Lithuania By Saulius Piksrys Vytas (Bendrija Atgaja, Community Atgaja, Lithuania)

Basic information

	Base-year emissions Mt CO2	2007 emissions Mt CO2	Change 2006– 2007 %	Change 2007/base year %	Kyoto target %
Lithuania	49.1	24.7	8.1	–49.9	–8.0
EU-15	4232.9	4052.0	–1.6	–5.0	–8.0
EU-27	5564.0	5045.1	–1.2	–9.3	No target

	2007 GDP Growth %	2008 GDP Growth %	2009 GDP Growth (est.) %	Gross Inland Energy Consumption Change Feb.2009/ Feb.2008 %
Lithuania	8,9	3,0	-11,0	-11,0

Source: EEA Report No. 5/2007

The Lithuanian economy declined substantially since the declaration of independence in 1990. In 1994, the GDP dropped to 54% of the 1989 level but later started to increase again. Since 2000, the GDP has been growing continuously. The average annual increase in 2000-2005 was 7%, and the average GDP change from 1995 to 2005, including the decline during the banking crisis in Russia, was 5.7%. A rapid decrease of GHG emissions followed the decline of the national economy in the 1990s. The reduction of GHG emissions from 1990 to 2000 exceeded 60%. Towards the mid-1990s, Lithuania’s GDP began to rise and the reduction in emissions slowed down. The annual increase of GHG emissions in 2000-2006 was approximately 4% annually. The future of GHG emissions in Lithuania depends on the decommissioning of the Ignalina nuclear power plant and on the rate of economic development. In the National Energy Strategy, future energy demand was projected according to three different economic growth scenarios:

1) Fast economic growth scenario;

2) Basic scenario;

3) Slow economic growth scenario.

The fast economic growth scenario foresees very high rates of economic growth in Lithuania during the period until 2020, i.e., on average 5% per year (7% until 2010 and 3% after 2010). The low average annual growth rates of GDP in Lithuania (2% until 2010 and 3% in 2011-2020) predicted by the slow economic growth scenario could be a result of a very slow pace of economic restructuring, insufficient domestic and foreign investments, unexpected economic and political crises, etc. The basic scenario is based on the economic development trends that have been provided in the forecasts of macroeconomic indicators for the years 2002-2005 prepared by the Ministry of Finance, extending them to the year 2010 and assuming that a GDP growth rate would be 4.7% until 2010 and 3% after 2010 (on the average 3.85% during the period from 2000 to 2020).

By analysing changes in energy demand, ways to generate power after the closure of Ignalina nuclear power plant, and development of other sectors of economy, the Lithuanian Energy Institute developed two GHG-emission scenarios for the period ending in 2020 :

1. Maximum GHG-emissions scenario;
2. Minimum GHG-emissions scenario.

According to the Maximum scenario, total greenhouse-gas emissions in 2020 would be 43,80 Mt CO2 equivalent, 91 % of the 1990 level. The Minimum scenario puts total emissions at 31,00, Mt CO2 equivalent, 65 % of the 1990 level.

Public attitude towards Climate Change

A few years ago, climate-change problems were kind of a mystery for Lithuanian society and were almost not seriously reflected in media except for announcements about climate-change-induced impacts like storms, floods, droughts, etc. Only environmental NGOs and responsible officials from the Ministries of Environment and Education were raising concerns about the climate as a comprehensive issue. However, the latest surveys demonstrate that public concern about climate problems in Lithuania recently began increasing. The internet survey done by "AC Nielsen Baltics" in April 2007 stated that 6% of respondents from Lithuania indicated that climate change is the most serious global problem. Results of survey done in 2008 (“Fonitel“ on order of the Ministry of Environment) states that around 40% of citizens in Lithuania take the problem of climate change very seriously. According to the Eurobarometer survey, around 70% of respondents from Lithuania think that global warming is a very serious problem. However, these concerns are based on information usually twinkling in the media about weather-related extremes, not by approaches featuring scientific proof, political negotiations, or implementation of policies.

For most Lithuanians, warmer winters emotionally are associated with bringing them closer to the climate of Paris than to doomsday and help to save on increasing heating prices. Also most of Lithuanians think that such disasters as floods due to sea-level rise, earthquakes, hurricanes and tsunamis are far away; and that not we, but governments and polluters of such countries as the US, China, Russia should be responsible for it. Lithuanians are not willing to change their habits or to take concrete actions aimed at fighting climate change. To the survey’s question, “did you take any of these actions to combat climate change during the last month?”, only 25% of respondents mentioned that they reduced consumption of electricity; 26% used environmentally friendly transportation; 14% reduced consumption of disposable materials; and 29% reduced consumption of water. Most people in Lithuania of course have heard of the Kyoto protocol and about the U.S. refusal to sign it. The reasons for that refusal were not addressed in detail in the media, so the public’s knowledge on this issue is minimal. The general sense is that the U.S. was showing irresponsibility by expressing short-term national interests at the expense of long-term international needs. Also there is no deeper understanding of what, exactly, a Kyoto target is and what it means for the country; what a Kyoto mechanism is; why there are different lists of countries; etc. The main reason for such public unawareness in matters regarding the Kyoto Protocol is a lack of comprehensive information about climate issues in local and national media.

More and more rich people in Lithuania are implementing energy-efficiency measures (insulation of houses, modern heating systems, heat measurement equipment, etc.) and even installing renewable-energy systems (solar collectors, heat pumps, etc.) at the household level, more to reduce their energy bills to reduce GHG emissions. But these measures are not accessible to the general public; because energy prices are steadily increasing, many people with lower incomes are not able to pay energy bills and are forced to apply for state subsidies, while others are even forced to cut their heat supplies and to suffer in the cold. So, reduction of GHG emissions by higher energy prices seems very improbable in Lithuania at least for next decade. According the provisions of the National Energy Efficiency Programme for 2006–2010, the economic energy-saving potential in residential buildings is targeted at 5,2 TWh, (of which 3 TWh is in multi-story buildings), and in public buildings, 2,5 TWh (total annual heat supply in Lithuania is around 10 TWh). Proper exploitation of energy-savings potential in the building sector could reduce CO₂ emissions by approximately 15%. So, implementation of energy-saving measures and exploitation of the above-mentioned huge energy-savings potential probably would be the most economically feasible way to reduce GHG emissions quickly.

NGOs’ activities

Several environmental NGOs in Lithuania are working constantly on climate change but are concentrating mainly on educational and public awareness issues, implementation of specific projects, and promotion of sustainable energy alternatives. There is no leading group coordinating climate-related activities between NGOs and governmental institutions. A few groups occasionally organise conferences on climate change, drafting recommendations to governmental institutions and proposals for building of institutional capacities. However, NGOs don’t have a strategic approach towards shaping official CC policies and are not visible in national or international debates. Environmental NGOs, which are working on climate and energy issues, are familiar with the IPCC 4th Report and use it to inform their activities, but this information almost never reaches the public and is not very visible in the media.

Thus far in Lithuania, there have not been any “hot topics” concerning climate. The only topic that somehow relates to climate or EU and national energy policy is the plan to construct a new nuclear power plant together with Latvia, Estonia and Poland. However, even on this topic there was not any real public discussion; only officials and promoters of the new NPP discussed among themselves the capacities and time-frame of the project. In these discussions, reduction of GHG emissions was mentioned as one of the arguments in favour of the new NPP.

Media coverage of CC

Information about climate-change problems in Lithuanian media is very limited. Journalists like to report on weather extremes and related issues, however not necessarily linking those to climate change. It seems that deeper analysis of climate issues is not attractive to media owners, or it requires some deeper knowledge and is too complicated for journalists, or simply it is not touching Lithuania directly. Occasionally some TV issues or articles on climate problems appear in the media, but these are on a very populist level, taken from a very specific geopolitical point of view and not in favour of the environment. Other coverage by the media information consists of short messages in the form of news related to international events like COPs, EU summits, etc.

I didn’t see any reasonable information in Lithuanian media either on post-Kyoto targets or on IPCC 4^th Report outcomes. A future target for GHG emissions was discussed among environmentalists, scientists and responsible officials in seminars and working meetings, but was not appropriately reflected in the media. The best domestic source of information on climate change issues could be the web site of the Ministry of Environment; however, there, it is possible to find only legal acts and other climate-change-related documents without any explanation or analysis. Web sites of some environmental NGOs also could be used as a good source of information on climate-change-related issues.

Policies and Measures

The government did not present any post-Kyoto target as a topic for public discussion, nor has any discussion yet happened, and there probably will not be any governmental initiative to start such discussion. On a scientific level, trends of the greenhouse-gas emissions by the year 2020 were analyzed by Lithuania Energy Institute in the study “Forecast of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Development in Lithuania by 2020”. This scientific research was submitted to the Ministry of Environment. In this study are analysed relevant greenhouse-gas trends according to the economy development scenarios. A Maximum GHG emissions scenario and a Minimum GHG emissions scenario were foreseen. According to the Maximum scenario, total greenhouse-gas emissions in 2020 would be 43,80 Mt CO2 equivalent, 91 % of 1990 levels. According to the Minimum scenario total GHG emissions in 2020 would be 31,00, Mt CO2 equivalent, 65 % of the 1990 level. The environmental NGOs are advocating for stronger emission cuts.

Emission trading system

Analysis of the emissions trading scheme for 2005 - 2007 indicates that this scheme does not help to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. Some enterprises even manage to receive some additional incomes by trading unused greenhouse-gas emission allowances. Such situations happen because the Lithuanian Government tried to get the highest annual greenhouse-gas-emission allowances from the European Commission that it could, pointing to the closure of the Ignalina NPP and an increase in fossil-fuel combustion. Despite the fact that Unit 1 of Ignalina NPP was stopped at the end of 2005, however, fossil-fuel combustion was not increased because Unit 2 continues working (until 2010). So, enterprises, unable to use all received allowances, sold them in the market. Because of that, the enterprises considered treating the emissions-trading scheme not as an obligation or a tool for GHG-emissions reduction but just as some kind of the European Union assistance.

In 2005, sixty-three enterprises managing ninety-three fuel-combustion installations got permission to emit 13,8 million tons of CO₂. However only three of the ninety-three fuel-combustion installations exceeded the permissive CO₂ emissions level, and the remaining ninety installations used around half of their allowances. In total, real annual emissions were in the range of 6,6 million tons of CO₂. The rest of the allowances for 7,2 million tons were sold on the international market. State-owned enterprises additionally received income around 35 million EUR, while private enterprises have not reported income that they received through the emission trading scheme. For the period 2008-2012, the Lithuanian Government asked the European Commission to set a general annual amount of allowances of 16,7 million tons of CO₂. The European Commission allowed them 8,9 million tons. The closure of Unit 2 of the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant in 2010 might make it more difficult to keep within this allowance, but it could help for the Government and industry to consider the emission-trading scheme as a tool for GHG reduction.

Future targets

The Lithuanian Government does not pay too much attention to either the reduction of GHG emissions or public awareness in this field. There is a lack of information from the Government’s side on how to reduce GHG emissions through energy-efficiency measures and implementation of renewable-energy systems. Lithuania has the feed-in tariffs in place for wind energy, small hydro and biomass, which is 0,087 EUR/kWh. They are controlled by the National Control Commission for Prices and Energy and usually do not correspond to the real market situation, hindering investment. There is no proper legal background for renewable-energy development, resulting in unfavourable conditions for investors and no possibility of long-term guarantees.

Despite the approval of the National Energy Efficiency Programme for 2006–2010, implementation of the Programme has not enough support from the Government and is weak. During the last years, funds were allocated for renovation of old multi-story buildings; however, that is not enough to reach expected results. For renovation of inefficient buildings in 2007, the state budget allocation was ~ 4,3 million EUR in 2008, but it covers only a very small percentage of prepared projects. To date there have been prepared over 300 energy-efficiency projects in the housing sector, implementation of which requires around 100 million EUR. For renovation of old houses in 2009, some funding is foreseen (around 20 million EUR) from the Ignalina Decommissioning Support Fund, however some energy experts consider this to be misuse of international support intended for other purposes. Despite negligible attention to development of renewable energy from the Government’s side, during the last few years some progress was made in terms of renewable-energy installations.

Renewable Energy Installed capacities

Renewable Source	Installed Capacities, MW
	1990	1995	2000	2005	2006	2007
Small Hydro PP	5,30	5,30	12,70	24,80	27,00	26,40
Biomass PP	-	-	1,06	3,60	20,10	31,00
Wind PP	-	-	-	1,10	49,00	52,00

Electricity generated by Renewable Energy Sources

Renewable Source	Generation, GWh
	2000	2005	2006	2007
Small Hydro PP	26,60	66,10	55,80	95,90
Wind PP	-	1,80	13,70	106,10

Official energy policy in Lithuania is rather fossil- and nuclear-oriented, not favourable to renewable-energy development. During the last decade, there was no political will for decisions in favour of fast development of renewable energy or for implementation of energy-efficiency measures. In the National Energy Strategy, besides the new nuclear power plant, there are foreseen new, large fossil-fuel-fired generating capacities that will slow down development of renewable energy.

In 2008 there was put into operation a 35 MW electric capacity gas-fired CHP in Panevezys. Plans exist to build in 2010 a 400 MW electric capacity gas-fired thermoelectric power plant in Elektrenai and, for 2011–2012,a few smaller CHP’s in Alytus (20 MW electric capacity and 30 MW thermal capacity), Marijampole (20 MW electric capacity and 30 MW thermal capacity), Panevezys (35 MW electric capacity and 33 MW thermal capacity), Utena (2 MW electric capacity and 8,5 MW thermal capacity), Siauliai (9 MW electric capacity and 20 MW thermal capacity). As there were no “clean” coal projects planned in Lithuania, the major planned CHP’s are gas-fired, with some small biomass-fired CHPs. Also in Vilnius (20 MW electric capacity and 50 MW thermal capacity), Kaunas (15 MW electric capacity and 50 MW thermal capacity) and Klaipeda (25 MW electric capacity and 50 MW thermal capacity) there are plans for waste incinerators.

The Lithuanian government and major political parties consider nuclear power to be the most important future energy source. Their main argument for construction of a new nuclear power plant is security of primary energy supply; however, climate change is also used as a justification.

References

1. The Ministry of the Environment, Lithuania’s second national communication under the Framework Convention on Climate Change;
2. The Ministry of the Environment, Institute of Ecology of Vilnius University, Lithuania’s third and fourth national communication on Climate Change, Vilnius, November 2005;
3. The Ministry of the Environment, Lithuania’s National Allocation Plan for Greenhouse Gas Emission Allowances for the Period 2008 to 2012, Vilnius 2006;
4. The Ministry of the Environment, Institute of Ecology of Vilnius University, Lithuania’s Report on Demonstrable Progress, Vilnius, 2006;
5. Special Eurobarometer 300, Europeans’ attitudes towards climate change, March – May 2008;
6. Lithuanian Energy Institute, The National Energy Strategy, Kaunas, 2003;
7. Lithuanian Energy Institute, “Forecast of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Development in Lithuania by 2020”, Kaunas 2007;
8. he Ministry of the Economy, the National Energy Efficiency Programme for 2006–2010, Vilnius, May 2006;
9. National Audit Office of the Republic of Lithuania, Report on Evaluation of the Allocations and Trading Scheme of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Allowances, Vilnius 2007.