KRISTJAN JÄRVAN ⟩ Gas power plant near Russian border is a security risk

Deputy Mayor Kristjan Järvan. Photo: Madis Veltman

• Electricity supply has been guarded in the same way as any ordinary warehouse.
• Narva is not the best location for the new gas-fired power plant from an economic standpoint either.

The government has so far hardly considered electricity supply an integral part of security and national defense, Kristjan Järvan, deputy mayor of Tallinn (Isamaa), writes.

The recent audit by the National Audit Office highlighted a serious problem: the protection of the facilities ensuring Estonia's electricity supply is insufficient. Clear requirements have been established for the protection of only one facility, based on its status as a national defense object. All other facilities must decide for themselves how to protect themselves, even though they are crucial for ensuring the electricity supply of all of Estonia.

It can therefore be said that the government has so far hardly considered electricity supply an integral part of security and national defense. Power stations, cables and transmission lines have at best been guarded in the same way as any ordinary warehouse or factory. Since the National Audit Office proposed to the government to designate the sites supplying electricity to Estonia as national defense objects, also the location of the new 100-megawatt gas power plant, which according to current plans is to be built within the compound of the Balti Power Plant in Narva by 2029, should now be re-evaluated from a security and national defense perspective.

The deployment of additional dispatchable generating capacities is undoubtedly an essential step to ensure security of supply, and a gas power plant with a capacity of 100 megawatts is the absolute minimum that Eesti Energia should invest in to increase security of supply. However, with this project, the question inevitably arises as to why it is planned to build the new power plant in Narva, which is located on the eastern border of Estonia, right next to Russia.

All the oil shale-fired thermal power plants built in Estonia in the past are located in East-Viru County, and this is so for economic reasons, as oil shale mines were also located there. The energy source was nearby, transport was cheap and fast. But why build a gas-fired power plant there now as well?

Not a reasonable solution

From the point of view of Estonia's energy security, concentrating a number of dispatchable electricity production capacities in one place and, moreover, next to our border with the aggressor, is not a reasonable solution. Power plants and infrastructure further away from Russia are certainly easier to protect, fuel and keep in operation in the event of a conflict than plants directly on our border with a hostile country.

Narva is not the best location for the new gas-fired power plant from an economic standpoint either. If the power plant in question were built near Tallinn, next to Eesti Energia's Iru thermal power plant, it would be much more economically efficient, as electricity would be produced much closer to the main consumer.

Since the gas transmission network and gas supply are better in Tallinn than in Narva, it would be possible to build a more powerful gas-fired power plant with a capacity of at least 200 megawatts in Iru, which is not feasible in Narva with its smaller gas supply. In addition, it should be considered that if, in accordance with the government's climate policy plans, it is desired to switch the new power plant to hydrogen in the more distant future, then Tallinn is also a more logical and expedient place to build this infrastructure.

The only argument that the politicians who prefer Narva have been able to come up with is the need to solve the heating problem in Narva. But this, alas, is a very weak argument, more reminiscent of self-deception than the voice of reason. The heating problems in Narva indeed need a solution, but it can hardly be done with a gas power plant.

Gas electricity rarely makes it to market

Because gas electricity is very expensive, it only occasionally enters the market through the exchange during peak loads. This means that the gas power plant will not be running all the time and will only produce heat when there's no wind and the submarine cable is broken. But even if the gas power plant solved Narva's heating problem, the question would still remain whether this outweighs the arguments against building the gas power plant essential for the electricity supply of the whole of Estonia next to the Russian border, where the enemy would only need a couple of howitzers to destroy it.

Therefore, building the new gas power plant near Tallinn, next to the Iru thermal power plant, is better from both a security standpoint and an economic standpoint than building it in Narva, in the Balti Power Plant compound. If Eesti Energia faces the question of what to do with the residual heat generated as part of electricity production at Iru, it can be used for heating apartments in Tallinn, just as in Narva. Only a few regulations need to be changed for this.

It seems off-beat, but against the backdrop of the Government of the Republic's attitude to the continuity of Estonia's electricity systems being so odd – the siting of dispatchable generating capacities and burger kiosks should be done on the same basis – the Tallinn city government agreed to my proposal to discuss the continuity of the capital's electricity supply. I hope that the Government of the Republic will take security of supply as seriously as Tallinn.