Access to Information Programme | Information newsletter issue 1(13) January 2005

Information newsletter
Issue 1(13), January 2005

Public discission on the construction of a Nuclear power plant in Belene (NPP Belene)
Anton Andonov, AIP

"Bulgaria needs new sources of nuclear power" concluded experts from the energy sector. "Bulgaria needs no radioactive waste" was the opinion of Bulgarian environmentalists. The two opinions collided in the beginning of January at a public discussion on the construction of new sources of nuclear power in Bulgaria. Initially, some also disagreed on the topic of discussion. The Ministry of Energy and Energy Resources (MEER) said the discussion was about the necessity of building a new source of nuclear power, while Vesselin Bliznakov, Head of the Parliamentarian Energy Committee insisted that the debate was about "constructing a new nuclear power plant on the Belene platform." The debate - which was actually in the form of a six-hour presentation - proved that the confusion was subtle - the point of "discussion" was the construction of a new source of nuclear power in Belene. To strengthen the impression that none of these accidents was actually accidental, there was a difference in the announced number of people having reviewed the expert opinions in the reading room of the Ministry. The information center of MEER announced that seventy-seven citizens, NGOs, scientists and business organizations had visited and read the documents in the room deliberately established for that purpose about a month before. At the same time the speaker insisted they were forty.

NPP Belene in numbers

Price: between 2,25 and 4 billion Euro
Nuclear reactors: 2
Deployment of the first reactor: 2009-2010.
Investment return: in 15-20 years
Ownership: 51% state
Price per 1kWh: 2,4-4 Euro cents

The pros and cons of building a new nuclear power plant in Belene were never actually discussed on this occasion. Obviously, the debate had been initially set up with a single goal - to inform the society that NPP Belene will be built anyway. The minutes from the meeting will become part of the file which would later be presented by the Minister of Energy and Energy Resources to the Council of Ministers for a final approval. An approval might already been given, after on Dec. 12, 2002 the Council of Ministers abolished a decision of the Cabinet of 1991 by which the construction of NPP Belene was ceased. This was yet another controversial issue in the Belene project, which was partially resolved by a judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court.

Hardcore environmentalists and nuclear experts did not meaningfully discuss the future of nuclear power in Bulgaria. First, the number of the latter was much larger than the former. Second, questions could be asked only in written form, while those who asked them could never express their opinions or make remarks. Those who dared to ask questions had to wait until 5 p.m if they wanted to hear any answers. The so called "debate " turned into an event for informing the public; and ended at 18:00 sharp, to allow the organizers a well deserved rest!

The court will decide whether the construction of NPP Belene is legal

Was the procedure for construction of NPP Belene legally initiated? This is a question which the three-member panel of the Supreme Administrative Court will have to review. A five-member panel of the same court ruled that the case should be reviewed on its merits.

The decision of the five-member court is on a case, in which Petar Penchev from National Movement "Ecoglasnost" questioned the lawfulness of the secretive Council of Ministers decision to continue the construction of NPP Belene.

In November last year the opinions of the three-member panel of SAC diverged. Two of the judges ruled that the Cabinet decision from 2002 was preliminary and could not be appealed, while the presiding judge Elenkov believed that it was the final decision, and thus was subject to appeal. With a ruling from January, 2005 the five-member panel of SAC established that the Cabinet decision for building a nuclear power plant could not be classified as preliminary. Furthermore, there was evidence that the implementation of the Cabinet decision had started more than two years ago.

Petar Penchev, vice-president of NM "Ecoglasnost":

"The life of a nuclear power plant is thirty years, while our successors will have to deal with radioactive waste for more than 10,000 years. The problem of whether the wasted nuclear fuel will be stored near the village of Smolyanovci or near Novi Khan has not been discussed. I do not think that we can talk about sustainable development here. The consultants did not discuss whether it might be cheaper to import electricity rather than build a new power plant.

Georgi Fotev, director of National Association “EcoEnergy”:

The National Association EcoEnergy fully supports the future construction of NPP Belene. I am very excited about this public discussion because I noticed that we are moving forward. I cannot understand why Ecoglasnost is trying to prejudice the public opinion against Belene. "What if there is an accident, what if this, what if that?" Didn't you see how God struck on Indonesia? I call on the younger people to trust the institutions and not to worry about who struck a deal with whom. Let us believe in our institutions.

Krassen Stanchev, executive director of the Institute for Market Economics:

“The decision to build NPP Belene was pre-conditioned. As soon as the political decision to close the reactors of NPP Kozloduy was taken, the ideas to build NPP Belene re-emerged. There are no economical arguments in support of the project for a second nuclear plant. There was also no discussion about the price of the electricity produced. We believe there is a huge difference between a price of 3,5 and 5,5 Euro cents. Experts have notably changed their opinions since April 2004, regarding the point in time when electricity produced in Bulgaria will be insufficient to meet the county's needs. Now the state intends to give financial guarantees for the construction of NPP Belene, while ten months ago it was not so. There is a real hustle in the Belene project.”

Milko Kovachev, Minister of Energy and Energy Resources:

What is the context of the energy development of Bulgaria? Our key goals are a steady supply of energy, development of a competitive energy market, necessity of various energy sources and independence from external supplies. Concurrently, we aim at protecting the environment. The consumption of electricity will rise, while at the same time some of the older power plants will have to be closed because they are expensive and pollute the environment. In 2010-2012 the country will need a new basic source of electric power. It has to be a nuclear one, because the consumers and the business need it. Nuclear power is the cheapest, most supply-independent source of energy and fits into contemporary standards for security and protection of the environment.