http://www.iii.co.uk/shares/?type=news&articleid=7129158&action=article
By Benjamin Mallet and Emmanuel Jarry
PARIS, Jan 22 (Reuters) - France could build two new nuclear power stations or share the work on the one already planned between government-backed utilities EDF and Suez-GDF.
An official at the Elysee presidential palace said on Thursday that a decision on at least one new European Pressurised Reactor (EPR) nuclear power plant would be taken in the next few weeks.
He said the office was reviewing the location of the reactor and a possible joint investment by the two utilities.
The Les Echos newspaper said on Thursday that the government is considering two new reactors and would award one to EDF and the other to Suez-GDF, which would then team up with Germany's E.ON.
France has a leading position in the world for nuclear power stations and both utilities, in which the state has a stake, could obtain big export orders if the EPRs are a success.
Big construction projects are also a way to create jobs.
The crisis around Russian gas supplies via Ukraine has highlighted the strategic importance of energy independence and France now generates about 15 percent of its total energy needs and 80 percent of electricity with nuclear plants.
State-owned electricity giant EDF is already building an EPR in the north of France, near Flamanville, which will have capacity of 1,600 Megawatts. It will now cost 4 billions euros ($5.20 billion), at 2008 euros, after a upward revision of the 3.3 billion euro initial budget.
The government already has plans to order a second EPR for Flamanville. EDF and GDF Suez are contenders for that contract.
State-controlled nuclear energy group Areva is building an EPR in Finland and is also facing cost-overruns and delays due to the complexity of the new type of reactor.
EDF had planned to team up with big electricity users such as building materials group Saint-Gobain and steel group ArcelorMittal.
EDF bought almost all of British Energy and assets from Constellation Energy to be able to build nuclear stations in Britain and the United States.
EDF stock was up 2.5 percent and GDF rose 1.5 percent at 1027 GMT.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
EC Firmly against the Restart of Kozloduy Units 3 and 4
The Bulgarian Government insists on restarting the units
Brussels would not allow Bulgaria to switch on the NPP units in Kozloduy that were traded against the country's accession to the EU in 2007. The European Commission does not believe the re-start of units third and fourth could help Bulgaria solve the gas crisis problems in short terms, Ferran Tarradellas, Spokesman of the EU Energy Commissioner, Spiebalgs told the Bulgarian National Radio yesterday.
He pointed out that the European Commission was doing the necessary for the real solution of the problem via immediate restoration of gas supplies. The spokesperson also said that by now no official demand had been received in Brussels for the restart of the nuclear units from Bulgaria. Sofia's stand on the reopening of the decommissioned units came in the words of Bulgaria's Prime Minister, Sergey Stanishev who said that the option was being considered closely but all sides of the issue should be taken into account.
"Reopening of third and fourth units means that Bulgaria will lose the compensations that Europe pays for their untimely decommissioning," said Bulgaria's Prime Minister Sergey Stanishev yesterday.
He added that such an initiative may create tension between Bulgaria and the European Union and that analysis should be made on the Bulgarian projects and initiatives that would not be financed as a result of that tension. The Prime Minister believes the gas crisis was almost over. To his words very precise calculation of the possible economic profits and losses should be made if such a decision is made and reminded that the expiry date of the units is 2010.
On the other hand Bulgaria's Minister of Energy, Petar Dimitrov told the bTV that the official pledge of the Bulgarian Government for temporary re-decommissioning of the fourth nuclear units would be submitted on February 10. To his words PM Stanishev will then present Bulgaria's stand in Brussels.
Source: Standart
Brussels would not allow Bulgaria to switch on the NPP units in Kozloduy that were traded against the country's accession to the EU in 2007. The European Commission does not believe the re-start of units third and fourth could help Bulgaria solve the gas crisis problems in short terms, Ferran Tarradellas, Spokesman of the EU Energy Commissioner, Spiebalgs told the Bulgarian National Radio yesterday.
He pointed out that the European Commission was doing the necessary for the real solution of the problem via immediate restoration of gas supplies. The spokesperson also said that by now no official demand had been received in Brussels for the restart of the nuclear units from Bulgaria. Sofia's stand on the reopening of the decommissioned units came in the words of Bulgaria's Prime Minister, Sergey Stanishev who said that the option was being considered closely but all sides of the issue should be taken into account.
"Reopening of third and fourth units means that Bulgaria will lose the compensations that Europe pays for their untimely decommissioning," said Bulgaria's Prime Minister Sergey Stanishev yesterday.
He added that such an initiative may create tension between Bulgaria and the European Union and that analysis should be made on the Bulgarian projects and initiatives that would not be financed as a result of that tension. The Prime Minister believes the gas crisis was almost over. To his words very precise calculation of the possible economic profits and losses should be made if such a decision is made and reminded that the expiry date of the units is 2010.
On the other hand Bulgaria's Minister of Energy, Petar Dimitrov told the bTV that the official pledge of the Bulgarian Government for temporary re-decommissioning of the fourth nuclear units would be submitted on February 10. To his words PM Stanishev will then present Bulgaria's stand in Brussels.
Source: Standart
Gas crisis brings nuclear energy to the forefront
Slovakia, Bulgaria, Italy, Britain even Germany are among those countries giving nuclear energy another look, following the dispute between Russia and Ukraine, which has cut the flow of Russian natural gas to Europe has alarmed governments about the issue of energy security. Slovakia and Bulgaria, among the worst hit by the gas cutoff, announced last week that they may reopen Soviet-era reactors that had been dismantled in recent years, before the countries joined the European Union. “We consider restarting (the reactor) as extraordinarily actual and acute. When a critical moment occurs we will make the step,” Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico said. Brussels will listen to the arguments of Slovakia on the need to restart the country’s Bohunice nuclear power plant and then assess the situation, the Commission said on November 12. Slovakia had agreed to close the Bohunice plant as part of its EU accession agreement but now is seeking alternative energy sources.
“The (EU Energy) Commissioner (Andris Piebalgs) will hear the Slovak authorities’ explanation and in the light of the explanation ... he will assess the situation,” Commission spokesman Johannes Laitenberger was quoted by the press as saying. Meanwhile, Bulgarian Prime Minister Sergei Stanishev said on January 16 that his country will start technical preparations to re-open one of its shut nuclear reactors at Kozloduy if the gas crisis continues, but only with the European Union’s consent. “The government decided to start technical preparations to re-open one of its shut nuclear plant reactors if the gas crisis continues over an unforseeable period of time,” Stanishev was quoted by the press as saying. Preparations would take about 45 days, he added. But he noted: “We cannot act unilaterally and put our partners in front of an accomplished fact.” “A dialogue with the European Commission and the member states is necessary,” he said. Brussels, however, is highly unlikely to approve Bulgaria’s ans Slovakia’s appeals to reopen their nuclear reactors, experts say. Only two 1,000-megawatt reactors remain in operation at Bulgaria’s sole nuclear power plant at Kozloduy, after the country shut four other 440-magawatt units at the plant in 2003 and 2006 to secure EU accession. Even German politicians are openly discussing the advantages of nuclear energy. “It’s increasingly becoming apparent that we have to lay greater emphasis on resources available in Germany,” Deutsche Presse-Agentur (dpa) quoted German Economics Minister Michael Glos as saying earlier in January.
“I want to draw attention to the fact that we still have a number of nuclear power stations in Germany which, unfortunately, are going to be turned off in a few years just for political reasons.” On January 12 in Brussels, he was seconded by one of his state secretaries, Peter Hintze, who told a meeting of European Union energy ministers, “We need to take another calm look at the atomic energy issue, which is currently on hold.” The German government is bound by a 1999 agreement to shut down the country’s nuclear power stations by 2020, but the cessation of deliveries of Russian natural gas to Europe because of gas crisis has provoked deep concerns regarding over-dependency on a single source of energy. “What we are experiencing in supply breakdowns did not occur even during the many decades of the Cold War,” Heintze complained. Moreover, the Czech Republic - which is less dependent on Russian gas than its neighbours - appears to be planning to expand its use of nuclear energy, despite the moratorium on the construction of new nuclear reactors that was part of Prague’s EU accession agreement, the daily Hospodarske Noviny reported on January 16.
This is a policy turnaround by the Green Party-ruled Environment Ministry, the paper writes, as the ministry had previously opposed any move in this direction. One of the reasons is the gas crisis. France, which derives nearly 80 percent of its energy from its 58 nuclear reactors, is looking prophetic now. The French chose atomic energy after the oil crisis of the 1970s. “The French must be delighted that the country didn’t bet only on gas when we see what is happening with the gas,” the head of French energy supplier EDF, Pierre Gadonneix, said on French radio last week. EDF and other European utilities, notably the German energy giants E.ON and RWE, are investing heavily in nuclear energy in Europe, with projects in Britain and Finland. However, environmentalists say that increased nuclear energy use is not as good an idea as it may seem. “Nuclear energy is used to generate electricity while 90 percent of Russian gas imports to Europe are used for heating. They’re two different things,” Greenpeace official Jan Beranek was quoted by AFP as saying. Also environmentalists point out that while nuclear power may not contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, the long-term problem of disposing of nuclear waste remains a major challenge. “Moreover, countries such as Bulgaria, Slovakia and the Czech Republic depend on Russian fuel for their nuclear plants which means that the issue of dependence on Russia is not solved. “These countries would do better to improve their energy efficiency,” he said.
Source: New Europe
“The (EU Energy) Commissioner (Andris Piebalgs) will hear the Slovak authorities’ explanation and in the light of the explanation ... he will assess the situation,” Commission spokesman Johannes Laitenberger was quoted by the press as saying. Meanwhile, Bulgarian Prime Minister Sergei Stanishev said on January 16 that his country will start technical preparations to re-open one of its shut nuclear reactors at Kozloduy if the gas crisis continues, but only with the European Union’s consent. “The government decided to start technical preparations to re-open one of its shut nuclear plant reactors if the gas crisis continues over an unforseeable period of time,” Stanishev was quoted by the press as saying. Preparations would take about 45 days, he added. But he noted: “We cannot act unilaterally and put our partners in front of an accomplished fact.” “A dialogue with the European Commission and the member states is necessary,” he said. Brussels, however, is highly unlikely to approve Bulgaria’s ans Slovakia’s appeals to reopen their nuclear reactors, experts say. Only two 1,000-megawatt reactors remain in operation at Bulgaria’s sole nuclear power plant at Kozloduy, after the country shut four other 440-magawatt units at the plant in 2003 and 2006 to secure EU accession. Even German politicians are openly discussing the advantages of nuclear energy. “It’s increasingly becoming apparent that we have to lay greater emphasis on resources available in Germany,” Deutsche Presse-Agentur (dpa) quoted German Economics Minister Michael Glos as saying earlier in January.
“I want to draw attention to the fact that we still have a number of nuclear power stations in Germany which, unfortunately, are going to be turned off in a few years just for political reasons.” On January 12 in Brussels, he was seconded by one of his state secretaries, Peter Hintze, who told a meeting of European Union energy ministers, “We need to take another calm look at the atomic energy issue, which is currently on hold.” The German government is bound by a 1999 agreement to shut down the country’s nuclear power stations by 2020, but the cessation of deliveries of Russian natural gas to Europe because of gas crisis has provoked deep concerns regarding over-dependency on a single source of energy. “What we are experiencing in supply breakdowns did not occur even during the many decades of the Cold War,” Heintze complained. Moreover, the Czech Republic - which is less dependent on Russian gas than its neighbours - appears to be planning to expand its use of nuclear energy, despite the moratorium on the construction of new nuclear reactors that was part of Prague’s EU accession agreement, the daily Hospodarske Noviny reported on January 16.
This is a policy turnaround by the Green Party-ruled Environment Ministry, the paper writes, as the ministry had previously opposed any move in this direction. One of the reasons is the gas crisis. France, which derives nearly 80 percent of its energy from its 58 nuclear reactors, is looking prophetic now. The French chose atomic energy after the oil crisis of the 1970s. “The French must be delighted that the country didn’t bet only on gas when we see what is happening with the gas,” the head of French energy supplier EDF, Pierre Gadonneix, said on French radio last week. EDF and other European utilities, notably the German energy giants E.ON and RWE, are investing heavily in nuclear energy in Europe, with projects in Britain and Finland. However, environmentalists say that increased nuclear energy use is not as good an idea as it may seem. “Nuclear energy is used to generate electricity while 90 percent of Russian gas imports to Europe are used for heating. They’re two different things,” Greenpeace official Jan Beranek was quoted by AFP as saying. Also environmentalists point out that while nuclear power may not contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, the long-term problem of disposing of nuclear waste remains a major challenge. “Moreover, countries such as Bulgaria, Slovakia and the Czech Republic depend on Russian fuel for their nuclear plants which means that the issue of dependence on Russia is not solved. “These countries would do better to improve their energy efficiency,” he said.
Source: New Europe
Monday, January 19, 2009
Czech Industry minister: Focus on nuclear power proved correct by gas crisis
The Czech Republic should put more focus on nuclear power in the future, not on gas, and this idea has been proved correct by the current gas row between Russia and Ukraine, Czech Industry and Trade Minister Martin Riman said in a discussion programme on Czech Television Sunday.
Orientation on nuclear energy sources is also part of the draft state energy policy.
"It is impossible to follow the path of gas power plants," said Riman (ruling Civic Democrats ODS). He, however, added that it was necessary to extend possibilities of gas flow to the country.
Around 80 percent of Czech gas consumption is now secured by shipments of Russian gas via Ukraine and Slovakia, the rest of gas is transported from Norway.
The main advantage of nuclear fuel is the fact that it can be easily stored in many years ahead, according to Riman.
He also spoke about reserves of coal, with coal mining limits introduced in 1991. He said the cabinet is not going to lift the limits. It is only opening a debate on their cancellation.
"Writing off the reserves would be a big tragedy," said shadow industry minister Milan Urban (opposition Social Democrats CSSD).
As for nuclear power, Urban said CSSD wanted the new energy policy to be discussed in parliament, but Riman did not agree saying it was not a systemic step.
Economist Vladimir Dlouhy said the draft energy policy should not be approved by parliament because of a number of groups lobbying among deputies to push through their interests. Dlouhy said it was necessary to launch a discussion on the full use of domestic sources of energy.
The new energy policy, whose draft was published by the weekly Ekonom a few days ago, reckons with lifting coal mining limits and use of all uranium reserves available.
The share of nuclear power is expected to rise from the current third to around 50 percent of Czech production by 2030 and gas power plants should make up 5 percent of the total, about the same amount as today.
The ruling Green Party and its chairman Environment Minister Martin Bursik are opposed to the draft. The document has to be reworked substantially, according to Bursik.
(Source: Prague Daily Monitor)
Orientation on nuclear energy sources is also part of the draft state energy policy.
"It is impossible to follow the path of gas power plants," said Riman (ruling Civic Democrats ODS). He, however, added that it was necessary to extend possibilities of gas flow to the country.
Around 80 percent of Czech gas consumption is now secured by shipments of Russian gas via Ukraine and Slovakia, the rest of gas is transported from Norway.
The main advantage of nuclear fuel is the fact that it can be easily stored in many years ahead, according to Riman.
He also spoke about reserves of coal, with coal mining limits introduced in 1991. He said the cabinet is not going to lift the limits. It is only opening a debate on their cancellation.
"Writing off the reserves would be a big tragedy," said shadow industry minister Milan Urban (opposition Social Democrats CSSD).
As for nuclear power, Urban said CSSD wanted the new energy policy to be discussed in parliament, but Riman did not agree saying it was not a systemic step.
Economist Vladimir Dlouhy said the draft energy policy should not be approved by parliament because of a number of groups lobbying among deputies to push through their interests. Dlouhy said it was necessary to launch a discussion on the full use of domestic sources of energy.
The new energy policy, whose draft was published by the weekly Ekonom a few days ago, reckons with lifting coal mining limits and use of all uranium reserves available.
The share of nuclear power is expected to rise from the current third to around 50 percent of Czech production by 2030 and gas power plants should make up 5 percent of the total, about the same amount as today.
The ruling Green Party and its chairman Environment Minister Martin Bursik are opposed to the draft. The document has to be reworked substantially, according to Bursik.
(Source: Prague Daily Monitor)
Atomstroiexport revises Turkey nuclear tender bid
Russia's Atomstroiexport, the only bidder in a tender to build Turkey's first nuclear plant, has revised its bid after initially offering to sell power at three times the current rate, Turkey's Energy Minister said.
Energy Minister Himli Guler told reporters on Monday that state power company Tetas was preparing a report on the revised offer from Atomstroiexport, which won the nuclear power licence tender with Turkish partner Park Teknik and Russia's Inter Rao.
Details of the new bid were not announced.
Atomstroiexport had offered to sell power at an average price of $0.2116 per kilowatt hour, Yasar Cakmak, head of state power company Tetas, told a news conference earlier in the day.
The average wholesale price in Turkey is about $0.079 per kilowatt hour. Atomstroiexport's bid would include covering its construction costs and a forecast for power prices over the life of the station, which could cost as much as $8 billion to build.
Turkey wants to build three nuclear plants to cover about 5 percent of the country's electricity needs and cut its reliance on energy imports. Its demand has been growing at a rate second only to China's.
Environmentalists and some economists say nuclear power is too expensive and could create health hazards in a country crisscrossed by earthquake faultlines.
The government took nearly three months to approve the Atomstroiexport bid after no other companies submitted bids in the September tender. It has pledged to revamp a nuclear-tender law to attract more interest before it holds other tenders.
Guler also said the government was preparing draft legislation that would allow for a second nuclear tender for a site along Turkey's Black Sea coast in the north.
Atomstroiexport's licence is to build a power station on Turkey's southern, Mediterranean coast that will have a capacity of about 3,000 to 5,000 megawatts.
(Source: Reuters)
Energy Minister Himli Guler told reporters on Monday that state power company Tetas was preparing a report on the revised offer from Atomstroiexport, which won the nuclear power licence tender with Turkish partner Park Teknik and Russia's Inter Rao.
Details of the new bid were not announced.
Atomstroiexport had offered to sell power at an average price of $0.2116 per kilowatt hour, Yasar Cakmak, head of state power company Tetas, told a news conference earlier in the day.
The average wholesale price in Turkey is about $0.079 per kilowatt hour. Atomstroiexport's bid would include covering its construction costs and a forecast for power prices over the life of the station, which could cost as much as $8 billion to build.
Turkey wants to build three nuclear plants to cover about 5 percent of the country's electricity needs and cut its reliance on energy imports. Its demand has been growing at a rate second only to China's.
Environmentalists and some economists say nuclear power is too expensive and could create health hazards in a country crisscrossed by earthquake faultlines.
The government took nearly three months to approve the Atomstroiexport bid after no other companies submitted bids in the September tender. It has pledged to revamp a nuclear-tender law to attract more interest before it holds other tenders.
Guler also said the government was preparing draft legislation that would allow for a second nuclear tender for a site along Turkey's Black Sea coast in the north.
Atomstroiexport's licence is to build a power station on Turkey's southern, Mediterranean coast that will have a capacity of about 3,000 to 5,000 megawatts.
(Source: Reuters)
Canada, UK eye nuclear power deal with India
After the US, it is the Canadians and British who are eyeing nuclear power deals in India. Officials from the nuclear power industry of
the United Kingdom and Canada will be here from Monday to talks on the subject.
The two teams are being led by high-profile ministers — British secretary of state for business, enterprise and regulatory reform Peter Mandelson and Canadian minister of international Trade Stockwell Day.
The UK, where no new plants have been built in the past two decades despite 20 per cent of the country’s electricity being generated from nuclear power, has changed its policy recently and is planning more plants. Britain needs to import reactors from France, US or Russia.
The British delegation includes officials from the Nuclear Industry Association, the umbrella group for the industry, Rolls Royce Nuclear, Urenco Enrichment Co, Thompson Valves, Weir Power, as well as representatives from allied academic and legal fields. The Canadian delegation includes officials from Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd, nuclear reactor designers, Cameco Corp which is uranium supplier and SNC-Lavalin Nuclear, a nuclear engineering firm.
India’s cooperation with Canada had ended after the first nuclear test in 1974 when it was accused of taking plutonium from the Cirus reactor that it had got from Canada under the “atoms for peace” programme.
However, New Delhi maintained that this was not true. Canada has supported the Indo-US nuclear deal and helped in passing the India-specific safeguards agreement at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
India’s 30-year nuclear isolation ended with the signing of the India-US nuclear deal and the change in guidelines for trade with India by the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).
US electronics giant Westinghouse and Indian construction firm Larsen & Toubro signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) on Friday to set up a joint venture to build nuclear reactors in India. India also plans to award contracts to companies from France and Russia. By 2030, India plans to increase its nuclear capacity 15-fold, to 63,000 megawatts, at an estimated cost of $80 billion.
(Source: The Economic Times of India)
the United Kingdom and Canada will be here from Monday to talks on the subject.
The two teams are being led by high-profile ministers — British secretary of state for business, enterprise and regulatory reform Peter Mandelson and Canadian minister of international Trade Stockwell Day.
The UK, where no new plants have been built in the past two decades despite 20 per cent of the country’s electricity being generated from nuclear power, has changed its policy recently and is planning more plants. Britain needs to import reactors from France, US or Russia.
The British delegation includes officials from the Nuclear Industry Association, the umbrella group for the industry, Rolls Royce Nuclear, Urenco Enrichment Co, Thompson Valves, Weir Power, as well as representatives from allied academic and legal fields. The Canadian delegation includes officials from Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd, nuclear reactor designers, Cameco Corp which is uranium supplier and SNC-Lavalin Nuclear, a nuclear engineering firm.
India’s cooperation with Canada had ended after the first nuclear test in 1974 when it was accused of taking plutonium from the Cirus reactor that it had got from Canada under the “atoms for peace” programme.
However, New Delhi maintained that this was not true. Canada has supported the Indo-US nuclear deal and helped in passing the India-specific safeguards agreement at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
India’s 30-year nuclear isolation ended with the signing of the India-US nuclear deal and the change in guidelines for trade with India by the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).
US electronics giant Westinghouse and Indian construction firm Larsen & Toubro signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) on Friday to set up a joint venture to build nuclear reactors in India. India also plans to award contracts to companies from France and Russia. By 2030, India plans to increase its nuclear capacity 15-fold, to 63,000 megawatts, at an estimated cost of $80 billion.
(Source: The Economic Times of India)
Protest rally wants restart of Kozloduy nuclear power plant units
While university students were protesting outside Parliament on January 18 2009, several thousand people gathered outside the National Palace of Culture (NDK) to ask for the restart of units 3 and 4 of Bulgaria's only nuclear power plant in Kozloduy on the Danube River.
The units were shut down as part of the deal for Bulgaria's accession to the European Union in 2007 and ever since then the issue whether it was the right thing to do has been the subject of much debate in Bulgaria.
The halted Russian natural gas supplies to Bulgaria since January 6 2009 has made President Georgi Purvanov and Prime Minister Sergei Stanishev put the issue back on the agenda.
The NDK rally was organised by the newly-formed political alliance Napred, featuring several minor parties in opposition, as well as the Lider party backed by energy tycoon Hristo Kovachki, who owns the coal-powered Bobov Dol thermal power plant and a number of coal mines.
The rally started at NDK and ended outside the Cabinet building and was also backed by the of the country's main trade unions, Podkrepa and the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions in Bulgaria (CITUB), who refused to join university students' protest on January 14 2009.
Unlike the students' rally, which saw no communication between the protesters and members of the Cabinet, the Napred protest was warmly received by Stanishev. TV cameras showed Stanishev receiving a delegation of the Napred protesters in his office, where he told them what the Government was doing to cope with the energy crisis.
On January 19 2009, Kovachki told Bulgarian National Television that Bulgaria need not concentrate its efforts solely on the restart of Kozloduy's units 3 and 4 but on trying to restart some of the mothballed units of its thermal power plants, such as the one in Bobov Dol.
The same as with Kozloduy Bulgaria, had to shut down units at thermal power plants for environmental reasons. When the Bobov Dol units were shut down, the thermal power plant was still owned by the state. As of January 2009, however, the plant was officially sold to Kovachki for the price of 100 million leva.
“We have made commitments to the EU to switch the production of some of the thermal power plants from coal to natural gas within a few years, which for me makes no sense,” Kovachki told BNT.
According to him, Bulgaria had coal supplies that could still be used in thermal power plants. As for the issue whether natural gas was more environmentally clean way of producing energy than coal, he said that installations must be built in order to reduce the level of pollution.
(Source: Sofia Echo)
The units were shut down as part of the deal for Bulgaria's accession to the European Union in 2007 and ever since then the issue whether it was the right thing to do has been the subject of much debate in Bulgaria.
The halted Russian natural gas supplies to Bulgaria since January 6 2009 has made President Georgi Purvanov and Prime Minister Sergei Stanishev put the issue back on the agenda.
The NDK rally was organised by the newly-formed political alliance Napred, featuring several minor parties in opposition, as well as the Lider party backed by energy tycoon Hristo Kovachki, who owns the coal-powered Bobov Dol thermal power plant and a number of coal mines.
The rally started at NDK and ended outside the Cabinet building and was also backed by the of the country's main trade unions, Podkrepa and the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions in Bulgaria (CITUB), who refused to join university students' protest on January 14 2009.
Unlike the students' rally, which saw no communication between the protesters and members of the Cabinet, the Napred protest was warmly received by Stanishev. TV cameras showed Stanishev receiving a delegation of the Napred protesters in his office, where he told them what the Government was doing to cope with the energy crisis.
On January 19 2009, Kovachki told Bulgarian National Television that Bulgaria need not concentrate its efforts solely on the restart of Kozloduy's units 3 and 4 but on trying to restart some of the mothballed units of its thermal power plants, such as the one in Bobov Dol.
The same as with Kozloduy Bulgaria, had to shut down units at thermal power plants for environmental reasons. When the Bobov Dol units were shut down, the thermal power plant was still owned by the state. As of January 2009, however, the plant was officially sold to Kovachki for the price of 100 million leva.
“We have made commitments to the EU to switch the production of some of the thermal power plants from coal to natural gas within a few years, which for me makes no sense,” Kovachki told BNT.
According to him, Bulgaria had coal supplies that could still be used in thermal power plants. As for the issue whether natural gas was more environmentally clean way of producing energy than coal, he said that installations must be built in order to reduce the level of pollution.
(Source: Sofia Echo)
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Radiation in emissions control spotlight
[Thought this article interesting as it highlights how radioactive materials are managed and regulated in other industries and not just nuclear.]
http://www.upstreamonline.com/live/article169699.ece
By Upstream staff
Photo by Marit Hommedal
The Norwegian Petroleum Directorate, the country's Pollution Control Authority and Radiation Protection Authority have recommended that a zero emissions target for petroleum activities be broadened to include radioactive discharges.
The three agencies, in a report for the Norwegian enviroment and oil ministries, said measures to prevent discharges of produced water, which can contain naturally-occurring radioactivity, should be considered.
However, they said that no new general requirements need be introduced.
Cuttings and drilling fluid would also be included in the zero emissions target.
In the report, the agencies said: "The petroleum [sector] has achieved substantial environmental improvements. Discharges of environmentally hazardous chemical additives from the Norwegian shelf have been reduced by more than 99% over the past 10 years."
Estimates - based on figures provided from players active on the Norwegian continental shelf - indicate that preventing discharges to sea from all fields on the shelf could cost as much as Nkr46 billion ($6.4 billion). This figure also includes costs associated with emissions to air.
The report said that Norwegian studies have not been able to link any adverse environmental impact to the small amounts of radioactive elements in produced water, but added: "Nevertheless, we do not know enough about the long-term effects, and further research is required to determine whether radioactivity in produced water can result in [adverse effects]."
The agencies also said that while they have not recommended new general requirements forthe injection of produced water offshore, they believed specific measures should be considered on a field-by-field basis.
The report singled out the Troll B and C fields, saying that new evaluations were needed regarding the injection of produced water at the fields, which together account for about 40% of Norway's radioactive discharges offshore.
http://www.upstreamonline.com/live/article169699.ece
By Upstream staff
Photo by Marit Hommedal
The Norwegian Petroleum Directorate, the country's Pollution Control Authority and Radiation Protection Authority have recommended that a zero emissions target for petroleum activities be broadened to include radioactive discharges.
The three agencies, in a report for the Norwegian enviroment and oil ministries, said measures to prevent discharges of produced water, which can contain naturally-occurring radioactivity, should be considered.
However, they said that no new general requirements need be introduced.
Cuttings and drilling fluid would also be included in the zero emissions target.
In the report, the agencies said: "The petroleum [sector] has achieved substantial environmental improvements. Discharges of environmentally hazardous chemical additives from the Norwegian shelf have been reduced by more than 99% over the past 10 years."
Estimates - based on figures provided from players active on the Norwegian continental shelf - indicate that preventing discharges to sea from all fields on the shelf could cost as much as Nkr46 billion ($6.4 billion). This figure also includes costs associated with emissions to air.
The report said that Norwegian studies have not been able to link any adverse environmental impact to the small amounts of radioactive elements in produced water, but added: "Nevertheless, we do not know enough about the long-term effects, and further research is required to determine whether radioactivity in produced water can result in [adverse effects]."
The agencies also said that while they have not recommended new general requirements forthe injection of produced water offshore, they believed specific measures should be considered on a field-by-field basis.
The report singled out the Troll B and C fields, saying that new evaluations were needed regarding the injection of produced water at the fields, which together account for about 40% of Norway's radioactive discharges offshore.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Poland aiming at own nuclear power by 2020
Poland's prime minister says the ongoing natural gas dispute between Russia and Ukraine is pushing his government to speed up plans to build nuclear power plants.
Donald Tusk said his Cabinet decided Tuesday to step up construction of its first-ever nuclear power plants, and that he expects them to produce power by 2020.
Tusk added that Poland will further seek to reduce its dependence on Russian gas imports, including through construction of a liquid gas storage system and a gas port.
Poland was one of several nations to see a drop in natural gas deliveries as part of the dispute between Moscow and Kiev. Warsaw was largely able to make up the shortfall through an increased inflow from pipelines running through Belarus.
(Source: Tri-Parish Times)
Donald Tusk said his Cabinet decided Tuesday to step up construction of its first-ever nuclear power plants, and that he expects them to produce power by 2020.
Tusk added that Poland will further seek to reduce its dependence on Russian gas imports, including through construction of a liquid gas storage system and a gas port.
Poland was one of several nations to see a drop in natural gas deliveries as part of the dispute between Moscow and Kiev. Warsaw was largely able to make up the shortfall through an increased inflow from pipelines running through Belarus.
(Source: Tri-Parish Times)
Russia will fulfill duties on Iran’s nuclear power plant
Russia will fulfill its commitments on completing Iran’s first nuclear power plant in Bushehr despite of any pressures, said Iranian Ambassador to Russia Mahmoud-Reza Sajjadi.
Speaking in an interview with the Russian newspaper Zavtra Online, the ambassador said Iran did not believe that the Russian side has deliberately delayed completion of the 1,000-MW power plant.
Based on the previously agreed timetable, the power plant which is being built in cooperation with Russia, was to become operational in fall of 2008. However its construction was delayed for various reasons including some difficulties occurred in delivering its remaining equipment and necessary fuel.
Sajjadi regretted that completion of the project has been prolonged.
“However, this was not only the fault of the Russian side, but some countries that should produce equipment of the power plants have, sometimes failed, surprisingly, to fulfill their commitments,” explained the ambassador.
He stressed that certain states would not miss a chance to disturb promotion of Iran-Russia ties.
“We will not be surprised if the U.S. offers to construct new power plants in Iran in half of their real price, if U.S. officials see that Moscow will build them for the country,” Sajjadi said.
Iran is to increase the number of its nuclear power plants to help electricity generation to meet the country’s energy demands.
Sajjadi denied U.S. allegations that Iran was to develop nuclear weapons saying producing those weapons “has no place in Iran’s defensive doctrine.”
Referring to Iran’s complete cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, the ambassador said that the IAEA’s inspectors had “free access” to Iran’s nuclear sites and facilities and the agency was fully informed of their activities.
As for the U.S. and Israeli threats against Iran, Sajjadi said, “Iran is not Iraq or Afghanistan. If the U.S. enters any adventurism against Iran, then we would threaten its interest worldwide.”
(Source: Tehran Times)
Speaking in an interview with the Russian newspaper Zavtra Online, the ambassador said Iran did not believe that the Russian side has deliberately delayed completion of the 1,000-MW power plant.
Based on the previously agreed timetable, the power plant which is being built in cooperation with Russia, was to become operational in fall of 2008. However its construction was delayed for various reasons including some difficulties occurred in delivering its remaining equipment and necessary fuel.
Sajjadi regretted that completion of the project has been prolonged.
“However, this was not only the fault of the Russian side, but some countries that should produce equipment of the power plants have, sometimes failed, surprisingly, to fulfill their commitments,” explained the ambassador.
He stressed that certain states would not miss a chance to disturb promotion of Iran-Russia ties.
“We will not be surprised if the U.S. offers to construct new power plants in Iran in half of their real price, if U.S. officials see that Moscow will build them for the country,” Sajjadi said.
Iran is to increase the number of its nuclear power plants to help electricity generation to meet the country’s energy demands.
Sajjadi denied U.S. allegations that Iran was to develop nuclear weapons saying producing those weapons “has no place in Iran’s defensive doctrine.”
Referring to Iran’s complete cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, the ambassador said that the IAEA’s inspectors had “free access” to Iran’s nuclear sites and facilities and the agency was fully informed of their activities.
As for the U.S. and Israeli threats against Iran, Sajjadi said, “Iran is not Iraq or Afghanistan. If the U.S. enters any adventurism against Iran, then we would threaten its interest worldwide.”
(Source: Tehran Times)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
