EKIP– Expert Club for Economics and Politics A Different Opinion
We have been on an environmental wave lately. From the case of Pirin National Park and the potential construction of a second lift in Bansko, public attention has shifted its focus to the extremely serious air pollution in large cities, especially in Sofia. If you live in Sofia and have been out in the last few days, you can confirm. It is almost impossible to breathe. The stations that measure pollution levels show that it is dozens of times above the permissible norm. What is this due to and how can we solve this problem?
The biggest air polluter in Bulgaria is actually households that are heated with solid fuels such as wood and coal, with cars coming in second place, specifically those that run on diesel (see also this article ). This is why air quality problems are most serious during the heating season. The low air quality currently depends on the huge presence of fine dust particles in it. These are the particles (not carbon) that make the air extremely dirty, difficult to breathe, lead to the formation of smog and directly threaten human health.
However, did you know that the state subsidizes the use of precisely those fuels that pollute the most? No? Well, now you know – the state practically subsidizes air pollution in the country by granting subsidies for solid fuel heating. That is why the first step towards cleaner air should be:
1. All subsidies for solid fuel heating should be abolished
Unfortunately, over the years, the trend has been for solid fuels to be used more and more often as a source of heating in the country, and this also applies to the capital. This is due to a combination of factors - the incompetent management of the District Heating Company makes heating too expensive, while electricity also remains more expensive due to the lack of a clear policy in the sector and a move towards market liberalization. Meanwhile, illegal logging, which supplies households with much cheaper firewood, is not adequately pursued by the authorities and is ignored by "green" and "ecological" organizations.
But perhaps the biggest factor contributing to the widespread use of solid fuel is the availability of state subsidies for its use. The state provides heating subsidies to "socially weak" people who have declared that they cannot afford to purchase heating in the winter through their own income. A large part of these subsidies are for solid fuel - wood and coal. It is no coincidence that the greatest air pollution (especially in Sofia) occurs precisely during the heating season. It is precisely the mass heating of solid fuels that is the largest and most dangerous air pollutant in the country.
Even Sofia Mayor Yordanka Fandakova admitted last year that winter air pollution in Sofia is due to the massive use of solid fuel heating in the peripheral areas of the capital. Of course, although the authorities are aware of this problem, they have not yet done anything about it. The capital municipality itself cannot actually do much, because granting subsidies for solid fuel heating is a state social policy, outside its powers.
In any case, these subsidies must be stopped if we want to have clean air. It is absurd for the state to subsidize the consumption of the dirtiest and, moreover, the cheapest source of energy anyway, and expect to have clean air in the country.
2. Dangerous air pollution must not go unpunished
Eliminating government subsidies for air pollution is an important first step, but it alone is unlikely to be enough to eliminate serious pollution completely. Therefore, the second key step is for the state, or the Ministry of Environment and Water in particular, to somehow sanction polluters. After all, air pollution to dangerous levels is something that threatens the health of all citizens.
Of course, sanctions should not be too restrictive – pollution can never be eliminated 100%. The important thing is simply to eliminate this pollution, which threatens human health and life. Therefore, beyond a certain level of pollution, anyone who pollutes further should be sanctioned in some way. This does not necessarily mean a direct fine. The important thing is simply to create incentives NOT to pollute the air.
There are various options for introducing such incentives. Direct fining of polluters is, of course, the most obvious, another, indirect option is the creation of tax incentives for the use of less solid fuels. In any case, state institutions apparently have information on how each household in a given region is heated, they also have information on what fuel all cars registered in the country run on. Based on this data, it is possible to sanction in one way or another those citizens who pollute the most, i.e. who use energy sources that emit the most fine dust particles.
Whatever measures are taken in this direction, the most important thing is to follow the "polluter pays" principle, that is, the one who pollutes the environment should be the one who pays for cleaning up or preventing this pollution. This is the principle that is followed by all EU countries and is even enshrined in the basic treaty on the functioning of the union.
3. Elimination of tax privileges for diesel fuel
At the beginning of the article, I mentioned that the most pressing problem in terms of air pollution is solid fuel heating, but in second place are cars, specifically those that run on diesel. This step is in last place because the problem of replacing the car fleet and the introduction of more and more diesel cars is something that 1) is not as serious a problem as solid fuel heating and 2) is not only beyond the control of municipal authorities, but also of the state. The attractiveness of diesel cars for Bulgarian consumers is due to the lower price of fuel. And the price of diesel is lower because... it is taxed with a lower excise tax.
However, this does not depend on the Bulgarian authorities, or at least not entirely. Excise policy is largely regulated by the institutions of the European Union, and it was they who, in the 1990s, took regulatory measures that favored diesel over fuels that, according to the European Commission, had higher greenhouse gas emissions, such as gasoline, and thus contributed more to "global warming." One of these measures was the imposition of higher excise taxes on gasoline compared to diesel. This led to a boom in the popularity of diesel cars and, subsequently, to their mass introduction in countries like Bulgaria.
The problem is that in their efforts to combat global warming, such measures lead to more serious air pollution. In this context, it would be good if the Bulgarian government could take advantage of the EU Presidency and somehow lobby for a change in the current EU policy in this regard. The EU no longer looks so favorably on diesel, but the more favorable tax regime for diesel remains. The best option to level the playing field is to reduce the excise duty on gasoline to the level of that on diesel or below - this way, both consumers benefit from lower fuel prices and the use of diesel will be reduced.
