In recent weeks a wave of statements from ministers in the current government has questioned the rollout of development investments prepared by the previous administration, including strategic projects meant to advance infrastructure and energy security.
In a radio interview, the Minister of Climate stated plainly that her review of available data suggests river transport is not financially viable. She argued that investing in the navigation improvement of the Oder would be wasting public funds. To bolster her stance, she offered a simple, memorable claim about ships drawing water from fish and thus not moving. Whether these points swayed the outcome is unclear, but it is evident that the new government has stepped back from this project, potentially stalling the expansion of the Świnoujście container port.
Collapsing the atomic design
A deputy minister from the same ministry claimed that offshore wind turbines could deliver more energy than nuclear plants, implying there is no urgent need to rush ahead with nuclear power. The new energy portfolio head confirmed a delay in bringing the first nuclear unit online, shifting the target from 2034 to 2040. This shift casts doubt on moving forward with a U.S. investor-led nuclear project.
In fact, the Baltic Sea’s first offshore wind farm progressed under the leadership of a major energy group, but the political environment has begun to restrain that progress. Decision-making at that company appears paralyzed, with reports of personnel changes tied to cooperation with the former president. Preliminary quarterly figures already show a sharp drop in turnover and profits, and forthcoming data for the year will be delayed as the financial situation worsens.
More recently, a deputy minister announced concerns about the Olefins III project, a large petrochemical undertaking described as the biggest in two decades. The plan includes expanding oil processing capacity and extending refinery life. While costs for this project have risen, a global trend of higher infrastructure expenses during and after the pandemic and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine helps explain the increases. Questioning profitability at this stage is interpreted by some as shifting influence away from the domestic sector and toward broader European interests.
German interests
There has also been news from a state-owned pipeline operator that the second phase of a major cross-border pipeline project has been paused. The intention is to create a link from a northern port facility to a longstanding international corridor, culminating at a central crossing within the country where a key storage facility sits. This would connect with another pipeline that runs from the eastern border to the west, creating a unified route for crude transport.
During an earlier administration, this pipeline initiative received intense development activity to safeguard oil deliveries to Polish refineries via the northern terminal. After the political shift, leadership changes in transport and processing companies, including the main refinery players, coincided with a re-evaluation of the project, and its necessity came into question.
Observers have noted that German voices have opposed such investments, arguing that they could compel Germany to source crude differently, especially for its Schwedt refinery. The underlying issue appears to be the possibility of routing cheaper crude through a northern corridor, potentially circumventing sanctions policies. The debate centers on how to ensure secure supply without compromising broader regional relations.
All the investments discussed by the new ministers are framed as strategically important for Poland, yet they are perceived as unfriendly to neighboring interests. The German side has opposed several projects, and the new administration is portrayed as unwilling to implement them, sometimes offering what critics call pseudo-economic justifications for halting progress.
[Citation: wPolityce]