Slovakia

The Slovak Republic (Slovakia) ranks 47th in the CCPI, down one spot from last year, and still an overall low climate performer. The country receives a high rating in GHG Emissions, very low in Renewable Energy, and low in Energy Use and Climate Policy.

Slovakia remains among the lowest-ranking EU countries, with the government under Prime Minister Robert Fico prioritising neither climate action and decarbonisation nor energy efficiency. The CCPI country experts criticise weak implementation of EU regulations, the absence of a fossil fuel phase-out plan, insufficient monitoring of non-energy sector emissions, the lack of detailed decarbonisation roadmaps for individual sectors, and a strong reliance on EU funds. Because of these shortcomings, the experts demand higher ambition in renewables rollout, and increased cooperation with regions and cities, such as Bratislava and Kosice, that are pursuing progressive climate agendas. This aim, however, remains difficult amid the current lack of administrative and financial capacities allocated to mitigation and adaptation projects.

Coal phase-out was good progress, but fossil fuel imports and renewables bureaucracy and pushback stunt momentum

The carbon intensity of electricity production decreased after the last coal power plant closed in late 2023 and coal mining terminated that December. However, the experts view the country’s huge reliance on nuclear power plants, and ongoing oil and gas imports, as substantial weaknesses. Despite the phase-out of coal in electricity production, demand for coal remains high in district heating systems and especially in the industry sector. Slow bureaucracy around licensing and permits for renewable energy, as well as a lack of financial resources allocated to the energy transformation, further hinder electricity sector progress. Accordingly, the experts call for streamlining of approval processes, an end to fossil fuel imports, and an alignment of renewable energy expansion targets with European Commission recommendations.

Excessive logging in protected areas partly because of high biomass and tender demand still takes place and is not properly addressed, which leads to serious sustainability concerns related to carbon sink capacities.

In energy use, the EU Energy Efficiency Directive (EED) has partially been moved into national law. Some programs aimed at cutting energy consumption include measures defined in the Long-Term Renovation Strategy (LTRS) passed in March 2020. Overall, there is strong pushback against wind energy in Slovakia. Although there is widespread support for insulation and refurbishment campaigns, the dependence on EU funds is an obstacle toward sufficient financing. A final updated National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP) is overdue, and whether a significant increase in ambition is included remains to be seen.

Government unwilling to take climate change seriously and stop blocking EU legislation and tighter efficiency standards

Overall, the experts welcome the coal phase-out in late 2023, but they warn that imported Russian oil and gas may compensate for coal, amounting to a fossil lock-in that could put alignment with EU targets at risk. The current government’s unwillingness to take climate change seriously is considered a risk for the country’s decarbonisation process. The evident lack of concrete and detailed roadmaps for individual sectors threatens the effectiveness of single-policy measures and complicates coordination efforts between regions, cities, and the government. Internationally, Slovakia’s government should stop blocking progressive EU climate legislation and the tightening of efficiency standards. Strong implementation of the EED and the revised Renewable Energy Directive (RED III) should take place soon. The experts note that attacks on the EU, including from the minister in charge of the environment, framing the bloc’s climate policy as ‘ideological,’ are dangerous and should stop. The experts also call for targeted energy subsidies to ensure that these subsidies do not contradict energy efficiency efforts while still assisting those in need of public support.

Key Outcomes

CCPI Experts

National experts that contributed to the policy evaluation of this year’s CCPI chose to remain anonymous.