Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has transformed flows of energy globally and, at least in the developed world, accelerated the push for renewables. In Ukraine itself, the war has wreaked havoc on power generating capacity, but it has also sown the seeds of a plan to build a greener post-war nation.
On 24 February 2022 Ukraine’s electricity grid operator safely disconnected the country’s power system from Russia’s as part of a long-planned trial. Four hours later, Russia invaded.
Ukraine’s grid has been partially integrated with Europe’s ever since – and the plan is to go further. President Volodymyr Zelensky has outlined plans to create a decentralised green energy system that would be immune to missile strikes, as well as looking to export power and become “one of the guarantors of European energy security”.
So what? Ukraine’s vast, windswept steppe could provide huge quantities of wind and solar power by 2030, according to pre-war estimates. Electricity that’s surplus to immediate demand could be used to generate green hydrogen – by splitting water through electrolysis – and shipped west through the country’s existing gas pipeline network.
Ukraine’s other advantage is its highly fertile “black soil”, which could be used to replace a quarter of its pre-war gas consumption with biomethane from agricultural waste.
“Russian aggression has accelerated the move towards net zero in Ukraine,” says Antonina Antosha, spokesperson for DTEK, Ukraine’s largest private energy company. “We all understand that the sooner we build renewable energy sources, the faster we become free.”
But that freedom comes at a substantial cost to the country’s energy system and environment.
By the numbers:
40 – per cent of Ukraine’s energy network that was damaged in missile attacks last October.
90 – per cent of wind generation assets that have either been destroyed or are under Russian occupation.
2,500 – number of Black Sea dolphins that washed up dead on Ukraine’s shores between February and May 2022. Marine biologists say acoustic trauma from increased use of Russian submarine sonar is the main culprit.
3 million – hectares of forest burned or impacted by fighting across an area larger than Albania.
46 billion – cost, in US dollars, of measurable environmental damage according to the government of Ukraine. Includes direct military damage to air, forests, soil and water; pollution from weapons and shelling of facilities containing toxic material.
The recovery. The EU has endorsed Zelensky’s vision of rebuilding the country on a more sustainable basis. At last year’s Ukraine Recovery Conference, Ursula von der Leyen spoke of a Ukraine that would not only be free and democratic but “green and prosperous”.
Ukraine’s nuclear reactors provide a steady source of low-carbon power generation that can be teamed up with fluctuating green sources. The country’s ageing coal power stations made up 30 per cent of its energy mix in 2018, followed by natural gas (28 per cent) and nuclear (24 per cent), according to the International Energy Agency, while renewables accounted for 5 per cent.
DTEK, which has a large coal portfolio, says it does not plan to rehabilitate its coal mines and thermal power plants in the occupied Donbas, but is shifting investment into renewable projects instead.
Ukraine has set a target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 65 per cent by 2030, on 1990 levels, but achieving or even surpassing that ambition is dependent on several factors including:
Ukraine’s leaders have grasped that a fast track to EU membership is painted green. Ending the war comes first. Building a more sustainable future would be a fitting legacy for those fighting for a better Ukraine.
Roman Ratushnyi, the young political activist who was killed in combat near Kharkiv last year, first made his name as an environmental campaigner.