TL: GREENPEACE BRIEFING - NORTHWEST RUSSIA ENERGY REPORT SO: GREENPEACE RUSSIA, (GP) DT: MAY 1997 "Are we to wait for the second Chernobyl, but this time at a VVER-640?" Vladimir Desyatov, Head of the Public Environmental Impact Assessment for the Feasibility Study carried out for the construction of the Far Eastern Nuclear Power Plant INTRODUCTION In the Northwest region of Russia there are currently 2 nuclear power plants operating. One is situated in the Leningrad Region, near to St Petersburg, and is known as Leningrad nuclear power plant which has 4 RBMK-1000 (Chernobyl-type) reactors. The other, Kola nuclear power plant, is situated in the Murmansk Region, and has 4 VVER-440 type reactors. The majority of the reactors at both plants are now approaching the end of their design lives. Site Reactor Capacity Start Up Planned Unit (MWe Gross) Date Shutdown Date Leningrad No. 1 1000 1973 2003 No. 2 1000 1975 2005 No. 3 1000 1979 2009 No. 4 1000 1981 2011 Kola No. 1 440 1973 2003 No. 2 440 1974 2004 No. 3 440 1981 2011 No. 4 440 1984 2014 source: The Nuclear Industry in the former Soviet Union, Financial Times Energy Publishing The Ministry of Atomic Energy (MinAtom), now desperate to reinvigorate a failing nuclear power programme in Russia, has plans to replace the capacity of the existing nuclear power plants in the region by building a new design of reactor, known as the VVER-640. It is planning to construct one at the Sosnovy Bor site (close to the existing Leningrad plant), and two at the Kola-2 site (close to the existing Kola site). The nuclear reactors at Leningrad and Kola are extremely unsafe and should be shut down immediately. They should not be replaced by new nuclear reactors, but by sustainable energy technologies which are not so lethal to human health and the environment. Greenpeace commissioned the German-based organisation, the +ko-Institut, to prepare a report on the overall energy situation in part of the Northwest Russian region in order to ascertain the possibility for achieving this scenario. THE OKO-INSTITUT REPORT The Oko-Institut analysed all the available data on the energy situation in part of the Northwest region of Russia. It has become clear from this analysis that the economic costs of building new reactors are far higher than other alternative options for electricity generation in the region. According to the +ko-Institut estimates, the present value of eastern European plants, including decommissioning costs, can be put in the region of 5,000 DM/kW. The table below shows the economic costs of other sources of power. This is clear evidence that nuclear energy is by far the most expensive option for electricity production. [FIGURE 24 FROM THE REPORT NOT AVAILABLE IN THIS VERSION. CAPTION: Present values of power plant technologies compared Source: Oko-Institut calculations] The Report has specific detailed analysis of the demographic and economic conditions, the present electricity supply and the possible trends in electricity demand, and provides various scenarios for meeting electricity demand in the region. Following this analyses the Report concludes: Analysis of the options for the development of power plants in Northwest Russia has shown that both in the efficiency scenario and in the reference (business as usual) scenario nuclear power can be abandoned without any loss of prosperity. The continued operation of the nuclear power plants at the Kola and Leningrad sites, which is highly problematic from a safety perspective, cannot be justified in terms of safety technology or energy policy and in any case does not represent a medium-or long-term alternative, as these plants are obsolete. Nor can replacement of these reactors with modern and allegedly safer reactors be justified in terms of economic management of electricity and capacity demand in Northwest Russia . Energy capacity demand can only be significantly reduced by a policy which aims specifically at electricity saving. Important elements in the development strategy for energy production in Northwest Russia are the use of renewable sources of energy (especially water and wind) together with the comprehensive expansion of industrial and public combined heat and power (CHP) capacity. Fossil generation capacities in pure condensation operation (coal, oil, gas) are of minor importance overall, both in the reference scenario and - even more so - in the efficiency scenario. The supply of fuel for fossil electricity-generating plants - some of which will replace nuclear power plants - is hardly likely to cause any problems and can also be environmentally justified if all energy-consuming sectors are included in an integrated strategy for the rational use of energy. The tying up of considerable financial resources in the construction of threeaccording to the comments of Gis there are planned only new reactors at the Sosnovy Bor and at Kola-2 sites will continue to mean that other - definitely lower-risk - investments (energy saving, CHP, renewable sources) will not be realised, solely because of lack of available financing. In contrast to this, the development strategy shown in the report for the conversion sector in Northwest Russia makes a substantial contribution towards reducing the risks involved in the long-term operation of nuclear plants in Northwest Russia . Even the continuation of or increase in the already substantial exports of electricity to Finland, and the expansion of electricity supplies to other regions in Russia, by no means indicate that the building of new reactors in Northwest Russia is necessary. If electricity exports from extremely high-risk nuclear power plants are to be competitive, it must first be asked whether such exports are morally justifiable. Secondly, there is absolutely no evidence to indicate that such electricity exports will remain commercially viable, given that the obsolete nuclear power plants in Northwest Russia have to be replaced anyway. On the contrary, all the available information indicates that electricity exports could only be attractive from modern gas-fired power plants. ACCIDENTS AND CRISES The urgent need for a phase-out of nuclear power in the region has been graphically demonstrated by a catalogue of accidents and near disasters at both the Leningrad and Kola plants. Leningrad: In March 1992, unit 3 at Leningrad nuclear power plant experienced one of it's worst accidents to date when it leaked radioactive gases into the atmosphere and into neighbouring countries. This accident sent shock waves around the world and renewed public protest and political outcry that all RBMK (Chernobyl-type) reactors to be shutdown as soon as possible. This has not happened. In November 1996 the plant's Employees' Union (the Industrial and Environmental Safety Committee) alleged that 200 tonnes of radioactive water were pumped from the 3rd unit directly into the Baltic Sea. This incident caused a great deal of controversy between the employees and the administration at the plant. Although officials continue to deny the allegations, they have refused to carry out further tests. It is also well documented that there is a radioactive waste crisis at the plant. After almost 25 years of operation the plant has generated about 5,000 tonnes of spent fuel. It is kept in pools approximately 90 metres from the Baltic Sea. At present the main storage capacity is 100% full, but the plant is continuing to operate and produce more waste. The only solution the authorities are considering is to decrease the current space between the containers thus packing in more waste into the existing space. This raises very serious safety concerns, particularly as the present condition of the storage space is known to be dilapidating very rapidly and calls for an urgent inspection over safety concerns have already been made. Kola: In 1993 the Kola nuclear power plant experienced 43 safety incidents, representing almost 25% of all events reported in Russia. In February of that year it had one of it's worst accidents, when a tornado damaged transmission lines supporting the plant and led to turbine and reactor shutdowns at all four operating units. Emergency operating generators were started up for units 2,3 and 4 but the generator for unit 1 did not start up as planned. This accident was classified as level 3 on the International Nuclear Event Scale (The levels register on the scale at 0-7). In May 1995 Greenpeace obtained a document prepared by the US Department of Energy (DoE) entitled Most Dangerous Reactors. At that time, nine nuclear power plants in the Central and Eastern Europe had been surveyed for their accident potential, and Kola was named along with Chernobyl in Ukraine, Kozloduy in Bulgaria and Ignalina in Lithuania as the four worst plants with the highest potential for a nuclear disaster. THE VVER-640 NEW REACTOR DESIGN In the Feasibility Study carried out for the Far Eastern nuclear power plant (where MinAtom is also considering future construction of VVER-640 reactors) reports state that "the main protection of the population from any risk due to abnormal occurrences at the nuclear installation is insured by: technical safety and localisation systems; provisions for the quality of the design and construction; and competence of the staff. These measures reduce both the possibility of accidents occurring and the scale of the potential after effects. However even these measures cannot absolutely prevent a nuclear accident". This clearly shows that MinAtom cannot guarantee the absolute safety of the VVER-640 reactor. The head of the Public Environmental Impact Assessment for the above Feasibility study, Vladimir Desyatov has publicly stated "Are we to wait for the second Chernobyl, but this time at a VVER-640?" CONCLUSION In the past two decades there has been a steady decline in the development of nuclear power around the world, and this downward trend is even likely to accelerate more rapidly as the true economic and environmental costs come to light. It is imperative that Russia follows this global trend away from nuclear power and does not embark on investment into a new programme of a failed and unsafe technology. Greenpeace believes that the +ko-Institut Report should be used as the basis for future energy development in the Northwest of Russia. The VVER-640 should be abandoned and the existing dangerous reactors must be shut down. The Northwest can be a leader in energy development in Russia and show that efficient use of electricity coupled with renewable, sustainable energy technologies can provide a safe and secure energy future for the country.