Last update:
2014-11-07

Coal Fired Thermal Power Plant in Porto Romano, Albania


Description:

The conflict is over an Industrial and Energetic Park at Porto Romano located near Durres – the second largest city in Albania – that includes a thermal power plant, marine facilities and distribution lines connecting the plant with Tirana and Italy. Enel, the main Italian power company, had planned to construct a 1,600MW coal-fired TPP with permission from the Ministry of Environment once the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) had been prepared and disclosed and public consultations had been organized.

See more
Basic Data
Name of conflict:Coal Fired Thermal Power Plant in Porto Romano, Albania
Country:Albania
(municipality or city/town)Durres
Accuracy of locationHIGH (Local level)
Source of Conflict
Type of conflict: 1st level:Fossil Fuels and Climate Justice/Energy
Type of conflict: 2nd level :Thermal power plants
Specific commodities:Coal
Project Details and Actors
Project details:

According to the project's EIA, the station would consist of two 800 MW coal-fired units, a jetty for handling the imported coal, a transmission line connecting the local substation to Tirana's main substation, and an undersea transmission line linking the facility with Italy. Eighty-five percent of the electricity produced would be exported to Italy.

See more
Project area: 80
Type of populationRural
Start of the conflict:01/01/2008
Company names or state enterprises:ENEL Group (Enel) from Italy
Relevant government actors:Albanian Government, Albanian Council for Territorial Adjustment , Ministry of Environment, Forests and Water Administration of Albania
International and Finance InstitutionsEuropean Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD)
European Investment Bank (EIB)
Environmental justice organizations (and other supporters) and their websites, if available:Ekolevizja, a coalition of Albanian environmental NGOs, CEE Bankwatch Network

the Municipality of Durres
Conflict and Mobilization
IntensityLOW (some local organising)
Reaction stagePREVENTIVE resistance (precautionary phase)
Groups mobilizing:International ejos
Local ejos
Local government/political parties
Neighbours/citizens/communities
Local scientists/professionals
Forms of mobilization:Creation of alternative reports/knowledge
Development of alternative proposals
Involvement of national and international NGOs
Objections to the EIA
Public campaigns
Appeals/recourse to economic valuation of the environment
Impacts of the project
Environmental ImpactsPotential: Air pollution, Biodiversity loss (wildlife, agro-diversity), Food insecurity (crop damage), Global warming, Loss of landscape/aesthetic degradation, Noise pollution, Soil contamination, Waste overflow, Surface water pollution / Decreasing water (physico-chemical, biological) quality
Health ImpactsPotential: Accidents, Occupational disease and accidents, Other environmental related diseases
Socio-economical ImpactsPotential: Increase in Corruption/Co-optation of different actors, displacement, Loss of livelihood, Land dispossession
Outcome
Project StatusPlanned (decision to go ahead eg EIA undertaken, etc)
Conflict outcome / response:Strengthening of participation
Under negotiation
Development of alternatives:The EIA study addresses a minimum of alternatives. Typical categories of alternatives that should have been included are:

1. Site location alternatives: Three locations are taken into consideration: Porto Romano, Shengjin and Vlore. The locations are all on the Adriatic coast, and it seems that no other locations have been taken into consideration due to higher investment costs for the transmission lines.

2. Design (fuel and technology) alternatives for the site

No other design alternative has been considered in the EIA. There may have been different technologies, or different fuels, but it seems that, due to the fact that coal provides the cheapest solution (if externalities and carbon costs are not to be paid), coal has a head start over other fuels.

3. Construction, operation, and decommissioning alternatives for the design: No alternatives have been considered regarding the decommissioning of the plant.

4. ‘No-project’ or ‘no-action’ alternatives

These alternatives have not been considered in the study.

5. Timing alternatives relative to project construction, operation, and decommissioning

These alternatives have not been considered in the study.

The EBRD on behalf of the Ekolevizija coalition, call upon the bank:

• Not to consider the Porto Romano TPP for finance.

• To prioritize sustainable energy projects, particularly in the field of renewable energy and energy efficiency, when it comes to review its three-year investment strategy for Albania at the end of this year.

• To encourage the Albanian government to find a solution for the energy security of the country via

sustainable investments such as renewable energy and energy efficiency.
Do you consider this an environmental justice success? Was environmental justice served?:Not Sure
Briefly explain:The Municipality of Durres declared itself officially against the project in April 2009, but the project has not been scrapped yet.
Sources and Materials
References to published books, academic articles, movies or published documentaries

Porto Romano thermo power plant (NGO Issue Paper )
[click to view]

Over the edge / Enel’s plans to export its pollution to Porto Romano, Albania (April 2010)
[click to view]

Links to general newspaper articles, blogs or other websites

Albanian NGOs Seek to Scrap Power Plant (April 2009)
[click to view]

South-East European INDUSTRIAL Мarket - issue 4/2009, October
[click to view]

WB funded clean-up in Porto Romano
[click to view]

Porto Romano Power Station
[click to view]

Meta information
Contributor:Katarina; [email protected]
Last update07/11/2014
Comments