Government-commissioned legal opinion finds no obstacles to approving "K2 Ventum" wind farm

Latvia's Cabinet of Ministers must decide by August 31 this year whether to approve the "K2 Ventum" wind farm project planned in South Kurzeme. Failure to meet the deadline could lead to litigation, with the company seeking damages exceeding 120 million euros.

Decision paused back in April

The decision on "K2 Ventum" was put on hold at an April 28 Cabinet meeting under then-Prime Minister Evika Siliņa, at the same session where two other Kurzeme wind power projects, "Eko Ziemeļi" and "Kurzeme," were approved. The stated reason was legal uncertainty over whether "K2 Ventum" turbines could be built within the five-kilometer restricted-activity protection zone along the Baltic Sea coast.

Commissioned opinion finds no legal barrier

The Climate and Energy Ministry, together with the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development, was tasked with preparing a legal analysis on whether such construction is permissible. Following a price survey, the ministry signed a contract with law firm "Rasnačs" for the assessment, which delivered a 34-page opinion on June 15. It concluded that the Protection Zones Law does not prohibit building wind power stations in that coastal zone.

The project has already completed its environmental impact assessment and received a positive opinion from the competent authority. According to the legal opinion, projects in the coastal protection zone are subject to the full environmental impact assessment procedure rather than a simplified screening, and this requirement was deliberately written into law rather than intended as an outright ban.

Delay risks costly litigation

The decision on "K2 Ventum" has now been delayed by eight months, with the company's losses growing daily. If the company has completed the required procedures and received a positive opinion from the competent state authority, yet the government still blocks the project on legal grounds it has itself since deemed unfounded, the state would likely lose any resulting legal dispute.