RIGA - Disagreements over what kind of power plant Latvia should build have revealed deep split in the ruling coalition that spilled into the media during the last days of March.
In the first days after assuming power in December, the government of Ivars Godmanis said Latvia had no choice but to build two power plants 's one run on coal and the other natural gas 's a concept that was broadly accepted. But as ministers begin to tackle the nitty-gritty of the projects, it is apparent that they don't see eye-to-eye on how to proceed.
To complicate matters, some influential voices 's no less than European Energy Commissioner Andris Piebalgs 's are even suggesting that Latvia doesn't need to build any plants at all.
The sense of urgency is palpable, since at the end of 2009 the Ignalina nuclear reactor in all likelihood will be shut down, and Latvia, a major importer of kilowatts from Lithuania, will experience an acute energy deficit. Where the country will make up the difference, no one knows.
On March 11 the four-party coalition decided in principle to build the two new power stations. The first 400 megawatt power plant running on coal and biomass will be constructed in Kurzeme, while the gas-fired plant, which will also have a 400 megawatt output capacity, will be built in Riga.
However, leaders of the People's Party, a senior party in the coalition, have said in recent days that, for the usual batch of environmental reasons, a coal-fired plant is a bad idea.
Members of the junior For Fatherland and Freedom party have blasted a natural gas plant as seriously flawed since it will increase dependence on Russia, which has clearly shown its unreliability as an energy supplier to former Soviet republics. The influential daily Diena sided with them in the criticism.
Roberts Zile, the party's leader, told Diena that the coal plant had to be lobbied hard before opponents 's the People's Party and environmentalists 's manage to bury it.
People's Party founder Andris Skele has suggested building a peat-fired plant instead, primarily because Latvia has vast reserves of this fossil fuel. However, critics say peat is even more harmful than coal on the environment and has a lower yield (i.e., one ton of coal produces twice more electricity than one ton of peat).
For now, Godmanis supports both plants, the cost of which is estimated to reach 1 billion euros. In the first week of office, he said Latvia has "no choice" but to build the two plants.
But Piebalgs, a Latvian, thinks otherwise. He told Diena that he had doubts about Latvia's forecasts for energy consumption, and that they may be too high.
"All the discussions lack substance on consumption. They consider consumption will increase, and people will pay more. Yet it has started to fall, which means that the forecasts were exaggerated," he said.
The commissioner said that rather than building new power generating capacity, the government should focus on energy conservation 's i.e., effectiveness 's and developing energy links. He said that creating energy links is the only way to ensure energy independence, especially in extraordinary situations such as the one in the Baltics.
But even such links are a complicated matter. The Finance Ministry has said that any talk of a connection to the Swedish grid (via a high-voltage, underwater cable) is premature until details of the proposed power plant in Kurzeme are known.
"The question of linking with Sweden has not been resolved," said People's Party faction chief Aigars Kalvitis. "Lithuania has already been negotiating with Sweden, and they have agreed. There is no point trying to break down a locked door."
Godmanis echoed the sentiment, telling public television on April 1 that only one link to Sweden would be built, not two.
But Latvenergo CEO Karlis Mikelsons has gone on the record as saying that Sweden is unlikely to support such a link simply out of supply problems.
"Our talks have also proceeded rather far 's we have talked with our Swedish colleagues, but I wouldn't like to promise anything yet," he told the Baltic News Service.
"One thing we can forecast for sure is that the Swedes will not want to export energy to the Baltic states 's either to Lithuania or Latvia," he said.
The statement was surprising, particularly since the Lithuanians are putting high hopes on an underwater link to Sweden's grid. But as Mikelsons explained, the Scandinavian country simply won't have the capacity.
"From the point of view of security, [the Swedes] would not want to export energy to the Baltics. That is how we see it," he said.
Kalvitis said that in the long run Latvia's energy security depends upon a new atomic power plant in Sweden. But any such plant is unlikely to be operational before 2020, and some experts, such as Mikelsons, have said 2025 is a more realistic date.
