IN THIS ISSUE:
At this year’s European Economic Congress, one of the most important sessions was devoted to “the mining of the future.” According to most panelists, the mining industry of the future will focus almost exclusively on the extraction of critical raw materials (primarily rare earth elements) and minerals from the seabed.
Meanwhile, last year, as much as 9.1 billion metric tons of coal were mined worldwide, and global demand exceeded a record 8.8 billion metric tons. Production records were set in China and India, while Indonesia, with a figure of nearly 800 million metric tons, came close to the record set in 2024. Even the United States recorded a stable, high production volume (524 million metric tons). Globally, approximately 36% of electricity came from coal, and in many other regions—such as Southeast Asia and Africa—it continues to be and will remain the main pillar of the energy system.
In Europe as well, where strong climate and regulatory pressures are artificially reducing coal’s share in the energy mix, the prevailing anti-coal narrative is gradually losing momentum. And although the course of the fuel and energy sector’s transition toward the dominance of renewable sources seems inevitable, calls to slow its pace are appearing more and more frequently at the negotiating table. Recent, extremely severe geopolitical turbulence and its economic consequences—soaring oil and gas prices and limited supplies of these resources—are prompting reflection on this matter. More and more people are recognizing the—otherwise obvious—fact that coal’s share in the energy mix will remain necessary for a long time to come. In fact, it may prove crucial to our collective security, as it serves as a reliable stabilizer for energy systems during the transition to a zero-emission economy. Few people believe in cheap gas or a rapid launch of Poland’s nuclear energy sector (and there is a long way to go from its launch to scaling up operations). The transmission grid infrastructure and the capacity to store energy generated from renewable sources are developing more slowly than anticipated. The question, therefore, is not “whether” coal will be needed, but how much and for how long we will need it (there is still a lack of reliable estimates and forecasts in this regard), where and at what cost we will source it, and how it will be produced.
On this last point, technological advancements are opening up entirely new prospects for the future of coal mining.
Digitalization and artificial intelligence (including increasingly popular predictive models), “digital twins” for mines, the use of renewable energy sources on mining sites, automation and robotization of mining leading to the concept of “unmanned mining,” and remote mine control from operations centers—these are just a few examples off the top of my head. Some of these ideas are in an advanced conceptual phase, others are in the testing stage, but a significant portion is being implemented in practice, and many are already in operation (including in Poland) and yielding measurable results.
This technological leap translates into increased mining efficiency and reduced operating costs, better management of mine resources and logistics, greater precision in mining operations (accurate mapping of deposits, reduction of raw material losses, and minimization of the risk of mining damage), optimization of machinery and equipment operation (including faster detection of malfunctions and hazards), as well as improved workplace safety and a reduction in the number of accidents, lower energy consumption in mining processes, and reduced emissions and environmental impact.
Around the world, coal is also being discussed with increasing boldness in the context of solving the problem of energy poverty in developing countries, where—with 730 million people living entirely without electricity—the development of zero-emission power remains a distant dream. The transition continues, but its pace is slowing and adapting to the realities of the world in which we live—not the other way around (what a surprise!).
Under these circumstances, the debate over the role of coal is starting anew. Its fundamental question will not be “how can we phase out coal as quickly as possible?”, but rather: how can we reconcile climate ambitions with the requirements of energy security and economic competitiveness? The range of possibilities that Mining 5.0 has to offer in this regard seems exceptionally broad. If we succeed in convincing policymakers of this forward-looking concept, the role of our entire strong industry ecosystem—which ranges from research institutions and manufacturers of machinery and equipment to specialized service companies—will also grow. Without it, the “coal mining of the future” certainly cannot exist.
Janusz Olszowski
President of GIPH
Ms. Spokesperson, what is it like to be a woman working in the mining industry? To those outside the coal sector, these two things seem difficult to reconcile…
Yes, that’s true. Mining is definitely a male-dominated profession; women make up about 10% of the workforce at Polska Grupa Górnicza. Most work above ground, but we also have women who work underground full-time, including tunnelers and surveyors. Some do very physically demanding work—for example, the women working in processing; I admire them for their determination. Women in mining are strong and determined. I really enjoy talking to them when I meet them at the mines. I must also admit that I’ve always worked well with men—so these proportions aren’t a problem for me at all. Besides, I often say that I’d like people to be judged (and I want to be judged myself) based on their professional competence, not their gender. We women don’t need special treatment—we’re doing just fine without it.
When many people hear the phrase “women of mining,” they think of the names of women who have had impressive careers in the industry. But “women of mining” also refers to another group: women who are virtually invisible, remaining in the shadows of their husbands—the mothers and wives of miners, the strong women who have enabled Silesian families to function normally for generations…
I think there aren’t very many of these women who have had, as you mention, “impressive careers.” When I attend conferences or meetings, 80–90% of the participants are usually men—the same goes for conference panels—even though women also possess extensive knowledge and experience. Some time ago, I heard from someone in a high-ranking position in the industry that women aren’t cut out for this. This is very sad, and I try to fight such stereotypes as best I can. Last year, we carried out the “Portraits from the Mine” project, and we also featured women in it—21 out of 60 portraits were of women. We cannot downplay the fact that women are present in mining and work just as hard as men. As PGG, we were also involved in the Coal Mining Museum’s project “Memoirs of Women from Mining Families,” which shows another side of women in mining—the mothers, wives, and daughters of miners. They did not work in the mines, but they had—and continue to have—a significant influence on miners’ lives. Women are therefore an inseparable part of the male-dominated world of mining.
Following Polska Grupa Górnicza’s media communications, one gets the impression that you’re trying to regularly show a slightly different side of the coal sector than the one we’re used to seeing in the mainstream media. It really hit me while I was watching “Portraits from the Mine.” I wondered if there really were that many women working at PGG…
I’m glad you’ve noticed the change. Many people only hear about mining when there’s been an accident or when strikes have taken place—we all have that image of burning tires in Warsaw fresh in our minds. Ever since I joined PGG (it will be two years this August), I’ve been committed to communicating regularly and openly, and to showing another side of mining, because there are people behind every job, and our company has over 33,000 employees—people who are passionate and committed. We showcase them, write about them, and get involved in various projects where mining hasn’t been represented before. For example, I had the opportunity to speak about women in mining during an event organized at the Silesian Museum. I often hear from journalists or communications professionals that there’s been a huge change in what and how we communicate. I’m very proud of this because, together with my team, we put a lot of work and effort into ensuring that our articles, posts, and photos are professional and understandable to our audience. I also really appreciate that our employees have started reaching out to us on their own, telling us about what they do—that’s a change, too. The number of followers on the PGG profile has grown from 9 to nearly 22 thousand in just over a dozen months—this also reflects the work we’ve done. Communicating difficult topics related to the transformation is also important. Our company is at a very important juncture—we’ve launched JOPs and mining leave programs—employees are looking for information, and we should provide it to them.
I’d like to return briefly to the portraits from the exhibition in question. It’s striking that most of the employees seem satisfied with their work and their place of employment. However, industry media have recently been reporting on “the specter of bankruptcy looming over Poland’s largest coal company.” In April, the labor unions put the company on strike alert. In a letter addressed to the prime minister and the energy minister, they argue that the company has enough funds to last until June. What is PGG’s current market situation?
The situation facing the company—and the entire mining industry—is very difficult. Just look at what’s happening at JSW. PGG’s management is operating under conditions of constant uncertainty and volatility—all of which pose a huge challenge. We implemented a cost-cutting program over a year ago; we’re reducing costs and seeking to diversify our revenue streams.
According to announcements made at the beginning of the year, PGG intends to reduce its workforce by approximately 14%. Are these plans already being implemented?
Yes, we are consistently and efficiently implementing the protective programs at PGG provided for under the amended Act on the Operation of Hard Coal Mining. To date, 1,750 company employees have benefited from severance pay and miners’ leave. According to the plan, by 2026, the total reduction in the company’s workforce is expected to amount to 4,300 people, of whom 3,600 will participate in voluntary separation programs, and approximately 700 will retire.
Are these mainly people working behind the scenes, in administration, or perhaps on the board of directors?
No, not on the board of directors. Sales, production, restructuring, and financial matters—these are very important areas that must be managed and supervised. However, when it comes to employees at headquarters, our mines, and our plants, barring exceptional circumstances (when their presence is essential to the company’s operations), anyone who meets the criteria and wishes to leave has that option. I’m referring to both those working underground and those in administration.
Will these individuals be able to benefit from the safeguards introduced, for example, by the amended Mining Act? Or does the company support them in some other way?
Our employees can take advantage of the protective programs provided for in the amended Act on the Operation of Hard Coal Mining. That is why we were so eager for the Act to take effect, so that we would have the tools to begin implementing these protective programs—one-time severance payments, miners’ leave, and processing leave for employees of the Mechanical Coal Processing Division.
How do you intend to avoid the fate of JSW, which is currently in a dire situation?
Our situation is different. We are covered by a social agreement, the New Support System (to the extent necessary, we can take advantage of subsidies for reducing production capacity and funds for liquidation), and we produce coal that meets the requirements of all market customers: the power generation sector, district heating, industry, and households that heat with heating coal. We are also constantly working to optimize our costs and revenues.
Last year, the company received 5.2 billion PLN in aid from the state budget. What is being financed with these funds?
To be precise, PGG received an approved plan for state budget aid in the amount of 5.6 billion PLN for 2025 (plus 800 million PLN saved in 2024). Thanks to optimization measures, PGG utilized 5.2 billion PLN and 0.8 billion PLN in 2025, which means that the 400 million PLN in savings can be used in 2026. The new Support System for the hard coal mining industry allows public aid funds to be allocated toward “reducing the production capacity of mining companies”—in practice, the goal is to phase out coal mining. The schedule for mine closures through 2049 was agreed upon in the social agreement for the mining industry signed in 2021. The state budget covers the losses of state-owned mines (PGG, PKW, and Węglokoks Kraj), which inevitably arise as the difference between rapidly declining revenues from coal sales and the mines’ operating costs—50–60 percent of which are fixed and independent of production volume (e.g., maintenance of mine workings, shafts, ventilation and power supply systems, and the inability to reduce the workforce quickly and in proportion to the decline in production) and disappear only after a long-term process of closing down the mining facility.
Is it still worth investing in coal at all?
I think we need to look at this not strictly in terms of profitability, but much more broadly—taking into account the costs of energy security and socioeconomic stability. In my opinion, until nuclear power is launched in Poland, coal will remain essential to us because it ensures our energy security. And today, we don’t know exactly when we’ll have nuclear power in Poland. Just how important it is to align these timelines is demonstrated by a recent calculation from the Energy Regulatory Office, according to which each day of a blackout—that is, a widespread failure of the national power grid—would cost Polish residents, businesses, institutions (e.g., the banking sector, healthcare facilities), transportation, and so on, approximately 40 billion PLN. The threat of a loss of system stability due to the increasing share of unstable and uncontrollable renewable energy sources is very real (such incidents have occurred, for example, recently in Spain).
The second factor is the socio-economic one. The uncontrolled closure of mining operations—which, for example, account for over 100,000 jobs in the surrounding area and generate annual cash flows of 10 billion PLN to service and manufacturing companies in the region—would result in an exceptionally costly social and economic disaster. The 2021 social agreement established that it is in the state’s interest to carry out the mine closure process in a planned and controlled manner.
However, when we look at what is happening around the world, we see an increase in investment in the construction of new coal mines and new coal-fired power generation assets, and globally we are currently seeing historic records in coal production volume and demand at approximately 9 billion metric tons per year, mainly in Asia (China and India), the U.S., Australia, and Russia.
One of your predecessors, in a conversation with me, stated that the mining industry in Poland has a huge communication problem, which is the source of public resentment and tensions in its relationship with the government. Do you agree with this assessment?
I believe that this perception of the industry is the result of many years of very limited communication and a failure to explain processes and decisions. I was surprised when I joined PGG and often heard, in response to my requests for information (because a particular topic interested me and I wanted to write about it), that it would be better not to, that it would be better to leave it alone. This proverbial “burying one’s head in the sand” is a problem, and yet there are many projects we can be proud of and talk about. I believe that even a very difficult topic can be explained, and we should do so. It took me quite a while to convince people to be more open and courageous (fortunately, I don’t give up easily, and a lot has changed in this regard). By explaining the processes and the role that mining plays, it would be easier to reduce negative public sentiment. We should act like companies in the energy sector, but we don’t have the kind of money they do today to increase our outreach, expand our reach, and financially support the media, especially online outlets.
Is the company considering branching out into new technologies and industries that are less vulnerable to changes in the mining sector?
We are analyzing various options, but due to the New Support System, our options are limited because, in fact, we should focus on reducing production and phasing out mines. We managed to sell the site of the former Bojków shaft to Koleje Śląskie. A Koleje Śląskie Service Center will be built there. We have obtained a license from the Minister of Internal Affairs and Administration to manufacture and trade in explosives, weapons, ammunition, and products and technology intended for military or police use. Thanks to this, the Bieruń Repair and Production Plant, which is part of PGG S.A., can carry out projects for the defense industry.
To what extent do the manner and pace of the fuel and energy sector’s transformation in Poland and Europe affect PGG’s financial health?
First and foremost, the transformation is proceeding faster than anticipated. The data shows that renewable energy sources are displacing coal from the market, and this has consequences: since less coal is needed on the market, we are reducing production, which currently stands at about 15 million. According to the Power System Operation Plans (POKs), this is the level production should reach in 2032–33—by which time we would no longer have the three mines that are currently in operation.
If you—as an insider in the mining sector—could improve the transformation, what changes would you tackle first?
That’s a difficult question. The constant volatility of the market situation and regulations, as well as the fragmentation of responsibilities across too many entities, certainly doesn’t help. It’s also difficult for companies to plan their activities when we don’t know how much coal the market will need or how much electricity—all of this means that company management teams have to operate under conditions of great uncertainty. So certainly, having more information would make it easier to manage the transformation of the mining sector. It is also important to change the way we think about the mining sector’s transformation—by planning for it while the mines are still “operational.” This is already changing—we are not waiting until a mine is closed, but are proactively seeking the best use of the mine’s infrastructure, land, and—crucially—new job opportunities for miners and local residents. It would certainly also be worthwhile to further increase the level of education and information about the transition—what it is, why it is necessary, and what its consequences will be. This is important for a better understanding of this process, especially among mining sector employees and the region’s residents.
Being a spokesperson for a coal company is no easy job these days. Do you manage to step back from the day-to-day challenges, and if so, how?
Managing communications at a coal company is almost constant crisis management. But I like challenges, and I consider it a great privilege to be able to observe up close a sector that many outsiders have no access to at all, to go underground in mines that may be closed in a few or a dozen or so years, talk to miners—often outstanding professionals—and have an impact on the company during such an important and, at the same time, difficult period in its history. It’s a huge challenge for me, very demanding, but I try to fulfill my duties to the best of my ability, and I must admit that it gives me a lot of satisfaction.
Thank you for the interview.
Marcin Hylewski
Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, announced a reform of the EU’s Emissions Trading System (ETS). The changes are intended to focus primarily on allocating a larger portion of the revenue from CO2 emissions fees to the development of clean technologies and the decarbonization of European industry.
“The European Union should begin the process of phasing out the ETS, because it is the main reason why not only do we have high bills, but also why most of our industry and economy is moving away not only from Poland but also from Europe,” said Presidential Minister Karol Rabenda a few days ago.
At the same time, President Karol Nawrocki submitted a proposal—which was rejected by the Polish Senate—for a referendum on EU climate policy. He is about to submit another motion for a referendum, this time with a revised question. Will the Senate agree to a referendum in this situation? It’s hard to say.
One thing is certain: EU policy, in the context of the actions of China, India, the U.S., and developing countries, means one thing—Europe is effectively curtailing its industry and stifling it with additional fees.
The result? Manufacturing is moving out of the European Union to other continents. The EU is losing its economic significance. This process is particularly affecting Poland, which still relies on cheap coal for its energy.
The president recalled that in early May he had submitted a motion to hold a nationwide referendum on EU climate policy, which was rejected by the Senate. The president also emphasized that on Wednesday, a protest organized by NSZZ “Solidarność” took place on the streets of Warsaw.
Union members demanded a referendum specifically on EU policy, which they claim is destroying Polish agriculture and leading to high costs for electricity, food, and business operations.
– This is not just a discussion among experts; it is the voice of the Polish people, and the Polish people have the right to say in a referendum: we do not want European climate policy; we do not want the Green Deal,” Karol Nawrocki noted.
Minister Rabenda pointed out that “Poland spends 35 billion zlotys annually on the ETS, and after the elimination of free allowances, this figure will rise to approximately 48 billion zlotys.” He pointed out that over the past twenty years, CO2 emissions in the European Union have been reduced by nearly 35 percent—from approximately 3.7 billion metric tons to about 2.4 billion metric tons. “In terms of the global balance, emissions have increased. By way of comparison, China’s economic growth has caused a 110 percent increase in its emissions alone,” he added.
Karol Rabenda also pointed to a decline in industrial production in European Union countries, which is affecting Europe’s economic standing. “Twenty years ago, the European Union’s share of industrial production was about 20 percent; today it is 17 percent.” (…) On the other hand, we have China, which has increased its share of industrial production from 9 percent twenty years ago to 28 percent,” he explained. As he noted, these figures are the best evidence of how the ETS works, as it “does not reduce industrial production but rather drives it to other regions of the world.”
The Polish government has been informed of the need to reform the ETS by the Polish Chamber of Mining, Industry, and Commerce (GIPH). In a letter dated March of this year, its president, Janusz Olszowski, presented the Chamber’s position and emphasized that current regulations are placing an increasingly heavy burden on energy-intensive industries and undermining the competitiveness of the Polish economy.
President Olszowski points out that high prices for CO2 emission allowances directly translate into higher energy and industrial production costs. According to the GIPH, the ETS system in its current form requires adjustments that would help reduce the cost pressure on companies operating in Poland.
GIPH notes that European industry must compete with producers outside the European Union who do not incur similar costs related to climate policy. According to Chamber representatives, this could lead to the relocation of production outside the EU and a weakening of the domestic industrial sector.
Will politicians listen to the experts?
– The ETS works. It has drastically reduced our demand for gas. As a result, it has reduced our dependence on fossil fuel imports and our vulnerability (to shocks in those markets—ed.). It has also been a driving force behind investments in low-carbon energy sources, such as renewables and nuclear power, which we do not have to import and which give us independence,” said European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in late March following a meeting of the European Council.
In the meantime, however, Brussels’ position has evolved slightly.
The President of the European Commission announced in the third week of May that a draft reform of the ETS is to be presented by July 2026 at the latest. As she emphasized, the current ETS has already generated over 260 billion euros in revenue, and emissions in the sectors covered by the system have fallen by 39 percent since 2005.
According to von der Leyen, the European Union must accelerate the electrification of the economy and the development of its own energy sources to reduce its dependence on imported fossil fuels. The EC President pointed, among other things, to the growing sales of electric cars and the need to invest in modern energy grids and low-carbon technologies.
Meanwhile, EU Climate Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra defends the tax.
In response to a question from a member of the European Parliament, he argues that “ETS2 will help make the EU less vulnerable to global energy shocks” and less susceptible “to fluctuations in fossil fuel imports.”
It is worth noting that starting in 2028, the emissions trading system is set to cover transportation, construction, and district heating. For residents of Poland, this means an increase in the cost of living related to, among other things, energy and transportation.
The planned ETS reform is also intended to increase support for European industry. The European Commission wants a larger portion of the proceeds from the sale of emission allowances to go directly back to sectors investing in emissions reductions. Among the solutions under consideration are new criteria for public procurement that promote low-carbon products.
The ETS has been the subject of controversy in the European Union for several months. Some member states are demanding that the impact of CO2 emission costs on energy prices and economic competitiveness be limited. Proposals to release additional emission allowances and implement market-stabilizing changes are emerging in the debate.
Jarosław Adamski
– Coal will continue to be used in Poland’s energy sector for at least the next two decades. The big problem is that no one in Poland knows how much thermal coal will be needed in the near future,” said Janusz Olszowski, president of the Mining Chamber of Industry and Commerce, during the European Economic Congress (EKG) in Katowice.
– Will coal be needed? We have no alternative energy source. We are in the European Union and must carry out an energy transition. We have a specific energy mix, and whether someone likes coal or not, it will be necessary for at least the next two decades. The big problem is that in Poland, no one knows how much thermal coal will be needed in the near future,” argued Janusz Olszowski during the debate “Mining of the Future,” which took place during this year’s European Economic Congress (EEC) in Katowice.
The call for a reliable energy balance sheet has been repeated for many years, but it remains unfulfilled.
– We have two important documents that should address coal demand. The first is Poland’s Energy Policy through 2040 (PEP2040), which is outdated and inadequate for the current situation. In the currently valid Policy, the demand for hard coal in 2030 is set at 36 million metric tons. This is an absurd figure. The second document is the National Raw Materials Policy through 2050, which is also outdated. It reiterates that the demand for thermal coal will be up to 36 million metric tons,” added the president of GIPH.
He also pointed out that we have a new document, the National Energy and Climate Plan, which outlines two scenarios.
– One of them is more realistic and shows that we won’t be phasing out coal that quickly. And rightly so. Because what are we supposed to base our energy security on? Nuclear power? But that won’t happen until after 2060. After all, what good is it if by 2040 or 2050 we build a single nuclear power plant that will be a drop in the bucket compared to our needs? Are we to base our security on imported gas, including LNG, which is very expensive and vulnerable to geopolitical developments? We have no other choice: Poland will need coal for decades to come. We should do everything we can to ensure that it is domestic coal, not imported coal,” concluded Janusz Olszowski.
– Europe cannot talk about reindustrialization without raw materials. And when we talk about raw materials, we’re talking about mining. Instead, we should redefine mining within the framework of a democratic, environmentally and strategically responsible, and informed industrial policy,” said Alicja Krzemień, president of the European Association for Hard Coal and Lignite (EURACOAL) and professor at the Central Mining Institute – National Research Institute.
She emphasizes that having raw materials (and thus mining) is a kind of insurance.
– Just as we pay for car and home insurance, we must also decide whether we are willing to pay to have our own raw materials.” Ladies and gentlemen, the European Union itself—in the EU regulation on critical raw materials—by setting targets for 2030, states that at least 10% of our annual demand is to be met through domestic extraction, 40% through processing, and 15–25% through the recycling of strategic raw materials. “So mining is becoming a key element of European industrial autonomy,” explained Alicja Krzemień.
Although our country has adopted regulations regarding mining and mine closure plans, the current global situation calls for an analysis of the industry’s potential phase-out.
Marian Zmarzły, Deputy Minister of Energy responsible for mining, said that we must examine coal’s share in our energy mix and determine whether new technologies will ultimately ensure our energy security.
– We must look at our resources. In the social contract, we set a certain course for phasing out coal, and the ‘social contract’ serves as a roadmap outlining how we will phase out Polish mining and coal mines.” On the other hand, however, we must consider what share coal accounts for in our energy mix and whether new technologies will ultimately ensure our energy security,” explained Marian Zmarzły.
He also pointed out that coal will continue to be used for a long time to come.
– Considering the geopolitical situation, which has a major impact on the energy sectors of individual countries (including ours), I would be very cautious here about completely cutting ourselves off from coal.” Developed countries are trying to combine coal with modern technologies, whether with hydrogen or ammonia, to reduce carbon dioxide emissions,” added Marian Zmarzły. Like Janusz Olszowski, he also pointed out that the National Energy and Climate Plan includes two scenarios, and the one more favorable to coal projects its consumption in 2040 at a considerable level of 10 million metric tons.
In public discourse, the mining industry is often viewed as a homogeneous sector, yet this is a gross oversimplification. The industry produces not only coal (which itself comes in various forms…), but also mineral resources and metals.
In the coal sector alone, in addition to coal intended for the power industry, we also produce a key fuel for the steel industry.
– This is a different product than thermal coal. As is well known, coking coal—mined mainly by the mines of Jastrzębska Spółka Węglowa—is a raw material essential for steel production.” And without steel, there is no modern industry, and there can be no talk of developing even the defense industry,” emphasized Bogusław Oleksy, acting president of Jastrzębska Spółka Węglowa.
Interestingly, Europe seems to overlook the importance of this raw material and does not provide it with special protection.
– For over ten years, our coal has been on the list of critical raw materials, and nothing has come of it,” lamented Bogusław Oleksy.
The key question here is whether regulatory changes are needed to reward production efficiency and economic rationality while simultaneously strengthening energy security.
– The challenges facing the industry stem not so much from issues of cost or volume, but primarily from the issue of price. “When it comes to cost management, we at Bogdanka have been doing this for many years, and we know how to do it even under the difficult natural conditions we currently face, as well as in this challenging economic environment,” said Sławomir Krenczyk, Vice President for Development at Lubelski Węgiel Bogdanka.
As he acknowledged, the biggest challenge for us today is the price of thermal coal in Poland.
– And that is the factor that is holding us back right now. This price is, on average, about 15% lower than the international benchmark. If we were to calculate the prices from the ARA ports, add the cost of transporting that coal to Poland, and convert it to gigajoules, the difference would be roughly 15%, which means that Bogdanka is a company well-prepared to compete on the international market,” added Sławomir Krenczyk.
According to Maciej Młynarczyk, director of the Department of Geology at the Ministry of Climate and Environment, although the mining industry must combat negative public relations, Europe cannot do without new mines.
– For example, when it comes to critical raw materials, if we’re going to extract them through primary projects, we’ll simply have to build new mining facilities and new mines. If a copper mine is built in Nowa Sól, it will be a large, deep copper mine in Poland. And that’s a huge challenge.” However, when it comes to coal mining, I wouldn’t be so quick to write it off just yet,” explained Maciej Młynarczyk.
According to MP Marek Wesoły (PiS), in the case of coal mining, there is one more factor to consider—the security of coal supplies, because, after all, the demand for this fuel will continue to exist.
– Beyond diplomacy and attempts to reform the ETS—which is the nail in the coffin of the European energy sector—local content offers JSW a chance at survival. The energy sector should also adopt local content requirements for energy production using Polish raw materials. This is a chance to weather these difficult times. I am convinced that in a year or two, there will be an opportunity for a revival in the coal-fired power sector. We must preserve what we have and wait for a shift in policy. Someone has to pay for security. The state must pay for energy security. We must hold out, because we cannot afford to lose our energy sovereignty,” emphasized Marek Wesoły.
The European Economic Congress (EEC) took place on April 22–24, 2026, in Katowice. More than 20,000 people attended the Congress, including 15,500 in person.
Dariusz Ciepiela
journalist WNP.PL
All signs point to the fact that around the time of this year’s Barbórka, the miners’ festival and the mining traditions themselves will officially be granted the status of intangible cultural heritage of humanity. This will serve as a sort of culmination of efforts that have been underway for about a decade to grant them a status befitting their significance. However, inclusion on UNESCO’s Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity by no means concludes the matter. Being on this list is a major success, but it also entails a commitment to ensuring the continuity and vitality of the element covered by the inscription.
This August will mark eight years since the Barbórka festival of hard coal miners in Upper Silesia was added to the National List of Intangible Cultural Heritage, maintained by the Minister of Culture and National Heritage in cooperation with the National Heritage Institute. In 2022, the Barbórka celebrations in Wałbrzych were added to the same list, and a year later—the Barbórka traditions and the veneration of St. Kinga among salt miners in Bochnia and Wieliczka, customs associated with the veneration of St. Barbara and the traditions of ore miners in the Tarnowskie Góry region, as well as the cultural traditions of miners’ brass bands from Upper Silesia.
Almost immediately after the first of the posts mentioned above, efforts began to take things a step further and have the miners’ festival and the traditions of the mining industry (orchestras, beer taverns, songs, folklore, miners’ uniforms, dances, and miners’ greetings) on UNESCO’s Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity. Currently, Poland has seven elements on this prestigious list, including the tradition of the Krakow nativity scene, floral carpets in Corpus Christi processions, and the polonaise dance. At the end of March 2024, a joint Polish-Austrian-Luxembourgish application was officially submitted to the Secretariat of the 2003 UNESCO Convention to include St. Barbara’s Day and mining traditions on this prestigious list as well.
– In the face of the disappearance of the tangible mining cultural heritage, the intangible mining heritage is the primary means of preserving the identity of the ancestors whose labor shaped the environment in which the custodians live today. In the face of inevitable economic changes, the sustainability of intangible mining heritage depends on the strength of its custodians—as noted in the proposal, which was prepared with the participation of hard coal miners from Upper Silesia and Wałbrzych, salt miners from Bochnia and Wieliczka, descendants of ore miners from Tarnowskie Góry, and members of miners’ brass bands from Upper Silesia, as well as miners of metal ores, coal, and magnesite from Carinthia (Bad Bleiberg) and Styria, and miners of iron ore, copper, and slate from the Luxembourg regions of Minett, Haut-Martelange, and Stolzembourg.
In its nomination, Poland included five elements of mining heritage: the St. Barbara’s Day celebrations of hard coal miners in Upper Silesia and Wałbrzych, the St. Barbara’s Day traditions and the veneration of St. Kinga among salt miners in Bochnia and Wieliczka, customs associated with the veneration of St. Barbara and the traditions of ore miners in the Tarnowskie Góry region, and the cultural traditions of miners’ brass bands from Upper Silesia.
Initially, it was assumed that the inscription would take place as early as 2025. Due to the large number of international nominations submitted for consideration, this did not happen. We had to be a little more patient, but… what is delayed is not lost. In February of this year, the nomination—which had since undergone technical verification—was approved for consideration at this year’s session of the Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. The session will take place in late November or early December.
– The application is now being reviewed by the so-called evaluation body. It has until the end of September to ask any questions of Poland, since we are the coordinating country in this case,” explains Beata Piecha-van Schagen, head of the History Department at the Upper Silesian Museum in Bytom, who serves as the Polish coordinator for activities related to this project. As she notes, the approval of the application for consideration effectively guarantees that it will indeed be inscribed on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity.
– It looks like we’ll be celebrating in December,” she says.
However, it cannot end with the celebration alone. In accordance with the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, applicants must prepare a safeguarding plan for the element, outlining general guidelines for action, and then undertake initiatives that align with the plan’s objectives and give it concrete substance.
– This designation is not a reward for preserving traditions. The convention aims to raise the visibility of the element. It seeks to make its custodians feel proud of their heritage and of what they celebrate, and this should translate into a full awareness of the element’s importance and concrete actions that will serve to sustain its vitality, based on the premise that intangible cultural heritage is alive when it changes and when it adapts to its bearers,” notes Beata Piecha-van Schagen.
All of this is not merely empty rhetoric that can be forgotten as soon as the ceremonial speeches and congratulations have faded. Every five years, a report on the measures taken to protect and preserve St. Barbara’s Day and mining traditions must be submitted to the Polish Ministry of Culture and National Heritage, which—after receiving similar reports from Austria and Luxembourg—will then have to present an overview of these efforts to UNESCO.
This, in turn, means that those listed in the motion as so-called “depositaries” (including mining companies, industry-specific labor unions, the Higher Mining Authority, local associations, retirees’ clubs, miners’ brass bands, local government officials, and clergy) have committed to preserving the mining heritage, a great deal of work and cooperation lies ahead—both domestically and internationally. Some of these efforts will need to be coordinated with partners from Austria and Luxembourg. The coordinator of Poland’s activities related to the inscription emphasizes that the custodians—who are often informal groups with an average age of 50+—cannot be left to their own devices in fulfilling this obligation.
– In the current situation, custodians of mining heritage will need some form of systemic support. After all, it is the state that submits the application for inclusion on the representative list. The application even includes a section specifying the extent of the state’s involvement,” emphasizes Beata Piecha-van Schagen. In her view, local governments could play a major role in providing such support, as well as academic and museum institutions, which, on the one hand, could provide “expert” assistance to custodians of mining heritage in securing funding for their projects, and on the other hand, could take an active role in promotional activities, which are indispensable in this context. Importantly, this support must not entail top-down management or attempts at centralization, because, according to UNESCO’s interpretation, any centralization of an element of intangible heritage poses a threat to its sustainability.
In summary, what the future holds for Barbórka and mining traditions—and to what extent they will remain alive in communities that currently or historically depended on mining—will depend not on what has already been done, but on what is yet to be done. It will depend on people’s commitment and the support they receive from the state, local government, their institutions, and the business community (with particular emphasis on mining companies and their support networks).
Michał Wroński
journalist for WNP.PL
