Failed referendum leaves Bulgaria without nuclear future

[mya]

"A referendum on nuclear energy in Bulgaria failed due to low turnout, and the country's ruling party has confirmed it will not build a new nuclear plant. Critics warn that without nuclear energy, Bulgaria may become a third-world country in 20 years."

http://rt.com/news/bulgaria-nuclear-referendum-future-155/

Can't bulgaria get natural gas from russia, or does russia embargo it?

[KRins]

Considering the plan was proposed to be constructed by a Russian company, I rather doubt there is an embargo. It likely is a matter of (I honestly don't know what the name of Bulgarian currency is... are they on the Euro?) money. Like most political issues, the machine said "There is almost no need for a referendum"... and the sheep said "Ok boss." I thought it was very interesting they were was a quote in there stating that the plant could be paid off in 12 to 14 years and the remainder of the 60 year reactor life would essentially be the country "printing money".

[f0xx]

Alright.........

I don't know where to start.

Firstly, I don't think that an ordinary person with no qualification on any matters concerning economy, macroeconomics, nuclear energy and energy overall should have the ability to decide whether a nuclear plant should be built. I don't think that a person who doesn't even know which are the main sources of energy currently in Bulgaria should be able to decide that.

Secondly, that referendum (the first democratic referendum in Bulgarian history) was a complete joke. It was set by the parties mainly for them to test the ground for the upcoming elections.

The exact question was formulated the following way "Should Bulgaria develop its Nuclear Energy by building a new nuclear plant?"

Now, I am a 26 year old person with a master degree in Engineering and I work in the same sphere. I've personally taken A LOT of time to "educate" myself on whether does Bulgaria actually need to construct another nuclear power plant.

The main reason for starting a new construction plant was stated to be the following: A new nuclear plant in Belene will guarantee Bulgaria's energy security in future. A good reason, quite vague though.

1) If we take that energy security means: A new nuclear plant will produce cheap electricity. As it is now, nuclear plants produce the cheapest energy, but that is only so because the cost of the initial investment is not consider and most people only talk about the operational costs, fuel costs and waste treatment. The main initial expense is rarely considered.

2) If we take that energy security means: Satisfying the growing needs of energy. Building a 2000 MWatt Nuclear Plant to solve a non existent problem is bad planning. Firstly, the increase in energy usage is not expected to grow that much. The current predictions are about a growth of about 1.2% per year basis up to 2020. Instead of building a new plant we could invest in improving the efficiency of our network which is on average almost 6 times less efficient compared to the other countries in the EU. If we manage to somehow reach their standards, the early energy savings would equal to construction of 6 powerplants as big as Belene. Secondly, the government already has plans about adding additional power sources. Every person who lives here will tell you that the last 2-3 years there is a huge boom in the construction of wind and solar power plants. The combined production of those is expected to reach 2400 MWatts (20% more than the two blocks which would be built in the new power plant). Thirdly, I don't see anything wrong with importing electricity. The funds that are expected to be put into Belene would be enough to cover import costs for 27-36 years. Fourthly, we already have a nuclear power plant that used to have 6 blocks. Currently we have 4 closed and 2 working. We can concentrate on either building some new blocks in the already existing infrastructure or extend the life of the two existing and running ones.

3) If we take that energy security means: Diversification of the energy sources in the country. Currently Bulgaria is extremely dependent on Russia and it's gas resources (we suffered badly in the winter of 2008-2009 when Russia and Ukraine were arguing about transit prices and Russia stopped sending gas to it and by doing so the countries on that gas pipe stopped receiving gas as well). Deciding to build a new nuclear plant with and making a contract with Russian construction company who would use Russian technology and Russian "fuel" does not seem to be right imho.

4) If we take that energy security means: Decreasing the dependency of the need to import energy sources with "insecure and unstable" prices (due to Russia again...), it would fail to do that as well - Uranium prices during 2006 were about $40, in 2007 they reached a peak of $138 just to drop down to about $50 today.

5) If we take that energy security means: Economical security and the ability to sell energy to our neighbors, well it fails to deliver that as well. With a BGP of less than 40 biln. euros, we simply can not afford to build a nuclear plant costing 10 bln. on our own, which means that we will either have to take a credit from an international banking institution (which will decrease the credit rate of the country) or make a deal with foreign investors, which means to lose our independence on price forming. Not just that, but even if we would still manage to build the plant and somehow keep independence, believing that we would be selling energy to our neighbours would be unrealistic, because currently on the Balkan peninsula there are different projects for building plants for over 8500 MWatts. If we add to those the 4800 MWatts of the plants that are currently being built in Turkey (our southern neighbour), it would be silly to believe that the need of energy import of our neighbours would be as big as it is now.

All that being said, the project for the plant was revived and given to a Russian construction company some years ago without any action for the executor of the project. I don't know with what sense the socialist party back then single handedly decided to give the project to the country that already controls huge percentage of the energy sources in Bulgaria. The Russian lobby in our country is disgustingly enormous. Currently, 70% of the sources we use to produce energy from, come from Mother Russia.

The project Belene has already swallowed ~800 mln euros and is expected to swallow around 200 mln more even without building the thing.

Sources (only a small part of them, since most are in Bulgarian):

Many different stats - http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/energy/data/database

Uranium prices - http://www.uxc.com/review/uxc_PriceChart.aspx?chart=spot-u3o8-2yr

All that being said, I did not vote because I think I do not have enough information to make an adequate choice. My father didn't vote. My mother voted with a "No".

My neighbour though, voted with a "Yes" because he thought that the referendum was about fixing the streets and sewers near his house.

[KRins]

Not trying to make fun of your neighbor, but it is this exact sort of... political ignorance (best term I could come up with) that allows a media driven campaign on any topic to thrive. When we don't know, we assume what we've heard is true. At least many people seem to behave that way when it comes to issues back here in the US. While it is kind of sad the referendum sounds to be a bit of sham, it is a step towards a more... engaged democracy.

I do have to say kudos on the willingness to avoid the external pressures to vote because it is your "right". I've heard crap from my own family about not voting in the last Presidential election here when I honestly didn't believe anyone had a plan sound enough to earn my endorsement. Despite seeming to be quite informed, you made the most responsible possible decision by abstaining when your conscience told you to. I can't say I'm well versed in the Bulgarian political climate, but I hope that things work out.

[f0xx]

Not trying to make fun of your neighbor...

Why not? I made fun of him plenty

I can't say I'm well versed in the Bulgarian political climate' date=' but I hope that things work out.[/quote']

I hope as well, because I would hate to have to emigrate. I traveled to England for a few days around Christmas break and I didn't like it very much there

I am happy at least that very few people went to vote on this nonsense of referendum... and when you think that they could have asked us about smoking in public places instead... but oh well, I guess people know more about nuclear energy

[edit]Also, Mya, that link to the site is a bit wrong in one of it's statements:

"So far, only one country in Europe, Lithuania, has given up nuclear energy following EU demands to shut down Soviet-built nuclear power plants. "

Germany has also decided to give up nuclear energy.

[Celerity]

Interesting response f0xx, thanks for the read

[mya]

[edit]Also, Mya, that link to the site is a bit wrong in one of it's statements:

"So far, only one country in Europe, Lithuania, has given up nuclear energy following EU demands to shut down Soviet-built nuclear power plants. "

Germany has also decided to give up nuclear energy.

It's Russia Today, I expect some ... in-corrections. I use it mainly to bypass western propaganda and get another point of view.

On the vote, can't you vote in blank ?

In my country we also have many times half the population not voting for elections, especially during sunny weekends. But I find that very unpatriotic.

I always vote, even if I have to vote blank. But I know some people do not vote blank because of voting fraud.

On the removal of Nuclear and resorting to green energy. I think people are a bit misled about what green energy can do.

In my country we had a drive for green energy which ended with huge private wind parks being built, with heavy state subsidy. Which included a set minimum price at which the state grid would buy wind energy.

Since wind is not always on, we still need a huge capacity of Coal and Gas power plants to meet demand. Of course the owners of this plants don't want to have capacity they do not use, since it's almost never need, so the state has to subside this extra capacity.

Which ended with very high prices for electrical energy in my country.

Excluding nuclear radiation, nuclear plants are still the best way to produce cheep electrical energy. And cheep electrical energy is a must have for the industry of a nation.

With industry being the motor that drives a nation economy. Not services...

[f0xx]

And cheep electrical energy is a must have for the industry of a nation.

With industry being the motor that drives a nation economy. Not services...

I totally agree with that, but as I said, there are other, less expensive ways.