|
|
By Kristina Vilimaite (ECOLOGIA-Baltic Office) High standards of nuclear safety throughout the European continent are a top priority for the European Union[i] and this issue is especially important in the context of EU enlargement. One of the necessary conditions for Lithuania to become a full and equal member of EU is the requirement by the European Commission to close down both reactors of the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant (INPP) at the earliest practical date. The Ignalina NPP is located in northeastern Lithuania, close to the borders with Latvia and Belarus. It is a two unit RBMK-1500 reactor which belongs to the category of graphite moderated, channel-type, boiled water reactors.[ii] The thermal power output of one unit is 4800 MW, the electrical power capacity is 1500 MW. The first unit was commissioned at the end of 1983, the second – in August 1987 and according to the initial project they can be operated until 2013 and 2017 respectively. There were many additional safety improvements applied in recent years which have been financed by bilateral and multilateral support programmes to ensure that the Ignalina NPP satisfies international nuclear safety requirements and VATESI (the Lithuanian Safety Nuclear Power Inspectorate) is confident that currently the INPP meets the safety requirements and can be operated.[iii] But according to the Nuclear Safety Account Agreement[iv] reactors of INPP should be closed before their fuel channels are due for replacement – after that process operation would be less safe. Another weakness of the reactors’ design is a lack of the last physical barrier (complete and adequate reactor containment) required in Western European reactors. Following negotiations between the European Commission and the Lithuanian government about the closure of these non-upgradeable reactors, the Seimas (Parliament of Lithuania) adopted the National Energy Strategy in October 1999 which includes the decision to close down Unit 1 before year 2005. The Special Law on Decommissioning of the Ignalina NPP was approved by the Seimas on 2 May 2000. The conditions and precise date of the closure of Unit 2 will be decided in the upgraded National Energy Strategy prepared in the year 2004. Currently the Ignalina NPP is the main source of electricity in Lithuania. Over the period of years 1995 - 2000 it has generated 80-85% of the total electricity.[v]Total installed capacity of Lithuania’s power plants (thermal – 43%, nuclear – 42%, hydro – 15%)[vi]exceeds the present domestic requirement by almost three times. It seems that even after the closure of both Ignalina NPP units, Lithuania could produce more electricity than it is needed for national purposes. But the main problem with the closure of Ignalina NPP is economic; significant investments are needed to start the full operation of the conventional electricity plants. They should be extensively upgraded to fulfill the most recent international requirements of economic efficiency, reliability, conservation of environment and improvement of management. The INPP generates power at a cost ~50% lower then alternative electric power sources,[vii] so because of expensive fuel for thermal plants there will be an increase of costs for electricity generation. Currently users are paying higher prices than the actual cost of electricity generation. Lithuanian households spent proportionally more of their income on their energy needs than people do in the EU countries. Nuclear energy is relatively cheap, but to the price should be added costs for the future decommissioning and radioactive waste management. The fund for decommissioning of Ignalina NPP is not sufficient, so the closure of Ignalina NPP heavily depends on financing from multilateral and bilateral donors. The Lithuanian energy system is interconnected with Latvia, Belarus and Russia (Kaliningrad region). However, there are no lines connecting the Lithuanian energy system with Central European nations. The National Energy Strategy emphasises the need for changes in the structure of the national electricity grid. Therefore, the efforts are being made to connect the Lithuanian and Polish power networks. This would make it possible to integrate Lithuania into the European power market. For the development of the energy sector and decommissioning of Ignalina NPP various institutions are created. Currently Lietuvos Energija AB owns a monopoly right of electricity transmission and distribution in Lithuania. Steps are being taken towards the restructuring of this company. Non-core activities are already separated from the company and according to the law on Restructuring AB Lietuvos Energija (adopted on 18 May 2000) it will be divided in several companies that will be engaged in electricity generation, transmission and distribution. Ignalina NPP is controlled by the State Nuclear Power Safety Inspectorate (VATESI). The prices for the electricity are set by the National Control Commission for Energy Pricing and Energy Activities. Other institutions that are influential in the energy sector are the Energy Agency, Energy State Inspectorate, Nuclear Energy and Radioactive Waste Management Department under the Ministry of Economy, also such research and educational institutions as the Lithuanian Energy Institute and the Energy Efficiency Centre. Lithuania from Soviet times inherited rather modern energy utilities but at the same time economy which is inefficient in terms of energy use. While having dirt-cheap energy there were no stimuli to use fuel and energy efficiently. Increasing prices of primary energy sources and the loss of the former markets in the East, as well as other factors, resulted in a marked decline in industries and in some areas of agriculture. The demand for energy and its generation was decreasing considerably until the year 1995.[viii] But even according to worst prognosis about the development of the economy, there will be a need for more electricity energy by the year 2020 than in the year 1990, and if the development will be fast, this level will be reached in the year 2007.[ix] Lithuania has limited alternative power resources and anyway, introduction of new generating capacities is not a pressing matter at the time. So developments in the spheres of energy conservation and alternative resources use heavily depends on financial support from international community side. Footnotes [i] Regular Report from the Commission on Progress towards Accession by each of the candidate countries. European Commission. October 13, 1999. [ii] Handbook about the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant. Lithuanian Energy Institute, Kaunas: 1997. – 57 p. [iii] Kutas, Saulius. “Prior to Shutting down Unit 1 and Commencing Work Related with Decommissioning We Need to Enlist the Support of Western Countries”// Energy News 2(20)/2000. – P. 21. [iv] The Nuclear Safety Account Grant Agreement was signed in 1994 between the Government of Lithuania, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the Ignalina NPP. The Bank gave 33 mln ECU for nuclear safety assurance, Lithuania has signed not to replace fuel canals. Funding for the NSA comes from G7 and other countries. [v] National Energy Strategy. Republic of Lithuania. Approved on 5 October 1999. [vi] Lithuanian Energy Sector Statistics. Lietuvos Energija AB, Vilnius: 2000. [vii] A Brief Overview of Ignalina NPP Safety Issues. [viii] http://www.lpc.lt/images/gamyba.gif [ix] See footnote v. November 2000 Last updated: March 2001 Please make comments & report problems to the Webmaster |
