeopardise the clean energy transition and increase both climate and financial risks.  The signatories call on the government to abandon the agreement and prioritise sustainable investments that strengthen long-term energy security, reduce costs for citizens, and align with EU climate policies.  More information:   ]]> <![CDATA[Bishkek residents seek mediation to restore trolleybus service]]> Tue, 19 Aug 2025 09:59:50 +0200 Michaela Kozminova 154446 2025-08-19 09:59:50 2025-08-19 09:59:50 The EBRD has invested around EUR 24 million in loans and grants to support Bishkek public transport projects. These include a new e-ticketing system, the preparation of a public transport development strategy, infrastructure upgrades and 130 new trolleybuses. Of these, 52 were purchased in 2017 and 2018.  Although the EBRD recently repaid two of its previous trolleybus projects (approved in 2011 and 2015), it still maintains an active financial interest in Bishkek’s public transport sector. In 2020, the Bank approved an additional EUR 25 million loan along with an EUR 8 million grant to rehabilitate a bus depot, purchase new buses running on compressed natural gas (CNG), and implement the city’s Green Cities Action Plan. Trolleybuses were once the iconic mode of transport for citizens of Bishkek, the capital of Kyrgyzstan. Emissions-free and more spacious than both CNG buses and the city’s overcrowded ‘marshrutka’ minivans, the fleet of 183 trolleybuses provided a reliable and comfortable mobility option across 11 routes throughout the city. Unfortunately, in spring 2024, the city authorities began dismantling the trolleybus system with plans to transition to electric buses.(1) A year later, however, only two electric buses had entered pilot service, leaving Bishkek’s locals facing an acute shortage of public transport. This gap has resulted in worsening air quality (2) and increased health risks. And these impacts are disproportionately felt by vulnerable groups, including older people, women and children, and people with disabilities, whose mobility needs cannot be met by the city’s insufficient public transport fleet. After numerous petitions and letters from local, national, and international stakeholders, legal action in Kyrgyz courts, and unsuccessful attempts to communicate with international financiers, a coalition of Bishkek citizens and civil society groups has decided to request mediation. The group – which includes youth and women leaders, human rights organisations, environmental activists, and an association representing people with disabilities – has formally asked the EBRD’s IPAM to launch a problem-solving process through which they hope to negotiate with local authorities for the return of at least the newest 52 trolleybuses.  Problem-solving supports voluntary dialogue between parties aimed at resolving environmental, social and access-to-information concerns without attributing blame or fault. Facilitated by the IPAM and an independent mediator, the process enables an open exchange of information and helps all parties reach a mutually satisfactory agreement through alternative, consensus-based resolution approaches. To ensure focus and efficiency, the IPAM’s problem-solving process can last up to one year. A degree of flexibility is allowed until an action plan is agreed, at which stage the IPAM then monitors the implementation of the approved actions. If problem-solving fails to commence or a consensus is not reached, the IPAM can initiate an investigation to assess whether the EBRD has followed its own environmental and social standards.  A representative of BishkekSmog: ‘Air pollution continues to negatively affect the health and well-being of the more than one million people living in Bishkek. And the problem is only getting worse due to smog, the city’s “silent killer”. With around one-third of emissions coming from transport, we’re calling for open and constructive dialogue with Bishkek City Hall to restore the city’s trolleybuses – our most environmentally friendly, emissions-free mode of transport.’  A representative of the Association for Human Rights for People with Disabilities: ‘Unfortunately, it’s currently extremely difficult for people with disabilities to get around in Bishkek. Trolleybuses were equipped for accessibility, but they are no longer in service. Bus drivers never lower the ramps and completely ignore people with disabilities and pensioners. As a defender of the rights of people with disabilities, I often accompany them around the city and, for us, the absence of trolleybuses is a huge loss and a major obstacle to mobility.’ A representative of Bir Duino Kyrgyzstan: ‘In Kyrgyzstan, activists and civil society leaders are working within an ever-shrinking civic space. As watchdogs, they continue to demand justice, effective use of development aid, transparency, and good governance – including in development bank projects.’  Fidanka Bacheva-McGrath, Strategic Area Leader for Cities for People at CEE Bankwatch Network: ‘It’s in the interests of requesters, local authorities and international financiers to find a sustainable solution to Bishkek’s public transport system. Although two EBRD loans have been repaid, the trolleybuses purchased in 2018 can still contribute to the achievement of Bishkek’s Green City Action Plan as well as its climate mitigation and air quality objectives. To be “money well spent”, Green City investments need to deliver long-term benefits and create space for discussion on the mobility needs of communities.’ Egor Muleev, transport expert at the Leibniz Institute for Regional Geography: ‘It’s difficult to say why the decision was made to replace one electric bus system with another. It certainly wasn’t based on engineering knowledge, economic appraisals, or aesthetic considerations. What is clear, however, is that City Hall received loans from two international banks and should adhere to the initial agreements to support the city’s sustainable transition. Hopefully, the IPAM will maintain focus on sustainable development in the decision-making process and influence future steps towards delivering environmentally friendly transport solutions in Bishkek.’ Alessandro Ramazzotti, researcher at the International Accountability Project: ‘Residents of Bishkek have consistently expressed a preference for clean and reliable public transport. That’s why it’s essential that all stakeholders engage in the mediation process with integrity, respect the expressed needs of communities, and safeguard the long-term public benefit of previous investments.’ For more information, please contact fidankab@bankwatch.org or bishkek.smog@gmail.com.

NOTES FOR EDITORS:

(1) Read more about the decision to remove Bishkek’s trolleybuses: The last trolleybus of Bishkek: mayor’s decision defies logic and undermines foreign investments in green transport - Bankwatch. (2) Learn more about air pollution in Bishkek and the city’s trolleybuses: https://bishkeksmog.info/.]]>