The planned deepening of the Danube River poses serious risks to the environment, water supply and stability of the Bulgarian riverbank. This warning was issued by engineer Dimitar Kumanov of the Balkanka association in an interview held on the occasion of the forum of the European Union Strategy for the Danube Region in Sofia.
According to him, the environmental organization has been waging a legal battle against the project since 2024, after its objections to the Ministry of Environment and Water were not taken into account.
“Well, it isn’t a petition; it is a complaint to the Supreme Court, which we filed back in 2024,” Kumanov clarified.
He described the project as extremely dangerous because of the geological features of the Bulgarian section of the Danube. According to him, approximately two-thirds of the riverbank lies in landslide-prone areas, with the sections around Oryahovo and the village of Orsoya, near Lom, being particularly risky.
“Oryahovo could start shifting at any moment, even without any digging. And on top of that, they are moving the fairway closer to the Bulgarian bank in the Oryahovo area,” he said.
Kumanov explained that the project envisages moving the shipping channel toward the Bulgarian bank, including in areas with active and potentially dangerous landslides. According to him, excavation work at the base of these terrains could increase the risk of landslides.
The representative of Balkanka pointed out that the Oryahovo municipality had also expressed serious objections to the environmental impact assessment (EIA) report, but subsequently did not appeal the decision approving it. He suggested that the reason was the local authorities’ concern that state funding for other projects might be restricted.
Another contentious issue, according to Kumanov, is the possible impact of moving the fairway on the state border between Bulgaria and Romania. He expressed concern that changing the shipping channel could have consequences for the border line, referring to the historical agreements between the two countries. This claim, however, requires a separate legal assessment.
According to the expert, the risks to groundwater are particularly serious. Kumanov explained that deepening the riverbed could lead to lower water levels and affect the wells used to supply water to settlements along the Danube.
He cited the problems with water volumes in the wells in Svishtov and the difficulties recorded in Ruse during the summer. According to him, the low water levels this year have been unusual.
“So this is a very dangerous project for yet another reason — by deepening the river in order to create a fairway, especially in a new location: first, you lower the groundwater level, because when the river has been flowing evenly and you dig here, more water will quickly flow in, the river level will fall, and the groundwater level will immediately fall as well.”
The partial state of emergency in Kozloduy, declared because chromium had been detected in the drinking water, was also discussed in the interview.
According to Kumanov, there is a probable connection between the groundwater contamination and the dredging of the Danube. He explained that natural river sediments serve a protective function, which may be disrupted by excavation work.
“But let me draw attention to something very important: the natural riverbed substrate — sand, gravel and silt — acts as a filter that prevents pollutants in the flowing water from entering the groundwater.”
According to him, removing these natural layers increases the danger of pollutants from the river penetrating the aquifers. He stressed that the problem becomes more severe during periods of low water, when the concentration of pollutants may increase.
“You have removed the filter that protects our wells, and I guarantee to you that if they continue treating this river in this way, one day all the wells along the Danube in Bulgaria will be contaminated, and these wells supply water to all of Northern Bulgaria.”
The claims about the causes of the contamination in Kozloduy represent Kumanov’s expert position and do not prove a direct causal link between the dredging and the detected presence of chromium.
The representative of Balkanka also pointed out that, according to the project documentation, the riverbed is to be deepened by up to three meters in certain areas.
He also questioned the advisability of such an intervention, expressing the view that instead of altering the river’s natural state, the shipping fleet should be modernized.
According to him, using vessels with a shallower draft would allow more sustainable navigation, including during periods of low water, without requiring such large-scale changes to the riverbed.
Kumanov also criticized the institutions responsible for managing the Danube, raising the question of how much the numerous European strategies and international organizations actually contribute to protecting the river.
He said that he had warned the European institutions about the legal dispute and the possible consequences of providing funding for the project before the court had issued its final ruling.
The Balkanka association is calling for environmental legislation to be upheld and for the interests of the population along the Bulgarian stretch of the Danube to be protected.
Kumanov stressed that the organization is not seeking financial gain from the legal proceedings, but aims to prevent the implementation of a project that, in its view, creates long-term risks to the environment and water resources.
“If we win this case, the great satisfaction for us will be that a state body — several state bodies — have egregiously violated the laws and the interests of the state; you warn them that they are doing so, and despite that, they go ahead and do it, and then there is the great satisfaction of having managed to defeat them.”