This is according to Ukrainian energy security expert Mykhaylo Pirtko. He notes that striving for complete energy autarky in modern conditions is an unrealistic goal, especially for countries with damaged or relatively small energy systems.
“The illusion of absolute energy independence is one of the most common myths in public policy. For small countries or states whose infrastructure has been critically damaged, attempts to achieve complete autarky are not only economically inexpedient, but also technically dangerous,” emphasizes Mikhail Pirtko.
The expert explains that the energy systems of Ukraine and Moldova currently lack significant reserve capacities, which means that the failure of even one key facility can provoke a system failure. In his opinion, the modern paradigm of energy security is primarily related to the flexibility of the system.
Georgia’s path: successful transformation and investment boom
Mikhail Pirtko considers Georgia one of the most representative examples of successful energy transformation. Faced in the past with serious energy shortages and external pressure from gas companies, the country managed to radically change the situation thanks to a number of pragmatic decisions.
“Abandoning monopolistic gas supplies and establishing a strategic partnership with Azerbaijan has allowed Tbilisi to secure stable energy resources and alleviate external pressure. This is a classic example of how geopolitical logistics can solve the problem of deficit of basic resources,” the expert emphasizes.
In addition, Georgia has focused on the development of distributed hydropower and market deregulation. According to Pirtko, transparent rules without bureaucratic barriers “have attracted billions of dollars of private investment and proved that a transparent market effectively builds new generations”.
Three steps for Chisinau and Kyiv
Based on the Georgian experience, Mikhail Pirtko identifies three key vectors for transforming the energy security architecture of Ukraine and Moldova:
1. Decentralization of generation. Instead of restoring vulnerable megastations, a network of smaller facilities (gas piston and biogas plants, renewable energy sources) should be quickly established. “Physical destruction or destabilization of dozens of small facilities scattered across different regions is much more difficult than stopping a single megastation,” the expert notes.
In the conditions of Moldova, this statement can be transformed into a proposal not to rely too much on the “energy independence line” Isaccea-Vulcasesti 400 kV. Because of it, only this year twice there was a danger of blackout for Moldova.
The first time, allegedly, because of damage caused on the territory of Ukraine by Russian strikes. And the second time – last week, when due to bad weather there were wire breaks on the line. In both cases, Moldelectrica announced the possibility of blackouts throughout the country.
In such cases, Moldova can be saved by four 110 kV lines, which come from Romania, bypassing the territory of Ukraine. They proved themselves well during the two crises with the Isaccea-Vulcanesti transmission line mentioned above.
2. Deep integration with the EU markets. Technical synchronization with ENTSO-E should develop into a full-fledged market link for instant commercial cross-border electricity flow to cover peak loads.
For now, it is a matter of increasing the quota of 2.4 MW for Moldova and Ukraine, of which our country can count on 15%.
As Energy Minister Dorin Jungietu told Logos Press, this quota is “not a political or commercial restriction, but a technical parameter determined by the transmission system operators within ENTSO-E. It refers to the available cross-border transmission capacity – NTC (Net Transfer Capacity) – between the Moldova-Ukraine block and the continental European network”.
3. Pragmatic tariff policy. The expert insists on rejecting artificial price caps, which generate debts and scare away investors: “The only effective solution is a transition to market prices with the parallel introduction of a system of monetized targeted subsidies for socially vulnerable consumers”.
So far, with great difficulty, but such a system is being implemented in Moldova. During two winter periods, hundreds of thousands of vulnerable consumers received compensation for electricity – insufficient, but at least some. In other words, the country’s government has a lot to work on.
The importance of balancing the energy system
Praising Georgia’s achievements, Mikhail Pirtko notes that any major energy transition requires continuous improvement. He points out that the heavy reliance on hydropower naturally creates seasonal fluctuations, as river levels drop in winter and overall electricity consumption rises.
“For Moldova and Ukraine, this is a clear indicator of the need for balanced development. The expansion of renewable energy sources must necessarily be accompanied by proportional commissioning of highly maneuverable capacities and industrial energy storage systems. Balancing instruments are necessary to minimize risks and maintain the stability of the energy system,” concludes Pirtko.
Moldova has obvious problems with this so far. Balancing capacity is insufficient, and only one of the BESSs, in Radeni, with a total capacity of 60 MWh, has been commissioned so far.
But the process of BESS implementation in Georgia is just beginning: the Asian Development Bank (ADB) has allocated $104 million for the creation of the country’s first energy storage facility with a capacity of 200 MW/200 MWh.
As for balancing capacities, the example of Georgia is not quite correct for Moldova, as hydroelectric power plants are the main balancing resource there, insuring more than 70% of the total generation. The key facility is the Inguri HPP with a capacity of 1300 MW. And only 24% of balancing capacities are thermal power plants.
Moldova should not take Ukraine as an equal, since both nuclear and hydropower are developed there. It is necessary to invent its own way.
In general, the analyst notes, energy security in the 21st century is measured not by the number of large power plants, but by the capacity of cross-border interconnections, the depth of decentralization and a transparent investment climate.
