The recent announcement by Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić about the construction of a gas power plant near Niš has sparked interest among energy experts. While they agree the project could enhance electricity supply and stability for southern Serbia, they also caution about the long-term challenges, particularly related to the growing cost of natural gas and the country’s commitment to climate neutrality by 2050.
Potential for increased power supply and stability
The planned gas-fired power plant, which was initially proposed in Serbia’s energy development strategy for 2025 and 2040, aims to generate up to 1 gigawatt (GW) of electricity, a significant increase from the initial plans of 150 megawatts (MW). Vučić’s announcement marked a shift, with the project now expected to cost around 1 billion euros, far exceeding the 250 million euros originally projected.
Energy experts see this increase in capacity as a positive step, particularly for stabilizing the power supply in southern Serbia. Mirjana Laković Paunović, a professor at the Faculty of Engineering in Niš, noted that gas-fired plants provide a more stable electricity supply compared to coal or solar plants, as they avoid sudden fluctuations in power generation. She also emphasized that natural gas, being a cleaner fuel than coal, reduces pollution, with minimal risk of environmental accidents or large-scale disasters.
“Gas is a much cleaner fuel compared to coal, and it’s far more acceptable for the environment. It doesn’t create coal waste or ash deposits, as we see with coal plants in Kostolac or Obrenovac,” explained Laković Paunović. “Therefore, the risks to citizens living near the proposed plant site are minimal.”
Economic benefits and challenges
The gas plant would contribute to the growing demand for electricity in Serbia, where consumption has been steadily rising. Former energy manager for Niš, Bojan Gajić, highlighted the economic and strategic importance of the project, stating that it would help balance the electricity grid, especially as renewable energy sources like solar and wind become more widespread.
“This project will not only contribute to a higher electricity output but also help balance the system, which is crucial as more solar and wind power are integrated into the grid,” Gajić said. “It will also provide significant economic benefits, including job creation for local contractors and skilled workers.”
Concerns over rising gas prices
However, while the project holds promise, experts caution about the long-term viability of relying on natural gas. Gajić noted that Serbia would be sourcing its gas from Azerbaijan via a new pipeline that connects to Bulgaria, but this gas is likely to be more expensive compared to Russian gas, which Serbia has historically relied on.
“Over the last decade, we have faced several crises related to gas supply disruptions. The Azerbaijani gas, while an alternative, will be significantly more expensive. And the long-term trend for fossil fuel prices, including natural gas, is on the rise,” Gajić explained.
Furthermore, Serbia is a signatory of the Sofia Declaration, which commits the country to achieving climate neutrality by 2050. Relying heavily on natural gas could undermine these goals, as burning natural gas emits greenhouse gases, contributing to climate change. Gajić stressed that meeting climate targets would be challenging if such large-scale gas projects were pursued.
“Using natural gas to generate electricity makes it difficult to achieve the 2050 climate neutrality targets, especially with the scale of the project currently being proposed,” he said. “Instead, Serbia should focus on renewable energy sources, like wind and solar power, and explore alternatives such as energy storage solutions and the development of a balancing market.”
The need for sustainable alternatives
While the gas power plant represents a short-term solution to Serbia’s energy challenges, some experts argue that a more sustainable approach is necessary. Laković Paunović suggested that renewable energy technologies, including solar, wind, and potentially geothermal power, should play a larger role in Serbia’s energy future.
“While gas plants are important for grid stability in the short term, we must also explore and invest in clean energy alternatives. Serbia has significant potential for solar and wind power, and we should prioritize these sources as part of our energy strategy,” she concluded.
In conclusion, while the proposed gas power plant near Niš could offer immediate benefits for the country’s energy stability and economic development, experts urge caution regarding long-term sustainability and the need to balance these investments with Serbia’s climate goals. With rising gas prices and the global shift towards greener energy, Serbia’s energy strategy must evolve to ensure a secure and sustainable energy future.
