Russia's attack on Ukraine's energy sector this spring represented an explosive blow to Kyiv's resilience, citizen morale and industrial production.
Worse still, the ongoing Russian attacks on the vulnerable energy system do not offer much prospect of a quick solution that could fix the situation before Ukraine enters its third winter of war.
Since the beginning of this year, Russia has set out to finish the job it failed to complete in early 2023 — the destruction of Ukraine's civilian energy sector, especially the power plants that provide light and heat to millions of Ukrainians.
Since March, Russia has specifically targeted Ukraine's largest power plants in six massive waves of missile and drone strikes, knocking out about 9 gigawatts of electricity generation, or half of the country's total. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky told a recovery conference in Berlin that Russian strikes had destroyed 80 per cent of Ukraine's major coal and gas-fired power plants and a third of hydroelectric facilities.
Especially as a result of the last two major attacks - in early May and early June, Ukraine had to redistribute electricity to industrial and residential consumers, many of whom were left without power for only short periods; some cities, such as Kharkiv, on the country's eastern frontline, are virtually without power. Russia's attacks, which Britain's ambassador to the UN claims are in part an attempt to terrorize the civilian population, are even the subject of the UN Security Council.
As bad as Russian attacks have been so far, they could get even more brutal. Russia has already struck some of Ukraine's natural gas storage facilities - underground bunkers that are used to store fuel both for domestic needs and to support European consumption. Further Russian strikes there could extend the scope of energy attacks beyond Ukraine's borders, just as Europe tries to find a solution to transit gas flows through Ukraine to landlocked eastern and central European states, including Austria.
The other big concern is that Russia, having already destroyed the main sources of electricity production in Ukraine, will finally disable the remaining three nuclear power plants. (Since the early days of the war, Russia has occupied Ukraine's Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, using it as a shield for its occupation of southern and central Ukraine, but the plant - Europe's largest nuclear facility - has been shut down and does not produce electricity.)
"It sounds crazy to attack nuclear power plants, but Russia can hit the transformers near the nuclear power plants. If they do that, the energy system will lose its unity and the country will split into different energy islands, some of which will be on AC power, and others completely without," says Andrian Prokip, an energy expert at the Cannon Institute at the Wilson Center in Kyiv.
The undeniable success of this year's Russian offensive stands in stark contrast to Russia's failed attempt in the first winter of the war to "freeze" Ukraine into submission. This time, Russia dropped more munitions on more vulnerable targets, resulting in longer-lasting damage that will cost much more to repair. It was only after the major strikes in early May that Ukraine had to start distributing electricity to domestic and industrial consumers. Major industrial enterprises, such as the country's once-glorious steel and iron industries, fear that the blackout could disrupt what had appeared to be a miraculous wartime recovery of industrial production.
"The difference is that before they mainly targeted transmission lines and substations, now they are destroying power plants," said Slawomir Matuszak, a Ukraine specialist at the Center for Eastern Studies in Warsaw. "Previous attacks were relatively easy to recover from - a matter of days or weeks. But now it's a year or two to recover if that makes any sense at all because they can just be attacked again."
For Ukraine's leaders, renewed Russian strikes pose a threat to the country's already strained ability to withstand years of relentless bombing, social and economic upheaval and mobilization. The new campaign underscored Ukraine's desperation to bolster its air defences to protect what remains of its energy system.
"Russia's goal has not changed - they seek to destroy our energy system and use it as a weapon against our citizens," said Kira Rudyk, a Ukrainian lawmaker who leads the pro-European Holos party. She described the constant disruption to daily life caused by the power outages that come from Russia's continued use of weapons to strike civilian homes across the country, including her own.
"So we're saying, give us the F-16, give us the Mirage 2000, give us that luxury so we can go to bed and know we're going to wake up in the morning," Ruddick said, referring to the American- and French-made fighter jets. "In Ukraine, we don't have that luxury."
The increased pace of Russian attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure has also brought new urgency to the question of how and when to use Moscow's frozen assets to aid Ukraine. US and European leaders are working on a plan to convert the proceeds of frozen Russian money into a large loan for Ukraine.
"We need money now," Ruddick noted. "We have a simple task ahead of us: survive the summer and somehow get through the winter."
Some Western countries are heeding Ukraine's pleas for more air defences that could help protect cities and critical infrastructure from Russian attacks, especially after the destruction unleashed by strikes in May and June. Germany is already considering sending a fourth Patriot battery, and Chancellor Olaf Scholz is urging allies to do more; Italy is preparing to send more of its own air defence systems, and even countries like Spain are sending new munitions. Late last week, the Biden administration included more air defence missiles in its latest aid package for Ukraine.
Getting more funding for air defence is a necessary but hardly sufficient condition to start rebuilding Ukraine's battered power sector. Even at large power plants that had an air defence umbrella, such as the critical Tripol TPP in Kyiv, Ukrainian forces simply ran out of ammunition in Russia's major attack in April; headquarters was destroyed. But even with better air defences, energy experts doubt that more than 2 to 3 gigawatts of power generation capacity can be restored by winter. This would lead to major power shortages, not to mention the ongoing damage to the district heating plants that provide central heating during Ukraine's harsh winter.
One short-term but expensive solution would be to rely on more electricity imports from Europe. Just before the start of the Russian offensive this year, Ukraine was exporting surplus electricity to Europe, but that was soon stopped. Today, Ukraine can import about 1.7 gigawatts of electricity from Europe, and in the extreme case it can even get more than 2 gigawatts. The problem is that imported electricity is more expensive than domestic Ukrainian production, adding to the country's already strained finances.
The other solution, long discussed in Ukraine, is to build more small, decentralized power plants, including small gas turbines and renewable sources such as solar and wind power. The push for more renewable energy picked up during the war and especially after the Russian attack this spring.
Members of the G7+ Energy Coordination Group and the government of Ukraine outlined plans to increase the sustainability of the electricity sector, including through more decentralized generation. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told the conference in Berlin that Brussels is raising funds for urgent repairs in the energy sector, as well as for many small generators. "The aim is to help decentralize the electricity system and thereby increase resilience," she said.
The biggest advantage of replacing decrepit centralized power plants with multiple smaller, widely dispersed power sources is that they are much harder to blow up by Russian missiles.
"If you have micro-energy sources, and a lot of them, then Russia won't have enough missiles to hit them all, even if it knows where they are," Prokip said. "So distributed power generation is the way to go, but the government hasn't taken enough steps to do that when it could." |BGNES
-----------------
Keith Johnson, Analysis for "Foreign Policy"
