Bulgaria’s economic, social and geographical factors create the perfect storm for energy poverty – and citizens have been affected for decades. Based on the U.K. definition of fuel poverty, that people spend at least 10% of household income on energy, the National Statistical Institute estimated that typical citizens were fuel poor from at least 1999 through 2012. In 2008, the IAEE found that 67% of households went without sufficient heat in the winter – against an EU average of just 8%.[1]
Rates and reasons for high energy poverty
The EDEPI ranking shows a strong divide between northern EU countries and those in the south and southeast. Many were surprised by the results, as energy poverty has long focused on people who cannot afford enough energy to stay warm in winter. The new research incorporated data on inability to stay comfortably cool in summer (Figure 1).
Figure 1 — Weighting of factors contributing to energy poverty in Bulgaria
Bulgaria’s climate in continental, but its geographic location and topography ranging from seaside to mountainous makes it susceptible to cold air masses from northern Europe and Russia and from warm air masses traveling across the Mediterranean from North Africa. From December through February, temperatures regularly dip below zero; from June through August, they hover around 30°C. The year-round thermal discomfort is directly linked to the poor quality of dwellings: 65% of homes were built before 1990 – and thus prior to implementation of energy efficiency standards.[2]
To keep energy costs down, many families in small villages restrict how many rooms they use in the winter – spending much of their time around the wood stoves they use for cooking and for space and water heating. Photo: Emil Danailov
At €216 per year, actual energy expenditures in Bulgaria are the lowest in Europe—in fact, only 10% of the €2 315 paid by people in Denmark. But because incomes fall well under the EU average, the lower expenditures account for a higher share of household budgets. Energy bills eat up 14.6% of disposable income in Bulgaria against just 9.7% in Denmark or the lowest share of only 2.8% in Sweden with costs of €571 per year (Figure 2).
Figure 2 — Sampling of actual energy expenditures and % of household income spent on energy bills (2014)
Note: Shading represents the lowest to highest actual costs while the size of the circle reflects % of household budget.
Source: ENER. SWD Energy Prices and Cost, 2018.
As the gas network in Bulgaria is poorly developed, use of traditional energy sources, including firewood, is widespread in some of the coldest regions. Households that use electric heating are likely to have higher costs than they would if able to use gas. In reality, many resort measures that risk their quality of life, either by underheating or relying on coal and wood, which drives up local air pollution. In 2012 and 2018, thousands of Bulgarians took to the street to protest high fuel prices.[3]
Most low-income households still rely on low quality wood (wood with high moisture content) and coal for heating, which they burn in low-efficiency stoves. They must burn more wood than is technically necessary to stay warm, which drives up their actual costs and creates more indoor and outdoor pollution. Photo: Emil Danailov
While most homes are connected to the electricity grid, even in small villages, at the household level much of the wiring is haphazard, making it both inefficient and dangerous. Photo: Emil Danailov
Policy gaps and gains
Energy poverty is not officially recognised in Bulgarian legislation and awareness of the issue is low among politicians, according to a 2014 report by REACH (Reduce Energy use And Change Habits). The only support currently offered is through the Winter Supplement Programme (WSP), administrated by the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy, which provides financial aid to help pay heating, electricity or natural gas bills, or for the purchase of coal briquettes or wood. It is available only to households earning less than the guaranteed minimum wage and only for a period of five months. Anyone who has purchased property in the past five years or travelled abroad on their own expenses is ineligible. In 2013, more than 251 876 households received support through this programme.
On a positive note, Bulgaria has launched programmes to improve the energy efficiency of homes. For multi-family buildings, through an Operational Programme for Regional Development, a budget of €25.6 million was allocated to cover 75% of the diverse costs associated with bringing buildings to a ‘C’ rating. To participate, all individual unit owners in a given building must demonstrate they can cover the other 25% of the costs.
More appealing (and more successful to date) is a credit line that provides 20% of funding for energy efficiency in individual households and multi-family buildings. Between 2006 and 2014, more than 50 000 credits (adding up to €27.7 million) were approved, with new windows being the most popular action, followed by the purchase of air conditioners and wall insulation. The scheme was not very useful, however, to low-income households, who could not afford any additional costs or invest in energy efficiency. In effect, poverty itself was shown to be a barrier to energy efficiency.
Recent support for energy justice
Bulgaria does have legislation that protects people from being disconnected from energy services, while many EU countries only protect customers during winter months.
In 2015, an extremely interesting case of energy injustice was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). In the early 2000s, a major utility company, CHEZ Razpredelenie Bulgaria AD (a subsidiary of the Czech government-owned CEZ) was installing electricity meters across many regions – an important advance considering that while under Soviet jurisdiction, most homes had no means to monitor consumption. Whether installed indoors or outdoors, the meters were at eye-level.
However, in some districts of these towns that are known for high shares of Roma and migrant populations (such as is the case in the district of Gizdova in the town of Dupnitsa), the meters were installed on electricity poles, at a height of seven meters. While the company avoided any such statement, it was clear they placed the meters high because they felt the districts were prone to electricity theft.
The communities lobbied to have the meters moved down, arguing that by refusing to do so – regardless of the payment history of particular customers – the practice was a public statement by CHEZ that all residents were untrustworthy. It is important to note that CHEZ was the monopoly provider of electricity to Dupnitsa and the only Bulgarian company to use this practice.
After receiving a large bill, Ms. Nikolova (a shopkeeper) protested to the Bulgarian Anti-Discrimination Commission that the practice discriminated against customers in Gizdova. Although she is not herself Roma, she argued on behalf of the whole community. While the Commission upheld her complaint, it was later overturned by the Bulgarian Supreme Court. Additional actions prompted the Sofia Administrative Court to send 10 questions to the CJEU under the Race Discrimination Directive.
In taking the case to the CJEU, legal experts raised the question of whether people have a right to be able check how much electricity they are consuming, in part to have greater control over their electricity bill and be able to self-manage in relation to what is affordable to them. Further, the applicants raised the question that, if this right is denied to some communities, is it a form of discrimination that should be remedied.
The CJEU ruled in favour of the applicants, affirming that having access to energy is an essential public service and that the company’s actions were an example of ‘indirect discrimination’ and a form of stigmatisation.[4] The ruling clearly stated that a company must deal with theft or fraud on case-by-case basis: it cannot assume that an entire community is prone to such behaviour. It obliged the company to treat all customers equally and to practice due diligence.
Ultimately, the ruling was based on the Racial Discrimination Convention and on the inclusion in EU law of the universal right of access to energy. As this ruling was made in a European court, it sets a precedent for all EU citizens.
While Bulgaria has a long way to go in eradicating energy poverty, some very important steps are underway – and could provide models for other countries, particularly in Easter Europe, to follow.
[1] https://www.iaee.org/documents/2014EnergyForum1qtr.pdf
[2] https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-20339-9_11
[3] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bulgaria-protests/thousands-protest-in-bulgaria-against-high-fuel-prices-car-taxes-idUSKCN1NG0P5
[4] https://www.justiceinitiative.org/newsroom/eu-court-finds-bulgarian-electricity-company-discriminated-against-roma