- The Sofia Echo
- Expat in Bulgaria
- Propertywise Bulgaria
- About Us
- Sitemap
- Sales Points
- Advertise
- Email Bulletins
- Home
advertisement
Sun, Nov 22 2009
Nuclear negotiations
GROUNDWORK: For the past nine months, sub-contractors have been clearing the concrete poured on the Belene site in the 1980s.
Two successive Bulgarian cabinets have pushed ahead with efforts to resurrect communist-era plans for a second nuclear power station, but the fate of the planned plant now lies in the hands of the next government, media reports have claimed.
The contract with Russia’s Atomstroyexport, which will provide the twin 1000MW reactors for the Belene power station, stipulated a fixed cost of just less than four billion euro, but allowed for adjustment in line with inflation. The precise amount, however, has now become the subject of protracted negotiations.
Bulgaria’s deal with Russia, finally signed in January 2008, more than a year after Atomstroyexport was picked to build the power plant, reportedly said that the figure would be the average inflation in the European Union, as calculated by the bloc’s statistics bureau Eurostat. Atomstroyexport, however, now wants Russian inflation to be used instead for all equipment made in Russia, Dnevnik daily reported on May 28, quoting sources familiar with the talks.
Negotiations have reached a stalemate and the option of scrapping the project altogether has been discussed in earnest, the newspaper said. German utility RWE, picked to buy 49 per cent in the company that will build the power station, is committed to Belene, but has made its participation conditional on settling all the financial details by mid-2010.
Any deal before the Parliament elections in July was unlikely, Dnevnik said. The outcome of the polls remains uncertain, as does Belene’s future.
Sofia mayor Boiko Borissov’s party, the Citizens for the European Development of Bulgaria (abbreviated as GERB in Bulgarian), leads in the opinion polls. Presenting the party’s economic policy plans, Borissov said on June 1 that GERB would endorse the project only if it was fully funded by private investors. The right-wing Blue Coalition, seen as a likely ally in a GERB-led ruling coalition, has been even more scathing in its assessment, saying the project had too many environmental question marks and that it would further deepen Bulgaria’s dependence on Russian energy resources.
Funding lifeline
Delaying construction work on Belene by a year or two would not only increase costs by 20 to 25 per cent, but also result in about a billion euro of lost revenue, the head of the Government committee overseeing the project, Ivan Atanassov, told an international forum on nuclear energy on May 28. The project is already nine to 11 months behind schedule, he said.
Preparatory work on the Belene site has been underway since September 2008, funded by a 250 million euro bridge loan from BNP Paribas and 300 million leva from the Government. The European Commission is yet to rule whether the Cabinet’s cash injection was justified under the EU’s state aid rules.
BNP Paribas has also been retained to secure private funding for the project, but the lender has had little success in its task, hampered by the continued cash squeeze. Concerns about the projects viability and environmental impact have not helped Belene’s case. Bulgaria’s power grid operator NEK, which owns 51 per cent in the future power station, can extend BNP Paribas’ mid-2009 deadline, which RWE has already agreed to, Atanassov was quoted as saying.
The Russian government remains the only willing lender. In addition to a 3.8 billion euro export loan now being negotiated, state-owned electricity trader Inter RAO was one of the companies with which RWE was negotiating the sale of 24.5 per cent in the project.
Analysts have explained Russia’s eagerness to fund Belene with Kremlin’s desire to showcase the third-generation VVER reactors in the EU just as the nuclear power revival in the bloc is picking up steam.
For Bulgarian politicians, Belene is the best opportunity to reclaim its previous place as the biggest electricity exporter on the Balkans, or so it seems. Bulgaria lost that status when it was forced to shut down four units at the Kozloduy nuclear station, with a total capacity of 1760MW, before it could join the EU.
But some analysts have questioned such ambitious undertakings, given that other countries in the region have also announced plans to expand their power generation capacity, including Romania and Turkey, who want to build new nuclear reactors.
The contract with Russia’s Atomstroyexport, which will provide the twin 1000MW reactors for the Belene power station, stipulated a fixed cost of just less than four billion euro, but allowed for adjustment in line with inflation. The precise amount, however, has now become the subject of protracted negotiations.
Bulgaria’s deal with Russia, finally signed in January 2008, more than a year after Atomstroyexport was picked to build the power plant, reportedly said that the figure would be the average inflation in the European Union, as calculated by the bloc’s statistics bureau Eurostat. Atomstroyexport, however, now wants Russian inflation to be used instead for all equipment made in Russia, Dnevnik daily reported on May 28, quoting sources familiar with the talks.
Negotiations have reached a stalemate and the option of scrapping the project altogether has been discussed in earnest, the newspaper said. German utility RWE, picked to buy 49 per cent in the company that will build the power station, is committed to Belene, but has made its participation conditional on settling all the financial details by mid-2010.
Any deal before the Parliament elections in July was unlikely, Dnevnik said. The outcome of the polls remains uncertain, as does Belene’s future.
Sofia mayor Boiko Borissov’s party, the Citizens for the European Development of Bulgaria (abbreviated as GERB in Bulgarian), leads in the opinion polls. Presenting the party’s economic policy plans, Borissov said on June 1 that GERB would endorse the project only if it was fully funded by private investors. The right-wing Blue Coalition, seen as a likely ally in a GERB-led ruling coalition, has been even more scathing in its assessment, saying the project had too many environmental question marks and that it would further deepen Bulgaria’s dependence on Russian energy resources.
Funding lifeline
Delaying construction work on Belene by a year or two would not only increase costs by 20 to 25 per cent, but also result in about a billion euro of lost revenue, the head of the Government committee overseeing the project, Ivan Atanassov, told an international forum on nuclear energy on May 28. The project is already nine to 11 months behind schedule, he said.
Preparatory work on the Belene site has been underway since September 2008, funded by a 250 million euro bridge loan from BNP Paribas and 300 million leva from the Government. The European Commission is yet to rule whether the Cabinet’s cash injection was justified under the EU’s state aid rules.
BNP Paribas has also been retained to secure private funding for the project, but the lender has had little success in its task, hampered by the continued cash squeeze. Concerns about the projects viability and environmental impact have not helped Belene’s case. Bulgaria’s power grid operator NEK, which owns 51 per cent in the future power station, can extend BNP Paribas’ mid-2009 deadline, which RWE has already agreed to, Atanassov was quoted as saying.
The Russian government remains the only willing lender. In addition to a 3.8 billion euro export loan now being negotiated, state-owned electricity trader Inter RAO was one of the companies with which RWE was negotiating the sale of 24.5 per cent in the project.
Analysts have explained Russia’s eagerness to fund Belene with Kremlin’s desire to showcase the third-generation VVER reactors in the EU just as the nuclear power revival in the bloc is picking up steam.
For Bulgarian politicians, Belene is the best opportunity to reclaim its previous place as the biggest electricity exporter on the Balkans, or so it seems. Bulgaria lost that status when it was forced to shut down four units at the Kozloduy nuclear station, with a total capacity of 1760MW, before it could join the EU.
But some analysts have questioned such ambitious undertakings, given that other countries in the region have also announced plans to expand their power generation capacity, including Romania and Turkey, who want to build new nuclear reactors.
-
Print
-
Send via email
- Translate to
-
Share:
Comments
Write comment
Power play
Russian loan could save Belene nuclear station, but only if Bulgaria pledges state support for the expensive project
Earthquake shakes parts of Bulgaria, Romania
Seismologists register incident as 5.3 on Richter scale, with an epicentre in the region of Vrancea in Romania.
Bulgaria in talks for Russian funding for Belene nuclear station
Bulgaria has started negotiations with Russia to draw a 3.8 billion euro loan for the construction of the Belene nuclear power plant
More in this category
Bulgarian MPs resurrect proposal to raise spirits excise
Strong public opposition to price hikes prompted Prime Minister Boiko Borissov to axe the Finance Ministry proposal to increase the excise duty on spirits, but MPs have put it back on the agenda.
Back to the future
Bulgaria’s Cabinet seeks to reverse recent changes in the telecommunications sector
At a crossroads, again
Kremikovtzi’s prospects for a recovery plan appear increasingly distant
Cash or card?
Bulgarians are getting the hang of debit and credit cards, MasterCard says
Bulgarian telecom Spectrum Net acquires local peer Orbitel
The two telecoms, both set up to challenge former fixed-line state monopoly BTC, will merge operations and expect to report 20 million euro in revenue and a gross profit of five million euro in 2010.
© 2000-2009, Sofia Echo Media Ltd.
Web Design by RIZN
Sofia Echo Media is part of the Economedia Group.
The news and information content on this website is provided by our editorial team and is copyrighted.
Any unauthorised reproduction or use of it is strictly forbidden. Reproduction of this website's content is permitted only
with prior written permission from the Editor-in-Chief, should be propertly acredited and provide an active link back to our site.
Comments posted by the website's visitors are independent of the editorial materials and do not represent the views of sofiaecho.com.
Sofia Echo Media cannot be held responsible for the statements contained in visitor comments.
The percentаge change in the shares' prices are based on the price of the last transaction of the current session compared to the
price of the last transaction of the previous session. Bulgarian Stock Exchange data is not real-time, but updated every 15 minutes,
and should not be used as a basis for decisions about buying or selling stock options.
- Economedia Group portfolio:
- In Bulgarian:
-
Business:
Капитал,
Кариери,
Пазари,
Ho Re Mag,
Регал,
Stroitelstvo.info,
Одит,
Foton.bg,
Klikshop.bg
- News: Дневник, Re:TV, Европа, Foreign Policy - България
- IT: IDG.BG, Computerworld, PC World, CIO, Networkworld
- Entertainment: Бакхус, Едно, pipe.bg
-
In English:
The Sofia Echo, Property Wise Bulgaria, Expat In Bulgaria
I will prefer to ignore the first comment,but you are very welcome - on the second one ;-)
"By the way my IP is blocked by you friend Alex Bivol ( I am betting he is Moldavian)"
Sorry he's not my friend , I never heard of him...
I'm from Baia Mare, Noth-West Romania, close to the Ukranian border and I've been to Bulgaria this year (Nisipurile de Aur - Golden Sands) and I loved it, It was far better then any romania sea side resort and most probably I'll be there next year too :)
@Bulgarian:
"The Kozloduy Nuclear Power Plant is a nuclear power plant in Bulgaria situated 200 km north of Sofia and 5 km east of Kozloduy, a town on the Danube river, near the border with Romania. It is the country's only nuclear power plant. The construction of the plant began on 6 April 1970."
So the plant was built in 1970 and the operations started in 1974.
about the safy concerns:
"The country still exports electricity thanks to the two remaining reactors of the six that once ran in Kozloduy. Before they were shuttered, the two older reactors at the site were so dodgy that they were included in the list of the ten most dangerous reactors in the world. Closed in 2006, the two 440-megawatt reactors are from the Soviet era."
Dude Kozloduy was in poor conditions, the Franch one and the Dutch one are maintained well.
But this wasn't the point... you commpered Cernavoda with Kozlodui... and I tried to show you that Cernavoda is kinda new commpered to Kozloduy and is using the latest technology
"AECL – so why Canada stop using AECL technology in Ontario and is considering Russian design??? " this is bulgarian BS, exept a few un-democratic countries (Iran, Syria, China etc) and former communist countries no one want's russian made civilian neuclar techonlogy.
You think you don't know what you're talking about, I guess your trying to be a patriot and to suport this project because Bulgaria will befenit economically (and I understand you) and Russia. But the most important should be your safty this is what I'm trying to say to you. Why kissing Russia's a$$ so much when clearly is not in your interest...if I'm not whrong Bulgaria was compensate by the Eu for Kozloduy.
Build the Belene plant with european companies and maybe will get EU money and get a safer techonolgy (you might get some big money because a nuclar plant is very important for Bulgaria and for Europe - cutting the CO2 emmisions)... why getting into debts to russia for an un-safe plant?
@Dani;I can compare every reactor.
Can you please show the internet source for you claims - Please!?
How do you know that Kozloduy is a time bomb?
1974
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf40.html
France 7 reactors 1974 - operational
The Netherlands 1 reactor 1973 – operational
Bulgaria 1 reactor 1974 – closed
AECL – so why Canada stop using AECL technology in Ontario and is considering Russian design???
We all know that Cernavoda is a time bomb and is much closer to Vrancea mounting than Kolodyi and Belene ( Belene was a success for the French energy imperialism – I don’t thing it will be build – Paribas and EDF a winners)
By the way my IP is blocked by you friend Alex Bivol ( I am betting he is Moldavian)
@The same Bulgarian: you can't compare Cernavoda with Kosloduy, we use canadian technology (one of the best and safest in the world) and the plant is not that old (first reactor was finished in 1996 the second one was finished in 2007 - Kosloduy was built in 1974).The 3rd and 4th reactors from Cernavoda will be bild using the latest CANDU reactors..
We all know that Kosloduy was like a time bomb, one of the most dangerous rectors in the world (was included in Top10 by the US United States Department of Energy).
About Belene plant.. i don't mind building it, but we don't want to be built with some russian techonolgies that are not approved by the European Commision. This is not a safe techonolgy. We don't want a new Cernobal next to our border.
Build the plant with a safe techonology and no one in Romania (exept Greenpeace) will give a damn about it.
This comment has been removed by the moderator because it contained .
Romania – looks like Greenpeace wasn’t active enough (I miss to inform the wide public that AREVA is also own by the French government) if the NPP Cherna voda #1 and #2 are operational!
To me are important the results and the facts – and the facts are that Bulgaria is Minus (-) 4 nuclear reactors – which means less money for Bulgaria (in total lost revenue for Bulgaria from closing the 4 reactors before their original life span of 30 years of operation is US$ 655.2 million dolars – for example the life span of NPP Borssele is 40 years – 25% longer than the Bulgarian NPP.
For France and Netherlands, I saw the statistics; I can say only this – lousy job Greenpeace – these two countries a lagging behind Bulgaria on all points.
Bulgarians in Greenpeace – who are this Bulgarians?
If you mean Meglena Kuneva and Solomon Passy – they are the ones who signed for closing of the four reactors – I can say only good job Meglena good job Solomon - your good job cost Bulgaria US$ 655.2 million dollars.
Patrick Moore – the co-founder of Greenpeace – he is smart enough to do the math and realize that for the moment nuclear energy doesn’t have alternative – I sad for the moment – the next 20-30 years.
@Bulgarian - Greenpeace is active in Romania for an energy policy that includes phase-out of Cernavoda. Greenpeace was the organisation that published the dangers of tritium emissions from Cernavoda as well as of the inherent weaknesses of the used CANDU 6 reactors.
Also in France and the Netherlands, Greenpeace is propagating an alternative energy future that includes a phase-out of nuclear energy. More information you can find on http://www.energyblueprint.info.
Greenpeace is not a "Western" organisation, but an organisation active in and run by people from all over the globe, including Bulgarians.
This comment has been removed by the moderator because it contained .
@Jan Haverkamp
Taking out the populist rhetoric (good for the average western European consumption) here;
Netherlands and France are the ones who don’t meet the targets for 2020 (and beyond) and that’s duly shown by the statistics of Energy Information Administration - EIA .
Point ??? – you don’t have any point here – Romania just finish building of Cerna voda NPP # 2 reactor and is 300km close to Vrancea mounting than the site of Belene.
It is exactly other way around here – you seems to miss purposely the reality here – and I can give you few reasons why you are missing the reality - Areva and the French investments in the Romanian NPP Cherna voda, Borssele NPP ( Bulgaria was forced to close 4 units younger than you Nuclear reactor).
You are talking export again – don’t mess with our economy – you better shut down NPP Cherna voda – right now.
Sound energy policy – I like to be lead by example – so far Bulgaria is un example for France and Netherlands – I will like to see you closing all off you nuclear reactors – than we can close NPP Kozloduy and NPP Belene.
@Bulgarian - Greenpeace is active not only in Bulgaria, but also in all the other countries you have mentioned and beyond. Global warming, energy security and sustainable development are not issues that can be solved by one country, nor by one country at the time, but have to be addressed together on global and European level.
Bulgaria has targets to meet in 2020 (and beyond) according to European law, but also morally, like every other country in the EU.
Concerning Belene, you seem to miss the point here. Bulgarian politicians create the myth of Bulgaria loosing its leading position as electricity exporter in the region in order to argue for the construction of a nuclear power station in a seismic active area. Bulgaria has no solution for nuclear waste, Bulgaria misses the capital to have the power station safely build. Bulgaria does not need Belene. Creating mythology is nice for the long winter evenings, but should have no place in determining a sound energy policy - and certainly not in games with dangerous technologies like nuclear power.
One comparison between Netherlands, France and Bulgaria for the period from 1998 to 2006 on the CO2 issue.
According to; http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/country/index.cfm
Carbon Dioxide Emissions (Million Metric Tons of CO2) Total from Consumption of Fossil Fuels (Emissions from the consumption of petroleum, natural gas, and coal and the flaring of natural gas.)
Netherlands - from 242 to 260.45,increase of +7.6% CO2 emissions
France - from 409.8 to 417.8, increase of +2%
Bulgaria - from 49.9 to 48.9 decrease of -2%. In summary Bulgaria is a leader comparing to Netherlands and France – my suggestion to Greenpeace is to focus on this two West European countries, otherwise it will show me that Greenpeace has some hidden agenda regarding the last surviving competitor to EDF in this part of the world.
Have a nice day
@Jan Haverkamp
On the export issue;
Why you so bother what our export is – there is market we export – what is you problem – you want to export instead of Bulgaria?
You are trying to tell us how to run our economies – the communist times are gone Jan Haverkamp – leave with it.
To the moderator – I have no problem that you are tolerating every arrogant foreigner on this site - just so that you thing that it is unnoticed.
Mr. Haverkamp
I will use you source of info UCTE and http://www.eia.doe.gov.
EDF (French government holds 85% as of the end of 2008) from 1998 – 2007 Installed capacity – increase +2% [ From 109.9 to 111.9( GWe )] – that is where is the tricky part – EDF owns Power plants in Austria, Belgum, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Nederland’s, Poland ,Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, UK, Africa, Asia, Americas.
Bulgaria ( NEK) from 1998-2007 Installed capacity – diminish -10% [ From 12.4 to 11.1 (GWe)] – NEK doesn’t own Power plants out of Bulgaria.
Czech Republic – increase +35% [ From 61.5 to 82.9 (GWe)]
Nuclear Energy;
EDF (France) – 78% nuclear energy from the national production.
Czech Republic – 33% nuclear energy the national production.
Bulgaria – 36 % nuclear energy the national production.
Hydro and renewable.
EDF (France) – 14% clean energy.
Czech Republic – 3.6% clean energy
Bulgaria – 13.3% clean energy.
Carbon Dioxide Emissions
France – World Rank #15 – 417.75 Million Metric tons of (CO2)
Czech Republic – World Rank #36 – 116.3 Million Metric tons of (CO2)
Bulgaria – World Rank #62 – 48.94 Million Metric tones of (CO2)
Mr. Haverkamp – get to the Bulgarian standards.
A word of advice – first fix you own country.
To the moderator – can you please live all the comments without deleting?
@Bulgarian. The basis for the calculations are the statistics of the UCTE. For im- and exports, i used the physical im- and export maps (exchange) on:
http://www.ucte.org/resources/dataportal/statistics/exchange/
This comment has been removed by the moderator because it contained .
Mr. Haverkamp
Can you publish in the internet the bases ( the calculations) of you statements – Please!?
Bulgaria never lost its status as biggest electricity exporter on the Balkans. Also in 2008, Bulgarian electricity exports were larger than the second largest exporter, Romania. According to the European grid regulator UCTE, Bulgaria exported in 2008 net 5244 GWh - up from 4463 GWh in 2007, whereas Romania exported in 2008 net 3600 GWh (2007: 2400 GWh).
Neither Romania nor Bulgaria need new nuclear power. What they do need is increased energy efficiency and more renewable energy sources to replace their fossil and ageing nuclear capacity. This combination can be implemented fast and could help both countries to meet or even overshoot their 2020 greenhouse gas emission targets. Nuclear power is too expensive, too dangerous and there are wide spread doubts that Belene could be finished before 2020, if ever.