Knowledge Transfer and Research Needs for Climate Policy in Serbia

1. Knowledge transfer and research needs for preparing mitigation/adaptation policy portfolios- Serbian National Report - Aleksandar Madžarević University of Belgrade – Faculty of Mining and Geology 9-11 October 2013, Athens, Greece

2. Objectives • M/A policy portfolios development and assessment • Identification of  Needs and Gaps • Knowledge transfer procedures • Dissemination - 2 -

3. Strategy • Development • Evaluation of available data and information • Choice and implementation of models • Scenarios and policy portfolios • Implementation • Scenarios and policy portfolios • Evaluation • Evaluation of policy portfolios • Knowledge transfer towards scientists and decision makers of both public and private sectors • Training Dissemination • Identification of scientific research needs and gaps • Prioritization of research gaps and needs - 3 -

4. Serbian climate change policy - Objectives - 4 - - 4 - Serbia signed the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in June 2001. The country ratified the Kyoto Protocol and signed it in January 2008. The signing of the protocol does not oblige Serbia to reduce its GHG emissions. Serbia signed the Treaty that establishes the Energy Community of Southeast Europe and EU in 2006.

5. Spectrum of climate change mitigation options /adaptation needsfor Serbia • Energy sector • Agricultural sector • Forestry sector • Water resources • Others - 5 - - 5 - Exploitation of RES Energy efficiency Fuel switch Mitigation through CDM Other mitigation options

6. Policy mixtures andpossible scenarios for Serbia - 6 -

7. Database • Available data for period 1990-2010 • Key assumptions • Demographics, Climate statistics, Economy, Industry, Policies and measures • Demand • Household, Agriculture, Industry, Transport, Health, Tourism, Other services, Non specified, Non energy use • Statistical differences • Transformation • Transmission and distribution,Own use,Electricity generation, Pump storage, Oil refining,Coal drying,Heat plants • Stock changes (primary and secondary) • Resources • Non energy sector • Land use, change and forestry, Agriculture,Waste,Cement manufacture,Lime production. Part of the database - 7 -

8. LEAP model for Serbia Energy impact Non energy impact - 8 -

9. LEAP model for Serbia - 9 -

10. Possible scenarios • Database is linked with LEAP- open and dynamic model • Base year 2010 • Scenario development • Three possible scenarios: • Business as usual, • Optimistic and • Pessimistic - 10 -

11. Business as usual scenario • Key drivers are assumed to develop based on their historical trends • Utilization of RES is limited to hydropower plants and non-commercial use of biomass and geothermal energy • Despite the introduction of the FITs, renewable energy sources have not been promoted. There are rare examples of individual solar thermal building systems and small solar Photovoltaic roof maintained units. • 19 privately owned small hydro power plants were connected in 2010 to the distribution system of Public Enterprise “Electric Power Industry of Serbia” - 11 -

12. Business as usual scenario • GDP distribution per sector • based on the trend of the historical data. • Precipitation • For the BAU scenario a negative growth rate of 0,25% is assumed based on the historical data of the decade 2000-2010 • Temperature • temperature will increase by approximately 1,2oC in 2020 compared to that of year 2010 • Policies and Measures • Feed – in – tariff system - 12 -

13. Business as usual scenario -some results Population change Without generation from other RES GDP growth No energy efficiency measures or fuel switch Historical trend No biofuels - 13 -

14. Business as usual scenario – some results - 14 -

15. Optimistic scenario • The Optimistic scenario concerns the time evolution of an enhanced mitigation/adaptation policy portfolio that the country will implement during the time interval 2011 - 2050. • This scenario is linked with stringent climate policy options and relatively high need for adaptation policy instruments to handle minimum climate change impacts for Serbia. - 15 -

16. Optimistic scenario • The main characteristics of this policy portfolio is: • the promotion of RES, • the introduction of energy efficiency measures in all sectors, • the implementation of adaptation activities towards the minimum – in size and extent - expected climate change impacts, • the adoption of all expected technological improvements. - 16 -

17. Optimistic scenario • The Optimistic scenario concerns: • the mitigation/adaptation policy instruments that the country has set into force after 1st January 2011; • additional policy instruments in line with the EU climate change policy that can be adjusted to the needs and priorities of the examined country*aiming to the maximum exploitation of the potential of the country in energy efficiency and RES. • *Albania, Moldova, Serbia and Ukraine are Contracting Parties of the Energy Community and have committed to comply with the EU energy policy (http://www.energy-community.org/portal/page/portal/ENC_HOME). This commitment concerns also climate change policy due to policy instruments that support the usage of technologies for energy efficiency and renewable energy sources. - 17 -

18. Optimistic scenario -some results Efficiency measures are applied GDP growth Fuel switch Biofuels are introduced - 18 -

19. Optimistic scenario -some results - 19 -

20. Pessimistic scenario • This scenario is a non-climate policy scenario. The priorities are not in mitigation activities and adaptation needs, but in energy supply and security for ensuring economic growth in higher rates than those of this scenario • The penetration of RES technologies for this scenario concerns mainly biomass and hydropower • Efforts for energy efficiency will concern mainly the energy sector and the residential sector - 20 -

21. Pessimistic scenario • Mitigation • Existing policy instruments • Updated Energy law • Law on Construction and Spatial planning • Additional policy instruments • Policy instruments for the promotion of RES • Increase in electricity prices for allowing investments in the power sector. • Lower and constant feed-in-tariffs for RES. • Tax exemptions and subsidies for the encouragement of investments in the energy and mining sector. - 21 -

22. Pessimistic scenario – some results Efficiency measures are applied with delay of 5 years compared to Optimistic scenario Capacities of RES are reduced compared with Optimistic scenario Share of biofuels is 2.5% - 22 -

23. Pessimistic scenario – some results - 23 -

24. Results of AMS AMS results of each scenario - 24 -

25. Comments • OPT has higher political acceptability due to its higher performance in cost efficiency. • In feasibility of implementation the OPT scenario has the lowest performance compared to the other two. • The implementation network does not have the necessary capacity, skills and experience to apply such a strict climate policy mixture. - 25 -

26. Comments • The administrative feasibility needs to be improved considerably so as to incorporate the EU legislation and meet the requirement of the EU acquits in this policy area. • Significant disadvantage for this policy mixture is the insurance of the necessary financial resources so as to be effective. - 26 -

27. Conclusions • This report concerns the development and assessment of three climate change mitigation and adaptation policy portfolios for Serbia. • Each of them is characterized by a different policy mixture and is named after it as Business As Usual (BAU), Optimistic (OPT) and Pessimistic (PES). • Serbia as a non-Annex I country has no obligation to reduce its GHG emissions under the Kyoto Protocol. - 27 -

28. Assessment outcomes • The BAU scenario has the largest amount of GHG emissions, followed by the PES scenario. • The policy portfolio of the OPT scenario has the best performance in political acceptability since it is the most cost effective for the target groups (residential, industrial, energy and transport sectors). • It offers more flexibility for the target groups in complying with their obligations. - 28 -

29. Assessment outcomes • The most promising mitigation/adaptation policy portfolio is the one which characterizes the Optimistic scenario. • The success of this policy portfolio requires the appropriate implementation network, the necessary financial means and a more stringent frame for non-compliance. - 29 -

30. Research needs and gaps • Research needs and gaps related to M&A policy data • Established national procedures, sources, available data and information • Database development for M&A policy portfolios • Research needs and gaps related to M&A scenarios and policy portfolios • Research needs and gaps related to the evaluation of M&A policy instruments - 30 -

31. Research needs and gaps • There is no systematic database at the level of the country. • Some of the required data were not collected at all. • For the analyzed period even energy balances of the country can not be found (except 2007-2010). • The Initial National Communication of the Republic of Serbia (Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning, 2010) • “Report on the State of the Environment in Republic of Serbia” (Serbian Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA)) covers land–use change and forestry. - 31 -

32. Research needs and gaps • There is no systematic collecting, analyzing, systemizing and reporting of data nether by RHMSS, SORS nor SEPA for national GHG inventory. - 32 -

33. Thank you ! Aleksandar MADŽAREVIĆ University of Belgrade – Faculty of Mining and Geology Centre for Energy amadzarevic@rgf.bg.ac.rs