Artan Rama reports from Albania
Rike Uhlenkamp reports from South Tyrol, Province of Bolzano, Italy
The path opens.
Albania leads Europe in the production of electricity from renewable sources, mainly from the use of water. Last year managed to produce 99.3% of energy from these sources, leaving behind Norway, Denmark and Luxembourg, while the average of European countries does not even exceed half of this value.
To keep this green flag flying high, small Albania has had to stay true to renewable energy, whose capacity doubled over the last decade. In December 2024, the total capacity of private energy producers exceeded, for the first time, the total production capacity of the public company KESH. The Drini Cascade, the energy pride of the socialist past hydroelectric power plants, has lagged behind, compared to the unstoppable development of new renewable sources, including the latest: solar and wind.
This double achievement, not only in terms of energy, but also in line with the European transition towards clean energy, has transformed Prime Minister Rama's motto: "Albania, regional leader in the export of renewable energy", into a strategic development objective for the country. The use of new sources (solar and wind) is increasing capacities, further transforming the national energy system.
Last year, twenty-six new renewable energy plants added 270 MW of installed capacity. Only 14 MW came from hydropower. The rest, about 95%, came from solar. The installed capacity of photovoltaic panels has now reached 449 MW. It is expected to quadruple in the next two years.
To build on water
In July of this year, the 20th anniversary of the Energy Treaty was inaugurated in the historic building of Zhapios, in the heart of Athens, in the same hall where twenty years ago the European Commission and the countries of Eastern and South-Eastern Europe signed the agreement to integrate energy markets into a large, common market. It was this treaty that guided and forever transformed the post-communist Albanian energy system.
Implementation began with the drafting of the law on concessions in 2006 and the reform of the state energy corporation (KESH), towards decentralization and the creation of independent departments. It then continued with the extension of new interconnection lines with neighboring countries, with the drafting of a completely new legal framework that would support initiatives for the construction of new generation sources, with their diversification and up to the liberalization of the product towards a free market.
Although hasty, forced, and often "violent," over two decades, the reform, which was based mainly on the construction of new energy plants from renewable sources (water), was supported by all governments.
In fact, the national hydropower project had begun as early as the 60s with the construction of the large hydroelectric power plants of the Drini Cascade, and later with smaller works, but equally important for the planned socialist economy. They aimed to support industrialization, feeding the works of the 5-year plan with energy, and bore the names of the leaders of the world revolution.
But Albania followed the same tradition, also imposed by the country's steep terrain and high water availability. With the same state support as it seemed, it revived the hydropower projects, through a boom of new licenses that were issued for the construction of other hydropower plants. Although, now under new names of propaganda for green energy, the sudden aggression of the plants provoked great public concern about the real damage caused, such as the "imprisonment" of water flows in pipes and the high pressure on river ecosystems. But, according to experts, the energy generated by hydropower plants depends on the amount of water and its stability throughout the annual period in the flow.
“Due to climate change and increasing consumption, the production of electricity from hydropower sources is compromised,” notes energy expert Agim Bregasi. Bregasi has held the position of Director of Energy Policy at the Ministry of Infrastructure and Energy (MIE) and has long been the focal point of the Albanian government on the Energy Treaty. He emphasizes the necessity and advantages of diversifying sources. “Diversification increases the security of supply and the efficiency of the use of energy sources,” he further explains, explaining that the implementation of the Trans-Adriatic Pipeline (TAP) project, combined with the abundant water resources and the establishment of the system’s 400 kV network, has created ideal conditions for the use of gas to produce energy.
Evaluating the concession contracts of hydroelectric power plants that have started operating and are part of the national distribution network, it results that in each of the last five years, the total production does not exceed the expected production planned by the National Agency of Natural Resources (AKBN), which monitors the capacities, construction and operation of these plants. But this production would be even lower, if compared to the production, as expected from the contracts signed with the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources. However, even referring to the planned production by AKBN, the average of the last five years (2020; 2021; 2022; 2023; 2024) resulted 25% lower than this expectation, or for every 4 kWh of energy planned to be produced, in the last five years only 3 kWh were produced. The year 2020 marked the year with the lowest production in the last five years, producing 60% of the planning, or for every 5 kWh of planned energy, only 3 kWh were produced in 2020. Production was lower (compared to planning) even in 2023, which was considered a good hydrological year, where the total net domestic energy production was the highest in the last five years, even 30% higher than the average of the last 15 years. This shows that the unstable renewable energy produced by the concession contracts in question does not constitute a guarantee for the sustainability of the national energy system, especially when the growing economy will require the addition of new capacities.
“There are concessions that do not even reach half of the production foreseen in the contract,” reveals Kristi Thodhorjani, a former employee, a prominent hydrotechnical engineer, at AKBN. “There are inflated contracts, which are not based on measurements or proper hydrological studies,” the engineer further explains.
Currently, Thodhorjani teaches as an external lecturer on energy resources at the Faculty of Geology and Mining at the Polytechnic University of Tirana. “Albania has a shortage of hydrologists,” she emphasizes, “but also a shortage of training for new students. Therefore, the Faculty of Civil Engineering should deepen its program and studies towards mathematics and physics, in the branch of hydrology,” she advises.
It suggests reviewing existing concession contracts, regardless of their operational status, and even controlling the quality of construction of energy generation facilities, with the aim of optimizing production.
"In many of the hydropower plants, the quality of the works is poor. Thus, water is not transported properly from the intake work to the power plant building, which causes a decrease in production," he concludes.
But another consequence caused by the instability of production from renewable sources is the decrease in the value of the concessionary tariff, which is a small value of the total energy production produced by the generating facility. The concessionary tariff, which varies from 2% and reaches 8% in different contracts, is transferred to the budget, as part of the obligation that the private company has to the contractual authority. Thus, based only on contracts with a concessionary tariff of 2%, which constitute about 75% of the total, it results that for the year 2020, which has been a bad energy year, compared to the last five years, the financial loss from the decrease in the concessionary tariff is over 1 mln. euros. This is because the total production of contracts realized during this year was lower than the expected value for the same contracts.
The Ministry of Infrastructure and Energy has done very little in terms of diversifying its sources and supporting infrastructure. But it has excelled on paper. The Energy Regulatory Authority (ERE) has long reiterated the necessity of diversification, although it aims to favor a positive energy balance, not to mitigate the eco-social consequences caused by the unilateral and direct use of primary energy sources.
The pace of hydropower has slowed, but not the euphoria for renewable energy. The government is incentivizing the construction of solar plants with a capacity of 2 MW and wind plants, up to 3 MW. A legislation The new law has paved the way for the use of high-quality agricultural lands, mainly along the country's coastline, which allows for the creation of space for the expansion of solar panels. The construction is also being allowed within protected territories, once prohibited. The ambitions seem grand. Just like at the dawn of hydroelectric power plants, the immediate construction of photovoltaic capacities is ignoring environmental assessment.
In 2021, in a study on the suitability of potential territories for the installation of solar panels and wind turbines in Albania, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) concluded that only 20% of the country's territory, about 350,000 ha, is sustainable. It was the environmental dimension that was taken into account for this limitation, excluding the installation of panels within protected territories with significant environmental sensitivity.
But last year, the government allowed the installation of renewable energy plants within the "Protected Landscapes". These are wetland ecosystems that extend along the Adriatic coast, near river mouths, where flora and fauna are not only diverse, but under climate pressure, their ecological integrity guarantees the ability to withstand future environmental disasters. These territories have resulted in high solar radiation, thus, with energy potential. In 2024, the installed capacity of photovoltaic plants immediately rose to 449 MW. Dozens of new permits for the construction of photovoltaic parks have been issued in these areas.
New targets in the recently revised National Energy and Climate Plan (2020-2030) have increased the pressure to develop renewable sources. Albania has pledged that by 2030, more than half of its total energy consumption will come from renewable sources; the rest will be consumed by oil, heating and cooling systems, and transport. The parliament has just approved a law on biofuels, promising to introduce 7% of biofuels into the fuel market by 2030.
The gasification of the country and promises for the use of liquefied natural gas have long been part of the national energy strategy document, but the Vlora thermal power plant with a capacity of about 100 MW, built in 2012, has not yet been put into operation. The passage in the vicinity of TAP creates the possibility of putting it into operation through liquefied natural gas (LNG). This would contribute, especially during the drought period in the southern part of the country.
"Typically, the Albanian economy does not have an industrial profile, which means that CO emissions2"They don't take on any serious weight," explains Bregasi.
Moreover, the nature of energy production in the country does not match the nature of energy consumption, which is based on water abundance, thus Albania, the "green European model", can afford the convenience of resource diversification, as long as it reduces dependence on water (protects natural ecosystems) and strengthens the sustainability of energy supply throughout the year.
But while decarbonization generates support and enthusiasm, the practical possibilities in a small country like Albania mean a tough implementation on the ground. History has shown us that authorities and companies always try easy solutions, passing the burden on to the environment and local communities.
Uncontrolled development of hydroelectric power plants
In 2015, the government adopted new procedures for building electricity generation capacities. Concessions were abandoned, but a shift was made towards public-private partnerships (PPP). This reflected the same political will, but without the need to follow lengthy concession procedures. In a way, the new legal framework was a remix of the previous concession law. It aimed to reform the energy system by attracting private capital. Another support was the pre-purchase of production for 15 years by the Public Distribution Operator (OSHEE), starting from the first day of the plant’s operation. The purchase would apply to hydropower plants under two megawatts and up to three for wind turbines. Thanks to the measures, the payback period for the investment was shortened, while the profit period was increased. For contracts, most of which ran for up to 35 years, this opportunity was a profit heaven.
But in the meantime, the gates of hell were opened for nature. While the hydropower sector relied on strategic documents, with clear objectives for renewable energy, the water resources management strategy was missing; the Basin Management Plans had not yet been approved, while the newly created institutions, such as the National Agency for Protected Areas (AKZM), were too fragile to impose action plans for the protection of biodiversity.
“The imbalance between the progress of the energy legal framework and the stagnation of the environmental one is not simply related to the quality of the legislation, but to the way in which the country’s political and economic priorities were defined,” explains environmental expert Ornela Shoshi. “Energy was considered an engine of development, closely linked to attracting foreign investment, while environmental legislation, although advanced on paper and often drafted mainly to meet the demands of international partners, was not supported by strong monitoring mechanisms, sufficient institutional capacities and the same political will as energy,” concludes Shoshi with regret.
In conclusion, at the time of the country's great hydropower transformation, when the volume and speed of transposition of environmental legislation was higher than its processing by an extremely small number of experts and still unconsolidated institutions, the licensing of small hydropower plants, precisely those that caused the greatest damage to the environment, reached its peak. Within a decade, since the outbreak of the second energy revolution in the country's history, hundreds of hydropower plants had been licensed, some of which had even penetrated protected territories.
The total number of hydropower plants that have entered production, by December 2024 (in fact, the approval of HPPs continues in 2025, but at a reduced pace, while dozens of others have not yet begun construction), has reached approximately 255. According to the type of contract, we can group them into two groups: concessionary and non-concessional. Most concessionary contracts were signed during electoral years (2009; 2013; 2017), which suggests that the energy reform was also used for political support.
The trend of concession contracts declined after 2013, but the approval of other hydropower plants continued with non-concessional contracts, thanks to VKM 822 (October 7, 2015, “On the approval of the rules and procedures for the construction of new electricity production capacities that are not subject to concession”), which accelerated and eliminated the obstacles caused by the burdensome rules of previous concession contracts.
In a few months, non-concessionary contracts reached hundreds. Currently, 215 have managed to enter production. It is worth highlighting an important fact, if we look at the development from the perspective of their impact on the environment. For the energy works that are the subject of concession, in every four HPPs, one of them has at least two water intake works. By the word itself, with crime we mean that part of the river where water is taken and, the higher the number of intakes, the higher the damage to nature. But this ratio changes significantly in non-concessionary contracts, where in every two HPPs, one of them has at least two intake works. In this way, the approval of generating facilities through VKM 822 has accelerated not only their licensing, but has also increased environmental damage. Taking water from many points increases the cumulative effect of habitat fragmentation, during the construction of supporting infrastructure for generating facilities. The reduction of water and its diversion into pipes causes drought and in conditions of climate change the consequences on the land are even greater. In total, the total number of intake works of operating (private) hydropower plants, concessionary and non-concessionary, has reached 864. The ratio between large and small HPPs has narrowed to four to five. So, for every five megawatts of electrical power installed in river flows by large HPPs, four are installed in small HPPs. The trend of equalization, between HPPs with such different capacities, is due to the disproportionality in numbers, between large and small HPPs, in favor of the latter.
The Ministry of Tourism and Environment has not published any study on the damage and their weight that several hundred hydropower plants have caused to river ecosystems. A similar depreciation is also noted by the administration of protected areas, within the territories administered by it have penetrated dozens of hydropower plants, while their construction within national parks is an illegal activity. But in the Shebenik-Jabllanica National Park, there are dozens of such.
“What dominated was short-term economic gain over long-term resource sustainability,” Shoshi concludes. “As a result, biodiversity was not assessed in detail and river ecosystems were fragmented,” the expert concludes.
We can say that the energy reform plan was comprehensive and that the approximation of specific legislation did not leave environmental legislation behind. New laws, accompanied by the creation of law enforcement agencies, were adopted to protect the environment and natural resources.
“But in practice these remained difficult to implement, due to lack of funds, coordination between agencies and due to the lack of continuous and qualitative monitoring”, analyzes Shoshi. “In short, Albania progressed at the normative level, but it did not have a stable basis to transform them into effective instruments for environmental protection”.
The annual report on the state of the environment in Albania (ARS), which is compiled by the National Environment Agency (NEA), does not contain any data on the monitoring of the ecological water flows of the country's rivers. Ecological flow (Qek), the natural quantity required to feed a water body, is not allowed to produce energy. This quantity, necessary for the survival of river biota, especially during the warm season, passes entirely over the bed and cannot be used by the plant.
But on the ground, the inability to monitor ecological flow is justified by the alleged clash of competencies between agencies, with each trying to pass the responsibility of monitoring to the other.
In a request for information addressed to the KTA, the agency did not provide any documents proving the monitoring of the ecological flow of hydropower plants, although monitoring is a condition for granting an environmental permit. Regarding another responsibility, the rehabilitation and care of river banks, the KTA passed the burden to AKBN. AKBN also did not provide any data. But it justified itself, saying that the field monitoring had been delayed due to legal changes that occurred a year ago. However, these are responsibilities related to the performance of energy production and not environmental ones, which are often conflicting. The same request was also sent to the National Inspectorate for Territorial Protection (IKMT), which exercises some responsibilities for the protection of the country's water resources. But the Inspectorate did not provide any documents either. It responded, saying that with the transition of information online, the previous archive was not accessible. After insisting on a second request, the Inspectorate finally sent a list of thirty HPPs, “inspected”, some of which were even reported as having been fined, but the Inspectorate did not provide any documents on the cause or amount of the fine. They were not accompanied by any other administrative documents to prove the proceedings in question.
"We have often had cases of AKBN checks for technical parameters, then AKM goes and checks, which says something else; then IKMT goes and says something else, and in all these hydropower plant assessment checks we are dealing with people who have graduated in geography, history, or law, who take the coordinates, mark the quotas, measure the ecological flow, who in my opinion, don't even have any idea what they are, let alone ascertain them in the field," says hydrotechnical engineer Thodhorjani.
The clash between agencies is also confirmed by Enis Tela, former head of inspections at the State Inspectorate of Environment, Forests, Waters and Tourism, in 2019.
"The law has designated the environmental inspectorate and the KTA as the institutions responsible for monitoring the state of waters. But at the same time, adds Telaj, the law has also designated the National Inspectorate of Environment and Territory (IKMT) to control the authorizations issued by the Water Resources Management Agency (AMBU) and the National Water Council (KBU). According to Telaj, "this overlap has been used by the agencies to avoid the responsibility of monitoring." According to him, the creation of a general inspectorate, under the principle: one ministry - one inspectorate, and specifically, an inspectorate also subordinate to the Minister of Environment, exclusively for environmental issues, would be a good start towards sustainable monitoring.
In conclusion, we can say that the ecological flows of hundreds of hydroelectric power plants scattered throughout the country are not monitored. There is no data that shows this fact, including all agencies together, or separately.
The unbearable burden of small municipalities
The latest annual report on the state of energy shows that more than half of the total private hydroelectric power that entered production by December 2024 is concentrated in just five municipalities.
So, for every ten megawatts installed, five of them are installed only in the municipalities of Gramsh, Elbasan, Tropoja, Korça and Mirdita. In fact, the municipality of Gramsh wins the ranking only because of the development of the Devoll hydropower project, with two large hydropower plants: Banja and Moglica. This is noticeable from the low number of other generating facilities and intake works of this municipality, which are below the general average. Meanwhile, Elbasan and Korça, are ranked with the largest number of hydropower plants and intake works. Part of the first five municipalities, with the largest number of hydropower plants, in addition to Elbasan and Korça, is also Bulqiza, Kukës and Dibra. It is mainly the eastern municipalities that bear the weight of the hydropower works, thus the eco-social consequences suffered. Almost half of the country's municipalities do not have any hydroelectric power plants at all, or their presence is negligible.
In an effort to gather more data, we drafted a request, which was sent to all sixty-one municipalities in the country. But subsequently, the situation remained unclear, as many of the municipalities refused to respond. Another group of them responded late. Very few municipalities responded on time, and even those, not completely.
The request was based on three areas: the list and location of HPPs, the fires and damage caused, and the revenues from the HPPs.
None of the first five municipalities, which account for more than half of the total installed capacity, provided correct answers. Regarding the list of HPPs and their distribution across rivers or tributaries, the municipalities refused to provide accurate data, or ignored the request.
Kukes attempted to provide a list of revenues from HPPs operating in its territory, listing some of them, but it was much smaller, compared to the actual situation on the ground. Tropoja also demonstrated the same deficiency with the data sent. The two large hydropower plants on the Valbona River, so much discussed, for which the local community protested for several years, were even excluded from the list. But there were also municipalities, such as Shkodra, which declared that there were no hydropower plants in its territory, while AKBN data show 20 HPPs; in fact, the total installed power in this municipality is above the average installed power of other municipalities. The municipalities refused to provide data on hydropower plants in protected areas, but which were located within the territories of the respective municipalities, claiming that they were administered by AKZM. The AKZM, for its part, refused, but then offered a list of these hydropower plants, about 50. But experts believe there are more.
Photo: Artan Rama
Regarding social and environmental obligations, none of the municipalities in question has an agreement with hydropower companies to mitigate the negative effects on the environment that may be caused during energy production, just as there is still no agreement between residents and companies to release the necessary amount of water to perform community Services in the summer season, an assessment that is taken into account by the contracting authority when granting the water permit at the beginning of the process.
Sami Curri has been reporting for years on the protests and clashes between the Bulqiza community and some of the concessionaires of the hydropower plants built there. But although the number of hydropower plants in Bulqiza is over 40, for Curri, this advantage does not constitute a development opportunity in the service of the community.
"Local government does not do anything different, neither more nor less, than what the central government does. A mayor exploits such a situation to take a share of the corruption in a pyramid scheme," the journalist testifies.
Meanwhile, the data provided by the municipalities on fires was almost unusable, due to uncertainties and shortcomings. It was noted that none of the municipalities charges concessionary and non-concessionary companies of energy production plants for providing fire protection Services.
To obtain a complementary assessment, let's take a look at the report on local financial management, for the year 2024, prepared by the Ministry of Finance.
Photo: Artan Rama
In the list of expenditures of the country’s sixty-one municipalities, the average expenditure on general public Services took first place. While the average expenditure on environmental protection and social protection ranked last. If you look in more detail, in each of the five municipalities, which also have the largest number of operating hydropower plants (Elbasan, Dibra, Kukës, Bulqiza and Tropoja) they maintain the same “discriminatory” trend towards environmental protection. Each of the five municipalities spent very little on environmental protection. Issues such as housing and community amenities received more money from local government budgets. Even spending on entertainment and culture is higher than spending on the environment. Dibra and Bulqiza did not spend anything, although Bulqiza is the third municipality in the country with the largest number of private hydropower plants in operation (concessionary and non-concessionary) until December 2024, while Dibra is the fourth municipality with the highest number of (water) intake works. It turns out that, apart from Elbasan, the other four are classified as municipalities with low income per inhabitant. They remain so even after the central government transfers, which it carries out within the framework of local financial autonomy. So, we can say that they are poor municipalities. Meanwhile, the 2023 Census showed another thing: the decline in population! More than a quarter of the inhabitants of these municipalities have left over the last decade, precisely during the explosion of hydropower plants in these territories.
Photo: Artan Rama
"The abandonment by the residents has helped investors in the area to obtain approval to build hydroelectric power plants," regrets journalist Curri.
From "progress" to protest
But although in poor and small areas, protests to protect the resources have not been lacking from the affected communities, especially rural ones, whose livelihoods are directly linked to the flow of water. In fact, reactions have been delayed because the news of the water withdrawal has arrived late. Residents have only been notified after the dam construction machinery has arrived, which has made the protests, in most cases, ineffective. The lack of information and public consultations has favored the advancement of many opposed projects.
In 2017, for the first time, a court in Tirana accepted the request of several residents of the village of Kutë and overturned the concession contract for the Pocem hydropower plant on the Vjosa River. But the case also served to reveal shortcomings in the approval procedures for hydropower plants up to that time.
The content of the environmental assessment documentation was weak and powerless to guarantee the protection of biodiversity. Most of the experts who had compiled the documentation in question had shortcomings in the treatment and assessment of issues, which resulted in the assessments being copy / paste each other, thus, they were poor in arguments and data.
But the greatest damage was in the “ignorance” of the cumulative impacts of building several works at once on the same stream. The assessment documents did not take into account the destructive effect that the cascades of hydroelectric power plants caused to river ecosystems. In fact, the “ignorance” began as early as the granting of permission for the use of water.
Another “ignorance” was the avoidance of the local government in which the project was located. Municipalities were not consulted by the MEI during the evaluation of the proposal. The lack of mandatory regulations in the initial phase of the development of the hydropower project turned the increase in energy production capacities into a top-down decision-making, excluding local representatives and the affected community. According to the VKM 822 (October 2015), on the approval of the procedures for the construction of new production capacities, the Ministry (MEI) evaluated the proposals submitted by private investors, which also included information on the environmental and social impact of the proposed project. But the representatives of the commission did not have the ability to assess this impact; nor the desire to do so. Furthermore, the obligation to publish it online on the ministry’s website, before making the decision, was not respected. This led to the degradation of the natural environment during the construction phase, with the dumping of construction waste and aggregates into the river, the destruction of the wild landscape, the deforestation of slopes and stream banks, but also with more extensive deforestation due to the opening of new roads.
The transposition of the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive in 2020 improved domestic law, expanding the concept of the developer and communication between stakeholders during the project approval process. But according to Elvana Tivari, a legal expert on environmental issues, even these are not enough to guarantee the transparency of the process and the inclusiveness of the parties.
“It could be specified more in the law that developers can also be public authorities; the breadth and scope of the public participation process, during hearings, should also be specified, from the early stages of the proposal, so that it is not narrowed down only to the hearing at the end of the process”, argues Tivari. “Educating the administration with the new spirit of change should not be neglected either”, she advises. “Some habits created years ago do not respond to the new reality”.
Protests against hydroelectric dams erupted across the country. No aspect of the environmental movement on the ground over the past two decades has been more representative than the protests against dams to protect watercourses from hydroelectric dams. Media coverage was often absent or delayed because the protests took place near water sources, in remote and wild areas. Hearings were either invalid, as residents’ rejection could not change the concession contract or decision-making, or they were delayed because the KTA itself did not implement clean and transparent publication procedures to notify communities in a timely manner. This prolonged and deepened social conflicts and clashes.
And although the pace of the HPP has slowed, protests are still ongoing. Protests are taking place in Mat, Martanesh, Puka, Mirdita; again small, poor municipalities, but now even more emptier as residents move to larger centers.
What can this experience be used for in the future? Perhaps nothing more than what the country gained and lost in two decades. But in the future, as climate conditions become more difficult, the risks may increase. And primary resources are always finite. So we need to reflect before we go any further.
The solutions, along with the experience, are there...
The water belongs to us.
In South Tyrol, energy cooperatives have ensured electricity supply and well-being for over 100 years. Founded by mountain farmers, they continue to provide affordable energy today, and reinvest their profits directly into village life. A counter-model to the profits of large energy corporations, which, in times of energy crisis and climate change, seems almost utopian.
Black clouds hang over Moos in the Passeier Valley. Huddled between steep mountain slopes, they have been pouring down rain since morning. Only a few hikers and bikers dare to venture out in brightly colored jackets, while local farmers sit in the inn, play cards, drink Pilsner beer or Vernatsch wine.
But the rain is not only a welcome break from farm work, it is also good news for the residents of this northern South Tyrolean municipality. “The more rain, the more money,” says Theo Lanthaler, as he drives his car on a narrow mountain road. “Because the more water, the more electricity we can produce.” For ten years, the 61-year-old has run “Energie und Umweltbetriebe Moos” (EUM), a cooperative owned by all the residents.
Photo: Rainer Kwiotek
Spread across the village’s neighborhoods, the cooperative owns shares in three hydroelectric power plants in the valley. With them, EUM generates far more energy than it needs: of the 45 million kilowatt-hours produced each year, only a third is consumed locally. The rest is sold on the national energy market at standard prices. While electricity bills across Europe rose sharply after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the approximately 2,000 residents of Moos have never paid more than twelve cents per kilowatt-hour, one of the cheapest rates in Italy.
Across South Tyrol, around 1,000 small and large hydroelectric power plants stand along rivers and streams, and many reservoirs define entire mountain valleys. Together they generate around 7,000 gigawatt-hours a year, roughly 90 percent of the autonomous province’s total electricity production. Especially in summer, when melting snow feeds the rivers, more than half of this energy is exported to other Italian regions. However, community energy production, like in Moos, has deep roots in South Tyrol. While investors and international companies elsewhere pocket billions from hydropower, here it is the citizens who benefit. Democratically organized cooperatives that reinvest locally show that energy supply can work differently.
One of the birthplaces of this model is Prad am Stilfserjoch, about 80 kilometers from the South Tyrolean capital, Bolzano. For a long time, the authorities did not see any urgency in bringing electricity here. On alpine farms and stables, cooking and heating were done with fire, while candles and oil lamps served as light sources. In 1913, electricity arrived from the nearby town of Mals. But when tariffs began to rise more and more, the residents of Prad decided to help themselves. In 1923, a group of residents built their first hydroelectric power plant on the Tschrinbach stream. They invested 375,000 lire, then the equivalent of 375 cows. Three years later, to spread the risk, they founded a cooperative with about 50 members.
Photo: Rainer Kwiotek
One of the pioneers was Alois Wunderer. His son, and then his grandson, Georg Wunderer, ran the cooperative throughout the last century. The old hydroelectric power plant was replaced, and three others were built. The cooperative laid electricity, fiber optic and heating lines. It also supplies biomass district heating and operates a solar plant. Members in Prad pay low energy rates, around 15 to 17 cents per kilowatt-hour, thanks in part to tax breaks and exemptions granted to historic cooperatives.
Unlike other rural communities that have shrunk, Prad has grown over the decades. Companies have settled there. Today, almost 3,900 residents live and work in the town. “One of the reasons for this growth is undoubtedly the low cost of energy,” says Michael Wunderer. In 2018, after the death of his uncle Georg, the 43-year-old took over the management of the cooperative. He has no intention of resting on his predecessors’ laurels. One of his first major projects was the modernization of the hydroelectric power plant on the Suldenbach River. “It comes from there, from the Ortler Alps,” Wunderer exclaims over the roaring waters during a tour of the plant. In summer, it flows turbid with glacial meltwater. Prad’s cooperative has been generating electricity here since the 1980s. It invested 11 million euros in the renovation. “Since it was completed three years ago, we have been able to supply ourselves all year round,” says Wunderer.
Photo: Rainer Kwiotek
The huge construction site also gave Prad and the Vinschgau district an opportunity to invest in infrastructure. While replacing the old pressure pipes from the water intake to the hydroelectric power station, new irrigation lines for the fields were also laid, as well as a drinking water line for the community. All the pipes now run between the stream and the Stelvio Pass, a tourist magnet where hundreds of cars, motorbikes and cyclists climb 1,800 meters in altitude over 25 kilometers from Prad to the pass every day. “It’s not safe for cyclists on such a narrow road,” says Wunderer, himself a regular climber. “That’s why I proposed building a special cycle path.” The costs were covered by the province of South Tyrol.
Wunderer would like to build another hydroelectric power plant. “The last one,” he assures. He expects Prad and the neighboring village of Stilfs to continue to grow, and with them the demand for energy. “With another plant, we can still remain self-sufficient and secure for decades to come.” Whether he can realize the plans, however, remains uncertain. A few years ago, South Tyrol tightened its plans for water use and river protection, and Prad is located within the Stilfserjoch National Park. “We try to interfere with nature as little as possible,” says Wunderer. From Suldenbach, for example, they divert only 10 percent of the water.
Michael Wunderer is not only the head of the cooperative in Prad, which employs 12 people in the community. He is also active in the South Tyrolean Energy Association (SEV). It brings together over 200 energy cooperatives, as well as small private companies and utilities. The association provides legal advice, organizes insurance and represents the interests of its members in front of the energy market, politicians and industry. “We need a strong voice,” says Wunderer, “to also be heard in front of the energy giant Alperia.”
Alperia, the provincial energy company of South Tyrol, was founded in 2016 and is one of the largest energy suppliers in Italy. Its shareholders are the Province of South Tyrol, the cities of Bolzano and Merano, and, to a lesser extent, SELFIN, a consortium of more than 100 smaller municipalities in South Tyrol. On paper, this model also seems exemplary: the profits from 35 hydroelectric power plants and seven combined heat and power plants return to the public purse, and the municipalities benefit through riverbank use taxes or environmental protection fees.
In reality, this is debatable. Critics say Alperia is driven primarily by business logic, while citizens’ interests are neglected. Beyond energy cooperatives, South Tyroleans can only dream of affordable electricity. Most recently, Alperia’s activities have drawn attention in the Ultental valley, where it plans to build a pumped-storage hydroelectric power plant. Many residents of the valley, already covered in hydroelectric power plants, reservoirs and pipelines since the 1950s and 1960s, feel left out by the plans, accusing the company of a lack of transparency and civic participation. The conflict has intensified.
“That would be unthinkable for us,” says Michael Wunderer. His cooperative holds a general meeting every year, financial reports are made public, and Wunderer and the board make recommendations for savings or investments, but ultimately it is the members who decide.
The same applies in Moos. “It’s not just about profit, but about security of energy supply and proximity,” says Theo Lanthaler. This is much easier to achieve in a mountain village. “If someone needs construction energy, they come to the office in the morning and can start work in the afternoon. With Alperia, this takes weeks.” People feel involved, want to have a say and believe that the energy from their mountains should be managed locally.
This was recently made clear during the construction of the new free-flowing hydroelectric power plant in Moos, which is due to be completed in 2022. Initially, the EUM had no plans for another plant. But when two private investors from Bolzano applied for one in the valley, the cooperative quickly submitted a counterproposal, and won. “For the people of Moos it was a given: the water belongs to us and should not fall into foreign hands,” says Lanthaler, who mainly contracted local companies for the 13 million euro project.
The cooperative in the Passeier Valley takes care of much more than just electricity: when the village gas station lost its tenant a few years ago, the EUM took it over. Residents and visitors can now get their fill there at the cheapest fuel prices in South Tyrol. The cooperative also saved three grocery stores from closing, employing nine people there. The EUM and its sub-cooperatives opened a car repair shop, operate a district heating plant and laid a fiber optic network to every home – even to alpine huts at 3,000 meters. They support local associations and sports clubs through donations.
Photo: Rainer Kwiotek
Cheap energy and fuel bills, fast internet and jobs, in Prad and Moos, utopia is real.
If there is one lesson from the last two decades, it is this: the green transition is not measured by installed megawatts, but by water sustainability, by citizen trust and by the benefits shared fairly. Albania has abundant natural and human capital to make this transition smart: measured diversification (solar/wind/gas back-up), real and informal environmental assessment, real-time monitored ecological flow, and contracts that link production to social contribution in the country. The South Tyrolean cooperative model, affordable energy, democratic management, local reinvestment, shows that “water belongs to us” can become public policy, not just a slogan. This means full transparency in licensing, mandatory participation of municipalities and communities, compensation funds for rivers and forests, and independent performance and impact audits. If we translate ambition into clear rules, measurement technology and citizen co-ownership, Albania will not only remain an exporter of renewable energy, but will also be an exporter of a new philosophy: energy that serves people and preserves nature. This is the green revolution worth winning, measured, fair and shared.
This article was produced in collaboration between journalists Artan Rama from the Albanian Center for Quality Journalism and Rike Uhlenkamp from Zeitsenspiegel Reportagen. The photos in the article were developed by Artan Rama and Rainer Kwiotek.
This article was developed with the support of Journalismfund Europe.
