Tweet
European Report
December 22, 2004
EU/RUSSIA: EU SEEKS CLOSURE OF FIRST-GENERATION NUCLEAR REACTORS
First-generation Russian nuclear reactors are now in the EU's
cross-hairs. A dozen plants, commissioned in the 1970s and 1980s, are
considered dangerous by the EU but Russia is keen to extend their
service. The Commission is preparing a proposal to hold a joint
working group meeting with Russia on the first-generation reactors -
with a view possibly to extending a Euratom loan to Russia for
building a new reactor at Sosnovy Bor, near St Petersburg. Though
this nuclear safety dialogue does not figure in the EU-Russia Energy
Dialogue, it may soon be included, since the EU aims to link
electricity interconnection between Russia and the Union to the
decommissioning of the first-generation reactors.
At the 1992 G7 Summit in Munich, Western leaders decided to improve
nuclear safety in Eastern countries - but there has been little
progress in Russia. Although the EU took a firm line on early closure
of first-generation reactors in Lithuania, Slovakia and Bulgaria, it
acted differently with Russia. The 12 first generation reactors (FGR)
came on-line before the industry adopted basic safety rules. They
produce a total of 5,762 MW in Russia. They are type VVER 440-230,
RMBK 1000 or boiling-water, graphite-moderated reactor. Their
expected lifetime is 30 years, which they will reach between 2001 and
2009. However, Russia has decided to extend their service by 10 more
years. By contrast, the EU wants them shutdown.
--
The G7 Action Plan concerns Soviet reactors in Russia, Ukraine,
Lithuania, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary and Bulgaria. It
encompasses: operational safety improvements; medium term
improvements following safety assessments; improvements in safety
regulation; study of modernisation options for new facilities; and
study of options to replace less safe nuclear reactors by developing
alternative energy sources and more efficient energy use.
--
Dialogue of the deaf.
Back in January 2001, the then European Commissioner for External
Relations Chris Patten and erstwhile Russian Minister for Nuclear
Power Yevgeny Adamov, agreed to set up a Joint Working Group to
analyse the situation as regards first-generation nuclear reactors,
prepare alternatives and submit proposals, with special emphasis on
the possibility of providing Euratom loans for the completion of
certain nuclear power plants currently under construction in exchange
for the closure of some FGRs.
The first meeting of the Joint Working Group was held in Brussels on
July 16, 2001. The Russians presented their energy strategy for the
2020 horizon and their plan for the development of nuclear power in
the 21st century. A second meeting, held in Moscow on April 9, 2002,
confirmed the deadlock: Russia made it clear that it did not want to
link its nuclear plant lifecycle extension programme nor its new
reactor unit construction programme to any FGR closures. While
Minatom was not interested in loans to complete power plants under
construction, the Russians were nevertheless prepared to look into
any Euratom loan offers for new reactors and the possible closure of
FGRs after the year 2010. The European Union told them quite
categorically that finance for new reactor units was not possible via
Euratom loans.
The new Russian Administration seems to be more favourably inclined
towards dialogue with the EU. In February 2004, the new Russian
Atomic Energy Ministry Rosatom, which replaced the old Minatom,
revealed during a meeting of the G8 nuclear safety study group that
it would be prepared to consider holding a new meeting of the
EU-Russia Joint Working Group on first-generation reactors. As a
result of a recent Euratom loan decision, the EU could now have some
Euro 500-600 million available for lending for nuclear plant under
construction or already in service, if it would help raise nuclear
safety standards. Of course, not all these funds can go to Russia
because there are other dangerous or obsolete reactors in Ukraine or
Armenia - where the particularly risky reactor unit at Medzamor
should have been closed down in 2004. The Commission will propose to
help finance a new reactor unit under construction at Sosnovy Bor,
near St Petersburg, where four RMBK 1000 reactors are already in
service, the first of which should have been shut down in 2003 and
the second one at the end of 2004.
New strategy.
This time, the European Commission has its work cut out for it:
Russia has been calling loudly for some time for a power grid
interconnection with EU's owned interconnected network - a single
electricity grid stretching from Lisbon to Vladivostok. A study
co-financed by the European Union will shortly start listing the
technical and legal aspects of such an interconnector project. This
is one of the biggest priorities for the Russians in their energy
dialogue with the EU (see Europe Information 2917 and 2920). The
European Union, however, has always been clamouring for environmental
reciprocity, marketing opening and, above all, better nuclear safety
standards as prior conditions to any grid link-up. It will therefore
insist on FGRs being shut down before any progress can be made on
electricity network interconnection.
December 22, 2004
EU/RUSSIA: EU SEEKS CLOSURE OF FIRST-GENERATION NUCLEAR REACTORS
First-generation Russian nuclear reactors are now in the EU's
cross-hairs. A dozen plants, commissioned in the 1970s and 1980s, are
considered dangerous by the EU but Russia is keen to extend their
service. The Commission is preparing a proposal to hold a joint
working group meeting with Russia on the first-generation reactors -
with a view possibly to extending a Euratom loan to Russia for
building a new reactor at Sosnovy Bor, near St Petersburg. Though
this nuclear safety dialogue does not figure in the EU-Russia Energy
Dialogue, it may soon be included, since the EU aims to link
electricity interconnection between Russia and the Union to the
decommissioning of the first-generation reactors.
At the 1992 G7 Summit in Munich, Western leaders decided to improve
nuclear safety in Eastern countries - but there has been little
progress in Russia. Although the EU took a firm line on early closure
of first-generation reactors in Lithuania, Slovakia and Bulgaria, it
acted differently with Russia. The 12 first generation reactors (FGR)
came on-line before the industry adopted basic safety rules. They
produce a total of 5,762 MW in Russia. They are type VVER 440-230,
RMBK 1000 or boiling-water, graphite-moderated reactor. Their
expected lifetime is 30 years, which they will reach between 2001 and
2009. However, Russia has decided to extend their service by 10 more
years. By contrast, the EU wants them shutdown.
--
The G7 Action Plan concerns Soviet reactors in Russia, Ukraine,
Lithuania, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary and Bulgaria. It
encompasses: operational safety improvements; medium term
improvements following safety assessments; improvements in safety
regulation; study of modernisation options for new facilities; and
study of options to replace less safe nuclear reactors by developing
alternative energy sources and more efficient energy use.
--
Dialogue of the deaf.
Back in January 2001, the then European Commissioner for External
Relations Chris Patten and erstwhile Russian Minister for Nuclear
Power Yevgeny Adamov, agreed to set up a Joint Working Group to
analyse the situation as regards first-generation nuclear reactors,
prepare alternatives and submit proposals, with special emphasis on
the possibility of providing Euratom loans for the completion of
certain nuclear power plants currently under construction in exchange
for the closure of some FGRs.
The first meeting of the Joint Working Group was held in Brussels on
July 16, 2001. The Russians presented their energy strategy for the
2020 horizon and their plan for the development of nuclear power in
the 21st century. A second meeting, held in Moscow on April 9, 2002,
confirmed the deadlock: Russia made it clear that it did not want to
link its nuclear plant lifecycle extension programme nor its new
reactor unit construction programme to any FGR closures. While
Minatom was not interested in loans to complete power plants under
construction, the Russians were nevertheless prepared to look into
any Euratom loan offers for new reactors and the possible closure of
FGRs after the year 2010. The European Union told them quite
categorically that finance for new reactor units was not possible via
Euratom loans.
The new Russian Administration seems to be more favourably inclined
towards dialogue with the EU. In February 2004, the new Russian
Atomic Energy Ministry Rosatom, which replaced the old Minatom,
revealed during a meeting of the G8 nuclear safety study group that
it would be prepared to consider holding a new meeting of the
EU-Russia Joint Working Group on first-generation reactors. As a
result of a recent Euratom loan decision, the EU could now have some
Euro 500-600 million available for lending for nuclear plant under
construction or already in service, if it would help raise nuclear
safety standards. Of course, not all these funds can go to Russia
because there are other dangerous or obsolete reactors in Ukraine or
Armenia - where the particularly risky reactor unit at Medzamor
should have been closed down in 2004. The Commission will propose to
help finance a new reactor unit under construction at Sosnovy Bor,
near St Petersburg, where four RMBK 1000 reactors are already in
service, the first of which should have been shut down in 2003 and
the second one at the end of 2004.
New strategy.
This time, the European Commission has its work cut out for it:
Russia has been calling loudly for some time for a power grid
interconnection with EU's owned interconnected network - a single
electricity grid stretching from Lisbon to Vladivostok. A study
co-financed by the European Union will shortly start listing the
technical and legal aspects of such an interconnector project. This
is one of the biggest priorities for the Russians in their energy
dialogue with the EU (see Europe Information 2917 and 2920). The
European Union, however, has always been clamouring for environmental
reciprocity, marketing opening and, above all, better nuclear safety
standards as prior conditions to any grid link-up. It will therefore
insist on FGRs being shut down before any progress can be made on
electricity network interconnection.