Bulgarian choice of nuclear power plant criticised

Sofia / Vienna. The Bulgarian utility NEK today chose the Russian / French / German consortium Atomstroyexport to build the Belene nuclear power station. Greenpeace calls on the Bulgarian government to stop this project. It comments the choice for the Russian consortium as: Russian, fast and cheap, and concludes that that is a bad basis for nuclear safety, as well as economic security for Bulgaria.

Jan Haverkamp, Greenpeace nuclear expert for Central Europe, says: "It comes as no surprise to us that Bulgaria did not choose the Skoda Alliance, as its proposed VVER 1000/320 model is known to have major technical problems and we have seen in Temelin in the Czech Republic that Skoda does not deliver quality [1]. The choice for Atomstroyexport and the AES-92 (with a VVER 1000 / B466 reactor) is no better, however. There are only two reactors of this type under construction, one in China and one in India, which both are already facing heavy delays. There is no experience with operation, nor has this type been licensed in Europe before."

The announcement of the tender winner for Belene came with over four months delay, because the Bulgarian government demanded lower prices and shorter construction times. Greenpeace fears that this will put pressure on nuclear safety. It also reminds of the fact that according to the experts that made the initial Environmental Impact Assessment, a new EIA needs to be made [2]. Licensing a completely new design will also add time. Haverkamp: "This project will not be able to meet its deadline. And delay means extra costs."

Another reason for delay is the uncertainty in financing the project. The Skoda Alliance lost most of its backing banks over the last months, but also the UniCredit owned Hypovereinsbank (HVB) and Deutsche Bank made clear that for them investment in the Atomstroyexport consortium is uneconomic. Haverkamp: "Bulgarian utility NEK was last month ago downrated by Standard & Poor’s from ’developing’ to ’negative’ because of its 51% participation in Belene. Belene is not helping Bulgaria, it is considered by those who know and care as an economic risk, next to a security risk. Russian, fast and cheap is not the answer to those concerns."

Greenpeace points out that the Belene project is according to a study from the Bulgarian Academy of Science from 1990 planned in a seismic active area that saw as recent as 1977 over a hundred people killed in nearby Svishtov [3]. Furthermore, the AES-92 reactor type does not match up with protection against terrorism provided in, for instance, the EPR reactor from Areva in France. And even that reactor type, according to a recent study, is not capable of withstanding an attack with a passenger airliner [4]. On top of that all, there is no solution for the nuclear waste that Belene is going to create.

Haverkamp stresses that Bulgaria has good alternatives for Belene in the form of energy efficiency possibilities, decentralising energy generation, and develop the untapped renewable resources wind, biomass, hydro, and solar.

For more information:

Jan Haverkamp, Greenpeace nuclear expert for Central Europe