A Thesis Submitted to the Department of Environmental Sciences And

CEU eTD Collection

A thesissubmittedtotheDepartmentofEnvironmentalSciencesandPolicy Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus Central EuropeanUniversityinpartfulfilmentofthe Degree ofMasterScience Vaida PILIBAITYTE May, 2010 Budapest

CEU eTD Collection University ofManchester(UnitedKingdom). (Greece), CentralEuropeanUniversity(Hungary),Lund(Sweden)andthe Policy andManagement(MESPOM)jointlyoperatedbytheUniversityofAegean successful completionoftheErasmusMundusMasterscourseinEnvironmentalSciences, This thesisissubmittedinfulfilmentoftheMasterSciencedegreeawardedasaresult MESPOM Sciences, PolicyandManagement Erasmus MundusMastersCourseinEnvironmental Supported bytheEuropeanCommission’sErasmusMundus Programme

CEU eTD Collection European University. available fromtheHeadofDepartmentEnvironmentalSciencesandPolicy,Central Further informationontheconditionsunderwhichdisclosuresandexploitationmaytakeplaceis Central EuropeanUniversity,Budapest. Pilibaityte, V.2010. (3) Forbibliographicandreferencepurposesthisthesisshouldbereferredtoas: University, whichwillprescribethetermsandconditionsofanysuchagreement. may notbemadeavailableforusebythirdpartieswithoutthewrittenpermissionof vested intheCentralEuropeanUniversity,subjecttoanyprioragreementcontrary,and (2) Theownershipofanyintellectualpropertyrightswhichmaybedescribedinthisthesisis Author. accordance withsuchinstructionsmaynotbemadewithoutthepermission(inwriting)of must formpartofanysuchcopiesmade.Further(byprocess)madein the CentralEuropeanUniversityLibrary.DetailsmaybeobtainedfromLibrarian.Thispage of extracts,maybemadeonlyinaccordancewithinstructionsgivenbytheAuthorandlodged (1) CopyrightintextofthisthesisrestswiththeAuthor.Copies(byanyprocess)eitherfull,or Notes oncopyrightandtheownershipofintellectualpropertyrights: Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus.

Master ofSciencethesis, iii

CEU eTD Collection for anotherdegreeorqualificationofthisanyotheruniversityinstitutelearning. No portionoftheworkreferredtointhisthesishasbeensubmittedsupportanapplication Author’s declaration

Vaida PILIBAITYTE iv

CEU eTD Collection Keywords: national debateonnuclearenergy. misinterpretations ofglobaltrendsandknowledgegapsseemtooccurinbothtypesthe constraining effectonanationaldiscussionnuclearenergy.Asresult,significant political andcorporateinterestscoupledwithunspecializedreportinghaveauniversally challenge dominantnarrativesthaninthetechnocraticdebatetakingplaceBelarus.However, The studyconcludesthatinpoliticaldiscourseslikeLithuaniatherearemoreopportunitiesto about risksandlackofpublicinvolvement. national anti-nuclearenergycoalitionsmirrorthoseofglobaldiscourseandarevocal and reliable,downplayinguncertaintiespresentintheglobaldiscourse.Thestorylinesof energy discoursecoalitionsinbothcountriesutterglobalstorylinespromotingnuclearascheap change isemphasizedinternationally,whilegeopoliticsmoreimportantnationally.Pro-nuclear The resultsshowthatenergysecurityiscentralforbothglobalandnationaldiscourse.Climate and coalitionsfoundintheglobaldiscourse. and Belarus.Theresultsofthisanalysiswereinterpretedcomparingthemwithsimilarstorylines 2006-2009. Pro-nuclearandanti-nucleardiscoursecoalitionshavebeendescribedinLithuania storylines andcoalitions.Nationaldiscourseswerestudiedfrom157mediatextspublishedin Discourse analysisconductedinthisstudyreliedonHajer’sanalyticalconcepts–discursive Belarus isledbyanautocraticregime. dependent onenergysuppliesfromRussia,butLithuaniaistheEuropeanUnionmember,while European countriesincontrastwiththeglobaldiscourse.BothformerSovietstatesare This workdocumentsnuclearenergydiscoursesintwoneighbouringpro-nuclearEastern options indifferentcountries. as geopolitics.Discoursestudiesareemergingawaytoexamineapproachesonenergysecurity momentum, littlecross-culturalanalysisexistsaboutthenationaldriversfornuclearpowersuch After yearsofstagnation,nuclearenergyisbelievedtoexperiencearevival.Despiteglobal Lithuania andBelarus. Vaida PILIBAITYTEforthedegreeofMasterScienceandentitled: ABSTRACT OFTHESIS Belarus,democracy,discourse, environment,Lithuania,media,nuclearenergy, policy THE CENTRALEUROPEANUNIVERSITY submittedby: Month andyearofsubmission:May,2010 Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesin v

CEU eTD Collection support notonlymadethisjourneypossible,butalsoenjoyableandveryrewarding. advisor professorAlehCherp.Hispersonalcommitment,inspiringconversations,guidanceand Inga andAurimas.Andfinally,IamgreatlyindebtedtotheMESPOMcoordinatormy my assistantresearchadvisorsJessicaJewellandAušraRimait swimming, bikingandespeciallywalkingonlineMESPOMpeople.Manythanksalsogoto in environment.Thesepasttwoyearswouldhavebeenverydifferentwithoutthecooking, friends attheLithuanianNationalRadioforencouragingandallowingmetopursuemyinterest for theendlessinspirationtoAudraandRytis.Iwouldalsolikethankmycolleagues This thesiswouldhavenotbeencompletedwithoutthesupportfrommanypeople.Iowealot ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ė . Ioweparticularlytomyfamily,

CEU eTD Collection 2 1 Abbreviations...... List oftables...... List offigures...... TABLE OFCONTENTS 3 5 4

4.3 4.2 2.3 2.2 2.1 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 4.1 2.4 3.1 4.4 5.1 3.4 3.3 3.2 ICUS N OIYMKN ...... 11 ...... DISCOURSE ANDPOLICY-MAKING ...... 1 INTRODUCTION GLOBAL NUCLEARENER EHDLGCLFAEOK...... 29 METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK NATIONAL NUCLEAR EN 4.3.1 2.3.1 3.1.1 4.3.2 3.1.2 4.3.3 3.1.3

lbldsusv trlnsadcaiin...... 41 Global discursivestorylinesandcoalitions...... 39 Global discourseactorsandrecurringthemes...... eosrcigeeg icuss...... 17 Deconstructing energydiscourses...... 14 Discursive struggle,power,policyandpublicsphere...... 11 ...... Discourse studyasasocio-politicalstance Outline...... Scope andlimitations ...... Methodology ...... Aims andobjectives Research background...... Global discoursecontext...... umr n ocuin...... 27 ...... Summary andconclusion aacleto ...... Data collection umr n ocuin...... 49 ...... Summary andconclusion ihai ...... Lithuania umr n ocuin...... 35 ...... Summary andconclusion Discourse analysis...... Analytical categories......

r-ula icus olto ...... 41 ...... Pro-nuclear discoursecoalition ula icuss rmteCl a ociaecag...... 18 Nuclear discourses:fromtheColdWartoclimatechange...... otx ecito...... 30 Context description...... nincerdsorecaiin...... 44 Anti-nuclear discoursecoalition...... lbldsore...... 3 ...... Global discourse oeaedsorecaiin...... 47 Moderate discoursecoalition...... ainldsore ...... 31 ...... National discourses RYDSORE ...... 55 ERGY DISCOURSES YDSORE...... 37 GY DISCOURSE

...... x ...... ix ...... xi ...... 8 ...... 56 ...... 29 ...... 6 ... 34 ...... 33 ...... 8 ...... 6 .....1 .37 0

vii

CEU eTD Collection

...... Personal communication Bibliography...... Appendix 6 7

7.5 7.4 7.3 7.2 7.1 5.3 5.2 6.1 5.4 6.2 6.3 OPRTV NLSSADDSUSO...... 109 COMPARATIVE ANALYSISANDDISCUSSION...... OCUIN N EOMNAIN ...... 119 CONCLUSIONS ANDRECOMMENDATIONS 5.1.1 5.1.2 5.1.3 5.1.4 5.3.2 5.3.3 5.3.4 6.1.1 6.1.2 6.1.3 6.1.4 6.2.1 6.2.2 6.3.1 6.3.2

Recommendations...... 121 ...... Comparative nuclearenergydiscourseanalysis 120 Belarusian nuclearenergydiscourseanalysis...... 120 ...... Lithuanian nuclearenergydiscourseanalysis 119 Global nuclearenergydiscourseanalysis...... eauindsorecnet...... 8 Belarusian discoursecontext...... Belarus...... otxulzn lblsoyie...... 109 Contextualizing globalstorylines...... 106 ...... Summary andconclusion ruettv taeis...... 1 ...... Argumentative strategies h oeo ei ...... The roleofmedia

ihaindsorecnet...... 56 Lithuanian discoursecontext...... ihaindsoreatr n eurn hms...... 61 Lithuanian discourseactorsandrecurringthemes...... icriesoyie n oltosi ihai ...... 64 ...... Discursive storylinesandcoalitionsinLithuania umr ffnig...... 78 Summary offindings...... eauindsoreatr n eurn hms...... 88 Belarusian discourseactorsandrecurringthemes...... icriesoyie n oltosi eau ...... 91 ...... Discursive storylinesandcoalitionsinBelarus umr ffnig...... 102 Summary offindings...... rbesadesd...... 109 Problems addressed...... utfcto o raantncereeg ...... 109 ...... Justification fororagainstnuclearenergy ik novd...... 1 ...... Risks involved osrit n rset...... 113 Constraints andprospects...... ihai ...... Lithuania Belarus...... ihai ...... Lithuania Belarus...... 141 ...... 125 ...... 83 ...... 139 ...... 116 ...... 118 ...... 117 .... . 115 ... . 117 ... .123 12 14 3

viii

CEU eTD Collection iue51Eitn n lne ula lnsi ihai,Blrs usaadPln.... 55 Figure 5.1ExistingandplannednuclearplantsinLithuania,Belarus,RussiaPoland...... Figure 3.2Discourseanalyticalcategories...... Figure 3.1Researchstages 16 Figure 2.2Linksbetweenlanguage,discourseandpolicychange...... Figure 2.1Approachestodiscourseanalysis LIST OFFIGURES ...... 29 ...... 34 .... 12

CEU eTD Collection al . ula nrytee etrn nitrainladntoa et nlzd.... 110 ...... Table 6.1Nuclearenergythemesfeaturingininternationalandnationaltextsanalyzed 105 Table 5.12StorylinesrelatingtoconstraintsandprospectsfornuclearenergyinBelarus...... 105 Table 5.11StorylinesrelatingtonuclearenergyrisksinBelarus...... 104 ...... Table 5.10StorylinesrelatingtojustificationforandagainstnuclearenergyinBelarus 103 Table 5.9StorylinesrelatingtoproblemsnuclearenergycanorcannotaddressinBelarus... 90 Table 5.8ActorsandthemestheydiscussinBelarusianmedia,numberoftimesquoted...... 89 Table 5.7NuclearenergythemesfeaturingintheanalyzedBelarusianmedia...... 82 ...... Table 5.6StorylinesrelatingtoconstraintsandprospectsfornuclearenergyinLithuania 81 Table 5.5StorylinesrelatingtojustificationforandagainstnuclearenergyinLithuania...... 80 Table 5.4StorylinesrelatingtonuclearenergyrisksinLithuania...... 79 . Table 5.3StorylinesrelatingtoproblemsnuclearenergycanorcannotaddressinLithuania 63 ...... Table 5.2ActorsandthemestheydiscussinLithuanianmedia,numberoftimesquoted 62 ...... Table 5.1NuclearenergythemesfeaturingintheLithuanianmediaanalyzed 54 Table 4.6Storylinesrelatingtoconstraintsandprospectsfornuclearenergyworldwide...... 53 ...... Table 4.5Storylinesrelatingtonuclearenergyrisksworldwide 52 ...... Table 4.4Storylinesrelatingtojustificationforandagainstnuclearenergyworldwide 51 Table 4.3Storylinesrelatingtoproblemsnuclearenergycanorcannotaddressworldwide.... 41 Table 4.2Nuclearenergythemesfeaturingininternationalpublicationsanalyzed...... 40 Table 4.1Profilesofglobalenergydiscourseactorsselectedforanalysis...... LIST OFTABLES

CEU eTD Collection UNDP OECD –NuclearPowerPlant NPP –NuclearEnergyAgency NEA –Non-governmentalOrganization NGO –LithuanianElectricityOrganization LEO –IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange –InternationalEnergyAgency IPCC IEA –InternationalAtomicEnergyAgency IAEA –CriticalDiscourseAnalysis CDA ABBREVIATIONS –WorldNuclearAssociation WNA –WorldEnergyCouncil WEC

– UnitedNationsDevelopmentProgramme – OrganisationforEconomicCo-operationandDevelopment

CEU eTD Collection CEU eTD Collection emissions (IEA2009). and suggestsincreasingthe nuclearpowershareintheenergymixasoneof themeanstoreduce primary energydemandand increaseintheuseoffossilfuelsbetween2007 and2030 Outlook 2009 energy isproduced,transportedandconsumed (IPCC 2007;IEA2009).Inits emissions, therearecallsfora Since theenergysectorisresponsibleforaround 70%ofglobalgreenhousegas(GHG) 2009; Scrase assumptions andpractices(UNDP2004;Yergin 2006; Müller-Kraenner2008;IEA2009;Lugar have arguedthatthecurrentenergysystemsrequire substantialrethinkingofprevalentpolicy fossil fuelsconcentratedinfewregionsandapressingneedforclimatechangemitigationmany 2009; Lugar2009).Againstthebackdropofarapidlygrowingdemand,dependenceonimported conflicts, piracy,naturaldisasters,pollutionandfuelpoverty(Müller-Kraenner2008;Brauch has extendedtoapropagating unsustainable (UNDP2004;IEA2009).Additionally,therangeofenergy-relatedvulnerabilities Globally, energyuseisthekeytoeconomicandsocialdevelopmenthasbeenrecognizedas At theturnofthiscenturyenergypolicy-makershavebeenfacingincreasinglydiversechallenges. 1.1 1 European countriesLithuaniaandBelarusincontrastwiththeglobalnuclearenergydiscourse. supplies. ThisstudydocumentsrecentnationalnuclearenergydiscoursesintwoEastern on anationallevelanddifferentargumentsforagainstnuclearpoweraswaytosecure nuclear plants.Moreover,littlecross-culturalanalysisexistsaboutthepublicdebatestakingplace sociological surveysshowthatmostEuropeansfeelunfamiliarwithsafetyissuesrelatedto acceptance. AlthoughthemostofWorld’snuclearpowercapacityisconcentratedinEurope, social challengesrelatedtoradioactivewastemanagement,proliferationofweaponsandpublic plant. Despitetheglobalmomentum,nuclearindustryfacesmanytechnological,economicand policies, anunprecedentednumberofcountrieshaveexpressedintentiontobuildtheirfirst clean powersupplyagain.Apartfromsomestatesreviewingtheirpreviouslyanti-nuclearenergy After yearsofstagnation,nuclearenergyhasbeenincreasinglyviewedasasourcesteadyand

INTRODUCTION Research background etal. theInternationalEnergyAgency(IEA)considers theestimated40%increasein 2009). “low-carbon energyrevolution” “energy diplomacy” “There arealwaysdifferentwaysofsayingthesamething, , terrorismthreats,politicalinstabilitiesand and theyarenotrandom,accidentalalternatives” –amajortransformationintheway Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus World Energy Roger Fowler “alarming” etal. 1

CEU eTD Collection low-carbon electricity energy securitychallengesbyprovidinganincreasedaccesstostableandaffordablesupplyof The proponentsofnuclearenergyarguethatatomicpowerhasaroletoplayinaddressingmajor heat inthefuture(IPCC2007). Climate Change(IPCC)alsobelievesthatnuclearcouldcontributetocarbon-freeelectricityand emissions tobeavoidedasaresult(IEA2009).TheUnitedNationsIntergovernmentalPanelon Vaida Pilibaityte 2 1 projects aneardoublingofnuclearpowergeneratingcapacityby2030for1.4GtCO Kojo andLitmanen2009;MITTeather2009).TheIEAclimatechangemitigationscenario shift backinfavourfornuclearpower(Marshall2005;NuttallEerkens2006;Wald2008; There seemstobeawideagreementthatclimatechangeconcernshaveinstigatedworldwide 2010). Otherbarriersincludethelongtermavailability offuelwithoutrecycling,weapons problems oflong-livedradioactivewasteandhigh infrastructurecosts(CEC2008;Umbach two decadesandfuturenuclearpowerdevelopment remainscontestedduetounresolved is approachingamajorcrossroad.Onlytwonew constructionshavebeenstartedoverthepast Mt ofCO concentrated intheEUwhereitmeetsonethird of theelectricitydemandandavoidssome700 can beone.CurrentlynearlyhalfoftheWorld’sinstalled372GW(e)nuclearpowercapacityis If oneneedsaproofforuncertaintiesthatlieaheadnuclearenergy,theEuropeanUnion(EU) IAEA 2009). China andRussianFederationareplanningthelargestincreasesincapacityby2020(NEA2008; even inSwedenthathadaphase-outpolicysincethe1980s(NEA2008;IAEA2009).TheUS, Public surveysshowincreasinglyfavourableattitudesincountrieswithexistingnuclearplants, Holton 2005).However,therehavebeenseveralindicationsofchangesinthosepolicieslately. countries haltedtheirnuclearprogrammesorevenintroducedphase-outplans(Rüdig1990; Island intheUnitedStates(US)1979andChernobyl,Ukraine,1986somedeveloped few newconnectionstothegrid(WEC2007;IAEA2009).AfteraccidentsatThreeMile projections indicatefuturegrowth,theindustryhasbeendecliningwithanageingglobalfleetand IAEA 2009,2010).TheInternationalAtomicEnergyAgency(IAEA)notesthatalthough constitutes around7%ofprimaryenergyand14%globalelectricitysupplytoday(IPCC2007; There were436reactorsoperatingworldwideasofthebeginning2010,nuclearenergy stockpiled (Smil2003;CEC2008;NEA2008). uranium hasalimitedimpactontheelectricityprice,isavailablefromstableregionsandcanbe fossil fuels,nuclearfuelhasotheradvantagesfromtheenergysecuritypointofview.Thecost Basedonthedatafromqualified studiesSovacool(2008)calculatesthatthemeanvalueofemissions overthecourseof

and 9gCO2e/kWhfromoffshore wind. oil, 443gCO2e/kWhfromnatural gas,35gCO2e/kWhofsolarphotovoltaics,31from wastewoodbiomass lifetime ofanuclearreactoris66 gCO2e/kWhcomparedto1050fromcoal,778 CO2e/kWhfromheavy 2 emissions annually(WEC2007).Withitsrapidlyageing energyinfrastructuretheEU 1 (NEA2008;WNA2009).Inadditiontoloweremissionscompared

2 CEU eTD Collection In thislight,someauthorsarguethatcross-cultural (Antal andHukkinen2010). by theKyotoProtocolasoneofreasonsforfailingeffortstorespondclimatechange policy documents.Forexample,someauthorsseethetop-downapproachascommended However, theguidancefornationaldecisionmakingisoftenoutsideofscopeinternational no newprojectionshavebeenmadeavailableyet(IAEA2009). the nuclearenergygrowthandcostestimatesweremadebeforeeconomiccrisisof2008 other localcircumstances(IPCC2007;WECNEA2008).Itisalsonecessarytonotethat plants, muchdependsontechnology,previousprojectexperience,annualhoursofoperationand and scientistsagreethat,particularlywhenitcomestotheeconomiccompetitivenessofnuclear social factorshavetobetakenintoconsiderationonanationallevel.Forinstance,bothindustry of morelow-carbonelectricitysupplyglobally,theoverallrationale,technological,economicand decisions arealsoinfluencedbyvalues,beliefsand variousknowledgeclaimsthatprovidethe (Bickerstaff situations inwhichthenuclearenergyisdebated, couldimprovebottom-uppolicymaking 2 about theseissues,while49%are nuclear safety,only25%oftheEUcitizenssayingtheyare 2003; BarnabyandKemp2007;IPCC2007).Notably,Europeanscontinuetofeelunawareabout proliferation, technologicalsafety,securityandnegativepublicattitudes(Romerio1998;Smil While theremightbeawell-foundedneedforincreasingtheshareofnuclearpowerin economy. energy policy-makingperspective,forriskmanagementandtransitiontowardsthelow-carbon 2008; ScraseandOckwell2009a)isnecessary.Theanalysisofthisnaturecanbeimportantfrom change andenergysecurityinthe21 (McArdle Kelleher1983;YarrowandNewbery1988;Rüdig1990)tothesolutionclimate re-framing fromthepredominantview1980sofnuclearasadangeroustechnology With theongoingscientific,economic,politicalandpublicdebatesinmind,acriticallookat new generationreactorswithincreaseddecayheat(EbingerandMassy2009). capabilities tonewcountries,expansionofreprocessingactivityandstoragespentfuelfrom may behamperedbynewtechnologicalchallengessuchasproliferationofuraniumenrichment to beinsufficient(Eurobarometer2010).Moreover,someauthorsarguethatthenuclearrevival Although informationaboutnuclearissuesismainlyobtainedfromthemedia,peopleconsiderit Discourseisdefinedasaset of ideas,conceptsandcategoriesthroughwhichmeaningisgiven tosocialandphysical framework tounderstandtherelationship betweendiscourseandsocialreality(PhillipsHardy2002). phenomena, andwhichisproduced andreproducedthroughanidentifiablesetofpractices(Hajer1995). Discourseanalysisis

etal. 2008).Inadditiontopolitical,economicandtechnological justifications,policy

“not verywellinformed” st century(Bodansky2002;Eerkens2006;Bickerstaff andafurther25%are discourse “very well” Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus

studies or 2 exploringcontrasting “fairly well” “not informedatall” informed

pursuit etal. 3 .

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 4 interesting caseforcomparative nationalnuclearenergydiscourseanalysis. announced planstosimultaneously buildnewnuclearpowerplants,these counrtiespresentan the SovietUnion,butbothcontinuetodepend on energyimportsfromRussia.Astheyhave Belarus This studylooksatnuclearenergydiscoursesof thetwoformerSovietstates, the focusproblemofthisresearch. that discoursestudiesofpolicy-makingwiththe focus onnuclearpowerarelackingconstitutes al. context ofwinddeployment(WilsonandStephens2009),energyconsumptionpractices(Kurtz Mander 2008;Stevenson2009).Discourseanalysishasbeenconductedinthesocio-political renewable energysources(Szarka2004;HaggettandToke2006;Mander2007;Barry 2008; RisbeySarasini2009;Telešien studies thathavetoucheduponenergyinrelationtoclimatechange(Johannesson2005;Grist environmental issuestodate(HajerandVersteeg2005).Thereareseveraldiscourse-oriented the academicliteraturereviewshowthatdiscourseanalystshavelookedatvarietyof energy arefew(ByrneandToly2006;DevineWright2007).Searchesinscholarlydatabases Nonetheless, criticalsocialinquiriesintopolitics,sociology,andpoliticaleconomyofthemodern Fairclough andWodak2003;ScraseOckwell2010). basis forpublicdebatesinvariouspoliticaltraditionsandculturalcontexts(Dryzek1997; cultural comparisonsoftheseissuesarealsoabsent (Bickerstaff discursive re-framingofnuclearintheclimatechange debateandconcludedthatwidercross- undecided ontheissue.Anothergroupofscientistsusedamixed-methodsanalysistostudy favoured nuclearnewbuildinitspolicydocumentswhilesimultaneouslyimplyingtobe debates, originateintheUK.ScraseandOckwell(2009)foundthatgovernmentconsistently 2009). Acoupleofmorerecentanalyses,mainlyechoingintensifyingnuclearcapacityexpansion (Bickerstaff the renewedinterestinnuclearpower,energysecurity,climatechangeandriskperceptions Apart fromthose,therearealsoseveralinquiriesintonuclearenergydiscoursesinthecontextof 2007) orstudiedissuessurroundingIran’snuclearprogram(IzadiandSaghaye-Biria2007).. political communication(Windisch2008),radioactivewastemanagementprocesses(Johnson of transition(Schmid2004).Someresearchershavealsouseddiscourseanalysistoexamine debate (Nehring2004),thehistoryoftechnology(Proops2001)andpost-Chernobyldiscourses The mostrecentworkon ignoring thesocietyandpreventingopendiscussionsontheseissues(Balo colonized bythe Lehtonen andMartiskainen2010).ThestudyfromLithuaniaconcludesthatthepublicsphereis

2005),energyinnovation(Lovell2008),carboncaptureandstorage(Wilson . Theyfollowedverydifferenteconomicandpolitical developmentpathsafterthefallof etal. 2008;Balo “talking andactingclasses” nuclear energydiscourse č kait ė andRinkevi dominatedbythepoliticalandbusinesselitewhoare ė 2009;Boykoff č ius 2009;BergScraseandOckwell2009a; looksattherhetoricofColdWarpublic etal. 2010)andpublicacceptanceof et al. 2008).Thereforethefact č kait etal. ė andRinkevi Lithuania and 2009). etal. 2008; č ius et CEU eTD Collection Belarus government isexpectingtofindaforeigninvestorin2010(MinistryofEnergy2010). new nuclearstationwithpartnersinEstonia,LatviaandPolandanationalpriority.The relies onRussianimportstomeetitsenergyneeds.Inorderaddressthisitdeclaredbuilda membership agreementthecountryturnedfromenergyexportertoimporterandmainly in theworld1983(INPP2010).Sinceshuttingdownplant2009asperEU Lithuania ishometothebiggestSoviet-builtChernobyl-typeIgnalinanuclearpowerplant(NPP) except theunderwater350MW infrastructure, itsenergysystemremainscentralizedwithnoconnectionstotheWesterngrid 1990 andjoinedtheEUNATOin2004.Althoughcountryhasafairlydevelopedenergy Lithuania as Union in1991andformedaRussia-Belarus1999(Marples2008).Itisoftenreferredto where democratic Considering theabove,followingresearchquestions areaddressedinthisstudy: within suchacloseproximity(Krasauskas2009). new publicdebateabouteconomicandsecurityimplicationsofbuildingthreetofourplants Ria Novosti2010).Thesituationwastermedbythemedia is intheprocessofchoosinglocationfortwoplantsitsnorthernregion(PolskieRadio2010; close totheLithuanianborder,whilePolandplansondevelopingitsfirstnuclearprogrammeand In parallel,RussiahasinitiateditsownnewnuclearprojectintheBalticenclaveofKaliningrad project aretobesourcedfromRussia(BELTA2010b). Lithuania (Belarus2008).Accordingtothecurrentplans,bothfundsandtechnologyfor 2008 finalizeditspoliticaldecisiontobuildfirstplantclosethewesternborderwith gas pricedisputeswithRussia,Belarusseesnuclearpowerasthekeytoitsenergysecurityandin affected bytheChernobylaccidentof1986(UNDP2002).Increasinglyintimidatedoiland 2005). Althoughwithoutanuclearprogrammeofitsown,Belaruswasonethemostseverely from RussiatotheWest.Nonetheless,countryisheavilyreliantRussianimportsitself(WB rather well-maintainedenergysectorandastrategicroleaskeytransitrouteforexports Piano andPuddington2009).ForthepasttwodecadesBelarushassustainedanextensive “Europe’s lastdictatorship” 

national energypoliciesinLithuaniaandBelarus? How doestheroleofnuclearenergyinglobal energypoliciescomparetothatinthe is Lithuania’sneighbourtothesoutheast,itdeclaredindependence is oneofthethreeBalticStatesthatregainedindependencefromSovietUnionin “scaffolding” and concealsadictatorialstyleofgovernance(Korosteleva

one ofthemostrepressiveplacesinworldwitha Estlink cableconnectingEstoniaandFinland(ABB2010). “nuclear competition” Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus

from and instigateda façade

etal. the regime

2003; Soviet 5

CEU eTD Collection In ordertoworktowardsthisaim,thefollowingobjectiveshavebeenset: security assessmentframeworkstohelpguideatransitiontowardslow-carboneconomy. could contributetotheenergypolicydecision-makingandbebenchmarkedagainstother option onmultiple–internationalandnationalgovernancelevels.Findingsofthisresearch narratives showingdifferentwaysofperceivinganddebatingacomplextechnologicalenergy power forenergysecurity.Theexpectedoutcomeofthisworkisacollectionthevariety this studyaimstogainabettercross-culturalunderstandingofthediscursiveframingnuclear discourses incontrastwiththeglobaldiscourse.Bydocumenting,analyzingandcomparingthem, The mainaimofthisworkistoexaminethemostrecentformationnationalnuclearenergy 1.2 Vaida Pilibaityte 6 3 oriented analyticalapproach(Szarka2004;Barry The literaturereviewshowedthatthereisanemerging workonenergypolicyusingdiscourse- nuclear energyoption. similarities anddifferencesonglobalnational energypolicylevelwhenconsideringthe formation, describehowitrelatestoenergysecurity andclimatechangemitigationindentify Discourse analysiswasusedasframeworkto examinethecurrentnuclearenergypolicy 1.3 Discursivestorylinesaresimplified narrativesthatallowactorstogivemeaningcomplexphysical orsocialphenomena.The

historical references,clichés,collective fears,etc.(Hajer1995). play akeyroleinestablishingparticular viewsaspeopletendtofollowcertainstructuredmodes ofcognition:analogies,      

Aims andobjectives Methodology discourses? what roledoesclimatechangeplayintheirpursuitofnuclearenergy? discourse; in LithuaniaandBelarusdescribehowsomeofthemcometodominatethe actors toexpresstheirviewsonnuclearenergyinthecontextofnationalpolicies actors toexpressviewsonnuclearenergyinthecontextofinternationalpolicies; patterns andcontrastthemaindiscursivedriversforpursuitofnuclearenergy; global nuclearenergydiscourse. What arethemaindiscursivedriversfornuclearenergyinLithuaniaandBelarus Identify anddescribethemaindiscursivestorylinesrecentlyusedbydifferentnational Identify anddescribethemaindiscursivestorylinesrecentlyusedbydifferentglobal Compare theframingofnuclearenergyinthesecountriestoidentifydominant Contextualize thefindingsofnationalcomparativediscourseanalysiswithrespectto What arethedominantnuclear-related

discursive storylines etal. 2008;e.g.Balo 3 intheglobalandnationalenergy č kait ė andRinkevi č ius 2009; y CEU eTD Collection The datawasanalyzedusingfour used asthemaindatasource.Thelistofanalyzedtexts isincludedintheAppendix. that nationalmediaoutletswereselectedfirstandpurposefullysampledtextsfromthem was carriedoutafterwards.Thenationaldiscourseanalysisproceededinasimilarway,except national nuclearenergydiscourseswerecompared. nuclear energypolicies.Asafinalstepofanalysis, findingsoftheempiricalworkonglobaland the comparisonofresultsbetweencountries andagainstthebroadercontextofglobal 6 5 4 achieve a promote theirviewsusingsimplified Following thistheoreticalapproach,Hajer(1995)believesthatdiscourseactorsnotonlytryto Ockwell 2009a). (Fairclough andWodak1997;Dijk2001b;Jørgensen2002;PhillipsHardyScrase “messy” on decision-makingbasedfactsandrationality,discourseanalystsviewpolicy-makingasa Smith andKern2009a;Stevenson2009;ScraseOckwell2010).Asopposedtothelineartake security In thecontextofthisparticularwork,conceptsspecialinterestmightbe general (Jørgensen2002). 2005). Moreover,discourseanalysishelpstoassessthequalityofdemocraticdiscussionin contexts, socialresearcherstrytounderstanddriversforpolicychange(HajerandVersteeg linguistic framingofvariousphenomena,relationshipsbetweenactorsinteractingincertain sampled trends wasreviewedtoidentifytheinternationalactors.Policydocumentswere For theglobaldiscourseanalysisliteratureoninternationalnuclearenergydevelopment analysis. of discoursecontextandcompilationtheinformation-richdatasample(3) were dividedintothreesimilarresearchstages:(1)theliteratureandpolicyreview,(2)description was analyzedfirstandnationaldiscoursesconstitutedthesecondpartofresearch.Bothparts The empiricalresearchwasdesignedinthefollowingway.globalnuclearenergydiscourse 2008). simple, self-validatingstorylinesandbeliefslegitimizingspecificpre-setmodelsofpolicies(Molle Thesearediscoursecontext,main actorsandthemes,discursivestorylinesdiscoursecoalitions. Datacollectionstrategycharacterized byasmallsamplesize,but Discoursecanbeconsideredhegemonic whentheoreticalconceptsaretranslatedintoconcrete policiesandinstitutional data (Patton2002). arrangements (Hajer1995,61). and 5 processdominatedbysocialinteraction,argumentativebattlesandpowerstruggles andcodedusingqualitativecriteriadetailedinChapter3.Theglobaldiscourseanalysis discursive hegemony economics of nucleartechnologythatmaybedescribedas 4

– dominanceofacertaindefinitionreality.Byanalyzingthe

discourse analyticalcategories storylines, but alsoseekinfluenceoverotherrivalthinkersto “information-rich” 6 developedbyHajer(1995)toenable caseswithfocusonspecificrather thangeneral Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus “nirvana concepts” cleanliness, safety, promoting purposefully 7

CEU eTD Collection and/or thosetriggeredbycertain global andnationalnucleardiscoursesintheirentirety.Inbothcasesonlythemostrecentdebates The comparativediscourseanalysisconductedherebynomeansclaimstopresentastudyof 1.4 Vaida Pilibaityte 8 8 7 and framework forunderstandingapolicy-makingprocess Chapter 2 This thesisconsistsofsevenchapters.Presentedbelowisageneraloutlinethestudy. 1.5 subject andremainsopenforfurthercontributionsinterpretations. aspiring tobebasedonarigorousmethodology,doesnotclaimpresentfinalfindingsthe than generalizations(Patton2002).Thiswork,justlikeothersimilarqualitativestudies,though And finally,apurposefuldatasamplingtechniquewasaimedatin-depthunderstandingrather explore theinternationaldebate. intended toprovideaglobalbackgroundforthenationaldiscourseanalysisratherthanfully international playersselectedfocusingondifferentaspectsofnuclearpower.Thisanalysisis The globalpartofdiscourseanalysiscoversonlyfewenergy-relatedpublicationsbythekey work. cultural discourseanalysisofnuclearenergyinthetwocountriesisoutsidescopethis into accountthenationalcontext,energyandmediasystem,anin-depthsocio-economicand/or also partofamediadiscourse,havebeenexcludedfromthisanalysis.Althoughthestudytakes comments ofonlinemediausers,discussionforums,blogsandpressreleases,whichare television stationsorpopularscience,monthlyanalyticalandlifestylemagazines.Readers’letters, thesis. Thisstudydoesnotincludetabloid media outletsinLithuaniaandBelarusordertoanswertheresearchquestionsofthisM.Sc. National discourseswerestudiedbyanalyzing157purposefullysampledtextsfromthreenational using discourseapproachtoanalyzeissuessurrounding nuclearenergyarereviewed. democracy, discoursemanagement Mediacharacterizedbyoversimplified newscoverage,bigpictures,scandals-drivenheadlinesand focusoncrime,sports, Eventswhichareemphasizedpolitically (oftenbythemedia)

celebrities andentertainmentasopposed tothemediafollowinghighestprofessionalstandards. belong to(Jäger2001).

policy-change Scope andlimitations Outline providesanintroductiontothetheoreticalconceptsbehinddiscourseanalysisasa isexplained

as welltheroleof andtheroleof

discursive events 8 , regionalandbroadcastmediasuchasradio media 7 and influencethedirectionquality ofdiscoursestowhichth weredocumented. discursive inthepublicdebatearealsocovered.Studies . Thelinkbetween

storylines and discourse coalitions discursive powerstruggle . Discursive ey

CEU eTD Collection challenges of21 Chapter 4 this chapter. the study,analyticalcategoriesandapproachtocomparativeanalysisoffindingsarepart and identify dominantnationalpatternsofnuclearenergyframingandareaccompaniedbythe In storylines anddiscoursecoalitions. media system,andisfollowedbythepresentationofrecurringthemesactors,emerging discourses Chapter 5 comparative analysisthatcomeslater. discursive storylinesandcoalitionsonnuclearenergyareidentifieddocumentedfor collected documentsproducedbytheinternationalactorsareanalysed.Therecurringthemes, Chapter 3 The studyendswithconclusionsandrecommendationsin Chapter 6

comparison inLithuaniaandBelarus.Eachsectionbeginswithanoutlineofnationalcontext presentsthe containsthereviewofempiricalworkconductedtoexamine looksatthe withthenuclearenergy-relatedthemesfoundongloballevel. theLithuanianandBelarusiandiscursivestorylinescoalitionsarecomparedto st century.Theglobaldiscoursecontextisdescribedfirst.Thenpurposefully methodology global

discourse ofnuclearenergy : datacollectiontechniquesforbothglobalandnationalpartof asitisframedaroundthecentralenergy Chapter 7 Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus . national nuclearenergy analysis 9

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 10

CEU eTD Collection interested inoveralldiscursive contexts;constructiviststudiesexplorediverse waysofreality analysis ofindividualtexts, rhetoricaldevicesand/orspeechacts,while otherstudiesare Ravasi 1998).Dependingonthetheoreticaltradition, somestudiesfocusonathoroughlinguistic social constructionversuspowerdynamics,thelatter beingapartofcriticalstudies(Phillipsand be verybroadlycategorizedaccordingtotheimportance oftextversuscontextandaprocess Figure 2.1graphicallydepictstheexistingempirical approachestodiscourseanalysis.Thesecan human interaction(PhillipsandHardy2002). perspective, realityisasocialconstructand constantly producedandreproducedthrough production ofsocialreality:thewaylanguageconstructs,ratherthanrevealsit.Fromadiscourse In verygeneralterms,discourseanalysisisunderstoodasasetofmethodsusedtoexplorethe range ofsocialpractices. the threemaincategories:(1)anythingbeyondsentence,(2)languageuse,and(3)abroader Discourse Analysis” that scientistsstrivetoaddress(Burr1995;Schiffrin originates formamultitudeofacademicdisciplinesthatdiscoursestudiesevolvefrom,andissues a sortofresearchperspectiveinstead.Theexistencegreatvarietydiscoursedefinitions there areresearcherslikevanDijk(2001b)whoreject philosophy (Hajer1995;Dijk2001a).Jørgensen(2002)considersitboththeoryandmethod,but Discourse analysishasrootsinideologystudies,rhetoric,sociologyofscienceandlanguage 2.1 and concludes. approaches toexaminethedebateonnuclearenergyfromvariousangles.Section2.4summarizes change arealsoexplained.Section2.3proceedstoreviewstudiesthatusediscourseanalytical of mediainthepublicdebate.Inter-linkagesbetweendiscursivepowerstruggleandpolicy- analytical approaches.Section2.2dealswiththediscursivehegemonyanddemocracyrole concepts, abriefoverviewofdifferentdiscourseanalysistraditionswithanemphasisoncritical construction andknowledgeproduction This chapterintroducesdiscourseanalysisasaframeworkforinvestigatingtheprocessofsocial and nuclearenergyisstillararesubject. energy transitions.However,theliteraturereviewshowsthatdiscourseanalysisofsecurity theoretical approachhasbeenalsoaimedatunderstandingsocialdimensionsofsustainable To date,discoursestudieshavemainlyfocusedonissuesofsocialpowerabuse,butlatelythis 2

DISCOURSE ANDPOLICY-MAKING Discourse studyasasocio-politicalstance editedbySchiffrin et al. . (2001) groupdifferentapproachestothisconceptinto Section2.1beginswithdefinitionsoftheoretical etal. discourseanalysisasneither,andviewsit 2001).Theauthorsof Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus “The Handbookof 11

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 12 of discursivedemocracywhichisdiscussedfurtherdown. 2005; HajerandVersteegScraseOckwell2009a).Thisalsohaslinkswiththeconcept democratic discussioningeneral(Wodak1996;Rydin1999;Jørgensen2002;FeindtandOels discourse analysiscouldinformmoreeffectivepolicypracticesandcontributetoimproving driving orobstructinga knowledge productionandlinguisticcharacterofsocialprocessesthat,amongotherthings,are approaches todiscourseanalysisthatarelessconcernedwithlanguage As highlightedinthefigure,consideringaimsofthisstudy,focushereafterisoncritical although combinationsoftheseapproachesarealsopossible(PhillipsandHardy2002). production whilecriticalstudiesexaminepowerdynamicsanddiscursiveknowledgeformation, false picturesofreality (Jørgensen 2002).Inotherwords,discoursebuilds the connected todiscourse.Discourseisconstructed inawaythatgivesanimpressionoftrueor delimited historically.Powerisdescribedasbothproductive andconstrainingforcethatisclosely proposition thatknowledgeisnotareflectionof thereality,butisconstructeddiscursivelyand 2001; Jørgensen2002;PhillipsandHardy2002). Hisideasfollowthesocialconstructionist Michel Foucaultandhisworksondiscourses,power andknowledge(Fairclough1993;Jäger critical discoursestudiesaresaidtohavebeen greatly influencedbytheFrenchphilosopher tool (Fairclough1993;Dijk2001a,2003;Fairclough andWodak2003).Butforthemostpart Mikhail Bakhtinandtheirfollowerswhosemainfocuswasontheuseoflanguageasideological School ofPhilosophy–thinkerslikeAntonioGramsci,JürgenHabermas,LouisAlthusserand philosophers oftheEnlightenment,or,morerecently,WesternMarxismandFrankfurt Theoretical originsofcriticaldiscourseanalysis(CDA)aretracedbackifnottoAristotle,then socially acceptedwaysof knowledge production(FeindtandOels2005).

Figure 2.1Approachestodiscourseanalysis(adaptedfromPhillipsandRavasi(1998)) policy change . Itisbelievedthatunderstandingpolicy-makingthrough per se , butmorewith

“truth” from CEU eTD Collection One ofthepioneeringarchitectsCDA, Fairclough andWodak2003). historical methodsandinquiriesintolinguisticiconiccharacteristicofdiscourse(Dijk2001a; linguistics, socialsemiotics,socio-culturalchangeandsocio-cognitivestudiestodiscourse- interests inCDAarelargelymultidisciplinaryandanalyticallydiverse:theyrangefromcritical through criticalunderstanding(Dijk2003).Thereforeitcomesasnosurprisethatcurrent 2001a). ThetheoreticalframeworkofCDAissocio-politicallydeterminedandaimedatchange ways theseareproduced,reproducedandresistedthroughlanguageinavarietyofcontexts(Dijk 2001a, 2003).CDAmainlyconcernsstudiesofsocialpowerabuse,dominanceandinequality,the social scientistsprimarilyintheUK,Australia,GermanyandAustrialate1970s(Dijk unlike latercontributionsfromcriticallinguists,semiotics,socio-linguists,psychologistsand Nonetheless, itisimportanttonotethattheseworksdonotsystematicallydealwithdiscourse, Along similarlines,theDutchtextlinguistTheunA.vanDijk always opentointerpretationsandisneverfinished(FaircloughWodak2003). CDA isviewedasanopenlysubjectiveandengagedscience.Thatsaid,thistypeofanalysis seen asa political andinstitutionalobjectives.Thereforecriticalawarenessofsuchdiscursivepracticesis goes, societyhasbecomemoresusceptibletopowermanipulationsinaccordanceeconomic, (Fairclough andWodak2003).Associallifeisincreasinglyinfluencedbythemedia,argument They arguethatdiscursiveeventsareshapedbysituations,institutionsandsocialstructures with aprominentAustrianscientistRuthWodakstudydiscourseasformofsocialpractice. section 2.3ahead. (Rydin 1999;HajerandVersteeg 2005;ScraseandOckwell2009a).Thesestudies arereviewedin there hasbeenanincreasinginterestindiscourse approachtopolicy-makingandenvironment and languageinpolitics(Dijk1997;Jenner Titscher 2000).However,sincethelate1990s different manifestationsofsocialpower:racism,anti-Semitism, nationalism,xenophobia,gender Critical discourseanalystsobservethatsincethe 1960s CDAhasbeenappliedmainlytostudy groups. meanings ofwords,contexts,specificsocialsituations, beliefsandideologiesofvarioussocial discourse understudy.Thereforeheputsemphasisonsuchanalyticalcategoriesastopics,local basis andtakesintoconsiderationsomestylistic,rhetorical,semioticornarrativeelementsofthe abuse. JustlikeFairclough,vanDijk(2001a)advocatesfortheCDAthathasastronglinguistic with theoppressed” focus onstudying scholarship” racism indiscourseandcommunicationcontendsthatCDAisa (Dijk2001b).Theauthortakesafirmstancethatthistypeofresearchshould “normal featureofeverydaylife” (Dijk2001b)andbedirectedagainstthoseusingdiscoursetolegitimatepower “problems thatthreatenthelivesorwell-beingofmany” . Althoughbasedonarigorousandsystematicanalysis,

British

discourse analystNormanFaircloughtogether

Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus who studiesethnicprejudicesand (Dijk2003),showing “critical perspectiveondoing “solidarity 13

CEU eTD Collection section thatcomesnext. discursive struggle(Dijk2001a;Jäger2001).Anumberoftheseconceptsareelaboratedinthe 2.2 Vaida Pilibaityte 14 maintain poweroverothersbyretaining seeking knowledgeformation(Dijk2001a).AsvanDijk(2001b)pointsout,certaingroups communication becomesincreasinglyimportantforcertainsocietalgroupsandinstitutions As notedabove,becauseoftheimportancelanguage,gainingcontroloverpublicsphereand discourse isunderstoodasaformof In sum,inthiswork,ratherthanameresynonymof transporting andrealityshaping like inmostcriticaldiscoursestudies,centralnotionsarethoseofasaknowledge dominance ofaparticularviewtowardscertainsocialphenomena(Jørgensen2002).Therefore, fact theresultofastrugglebetweencompetingdiscourses Moreover, fromthesocialconstructionisttheoryperspective,whatpeoplebelievetobetrueisin social andnaturalscience(Jäger2001;PhillipsHardy2002). forms ofdiscursiveknowledgeproductionfromaneverydaycontentproducedbythemediato framework ofunderstandingtherelationshipbetweenadiscourseandsocialrealitypertainstoall relate tovariousactorsinvolvedincomplexrelationships(PhillipsandHardy2002).This Discourses arenotstudiedinisolation–theyappearhistorical,socialandcultural decisions aremadeandpowersexercised(Fairclough1993;Hajer1995;Jørgensen2002). way political,societalviewsandexpertknowledgeiscommunicated,howopinionsareshaped, Ockwell 2009a).Bystudyingbodiesoftextsinvariouscontextsdiscourseanalystsexplorethe produced andreproducedthroughanidentifiablesetofpractices” of understanding. Followingsuchapproach,abroaderdefinitionwoulddescribediscourseasset address problematicsocialphenomenaintheenvironmentalrealmthroughcritical These discursivelydominantgroups,havebeen described as discourses resultsinmoresocialpower. talk –inotherwords,occasions,formsofcommunication andtopics;controllingmore power isdefinedbythesocio-politicalcontextand theactualcontroloverstructuresoftextand discourses: scholarly,educational,legal,policy,mediaandothers.Hearguesthataccesstothis elites” privileged accesstoinformation andtheirpublicappearancetendstocarry the information andexpertise havebecomethemostvaluedcommodities. Manyofthemhave who holdintheirhandsanenormouspower ofconstructingrealityinsocietieswhere have themostsay–engineers,lawyers,scientists, academics, bankers,journalistsandconsultants

“ideas, conceptsandcategoriesthroughwhichmeaningis

(Lasch1996), Discursive struggle,power,policyandpublicsphere “symbolic analysts” “agent” (Reich1993)or , andsocialgroupsand/orinstitutionsengagingina social practice exclusive given tosocialandphysicalphenomena,whichis

anddiscourseanalysisisseenasawayto “discourse technologists” access

(Hajer andVersteeg2005;Scrase to achieve tomultitudesofinfluentialpublic discussion “power elites” or hegemony talking (Fairclough 1995)that (Mills 1956) , i.e.toestablishthe aboutthereality, “auraoftruth” context ,

“talking and CEU eTD Collection in areproductionofthesame narrativesofaprevalentdiscourseorder(Hajer 1995,61). actors aremoreoftenthan notforcedtoarguewithinadominantdiscursive framewhichresults that goesagainstthedominant economicandpoliticalinterests.Thatis tosaythatdiscourse possible onlyifsomeonechallengestheprevalent storylines. However,itisparticularlydifficultif of discoursecoalitionswithinthegivenrealm. Thereforeasocio-politicalchangebecomes the multiplegroupsofactors.Storylinescluster knowledgeandthusfacilitatetheformation the powerofstorylinesmainlystemsfromtheirmulti-interpretability, because of theformationandestablishmentcertainconcepts andrealities.Theauthorcontendsthat According toHajer’sinterpretation,discursivestorylines, assimplifiednarratives,areattheheart which aredescribedinmoredetailChapter 3onthemethodologyusedinthisstudy. analytical categoriestostudyenvironmentaldiscourse: Building onworksofFoucault,BronwynDaviesandRomHarré,Hajer(1995)suggeststwo (Figure 2.2). has implicationsforpolicy-makingresearchasitiscloselyrelatedtointroducing have tobeconstantlyreproducedthroughlanguagesothatacertainsocialorderismaintained prevalence ofcertainconcepts.Furthermore,hestates,thefactthatrulesandvariousconcepts argumentative interactionhasanimportantroletoplayindiscourseformationandtheeventual credibility, (2)acceptabilityand(3)trust(Hajer1995,59).Hajer(1995,54)maintainsthatthis rival thinkersaspartofanargumentativegametoachievea actors notonlypromotedifferentviewsinaformofnarrativesbutalsoseekinfluenceoverother studied throughdiscourse.Hajer(1995)putsforwardthe He concurswiththeauthorsmentionedearlierwhobelievethatpowerstructuresshouldbe interpretations ofenvironmentalproblemscometodominate,whileothersremaindiscredited. Hajer (1995)studieddiscourseofecologicalmodernisationinordertoexplainwhysome difficult taskinpractice. research bytheDutchpoliticalscientistMaartenA.Hajer(1995)thismayprovetobearather rearticulate newordersofdiscourse(Fairclough1993,1995).However,ascanbeseenfrom and highlydependsonabilitiesofcertainactorstoinitiateinnovativediscursiveevents Fairclough’s understanding,democratizationofdiscourseislinkedtosociety hegemony ofinstitutionsororganizationsfacilitatedbytheabove-mentionedpowerfulelites.In relationships. Asheproceedstoelaborate,itmayalsoleadthe a hegemony. transnational scale)anditseconomic,political,culturalideologicaldomainsas Inspired byGramsciandothers,Fairclough(1993)referstothecontroloversociety(oreven the restofsocietyanddegradingpublicsphere(Balo (Fairclough 1995).Veryoftentheyspeakspecializedjargonandonlytoeachother,shuttingaway hegemonic struggle Discursivepractices–production,distributionandconsumptionoftextsarefacets aimedatreproductionoftheexistingdiscourseorderandpower č kait “social-interactive” discursive storylines ė discursive hegemony andRinkevi Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus technologization ofdiscourse discourse theorywhere č ius 2009). and determinedby:(1) discoursecoalitions “it soundsright” policy change discursive to – 15

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 16 goals inamoreinclusive way.Itisarguedthat Scrase andOckwell2009a).Inturn,the typically performedbyofficialsandexpertsexcludingavarietyofothervoices(Rydin1999; dominant viewofthisprocessasanobjectiveandlinearonethatincludesserieslogicalsteps This perspectiveon Rydin (1999)arguesthatdiscoursetheory storylines andcoalitions(Rydin1999).Hence,with planningforsustainabilitypoliciesinmind, perceptions, definespriorities,promotespolicy agendas, constitutesthebasisfordiscourse It wasalludedearlierthatlanguagehasanimportantroletoplayinthepolicyprocess;italters As oneofthewaysovercomingthesechallengesnotion illegitimate claimsandrepressivesocialpowerabuse(Hendriks2006). movements andthemedia.However,itisalsosusceptibletoacommunicationdistortion, debate andextendstherangecommunicativespacesfromsmallintimatediscussionstosocial democracy 2009a). SummarizingworksbyDryzekandHabermas,Hendriks(2006)concludesthat with opinionformationinmessyformsofpublicdebate(Dryzek1994;Hendriks2006;Lehtonen parallels arealsodrawnwithadiscursiveor face ofalotuncertainty,especiallyinthefieldenvironmentalpolicy.Withinthisrealm the factthatso-calledexpertjudgementsarealsocolouredbypersonalvaluesandmadein Following thisviewScraseandOckwell(2009)pointoutthatwaytoooftenpolicydebatesignore judgements, individualandcollectivelearning(Lehtonen2009b;ScraseOckwell2009a). informed bylanguageandargument,becloselylinkedwithsocialinteraction,value what theycall consensus, amongotherthings.Seeninasimilar way,Renn emphasizes though,thatsuchactionhastotakea formofadebate,becollectiveandbasedon effective inenvironmentalandpoliticalcampaigns intheUKandelsewhere.Theauthor aim of

normatively ismoreinclusiveasitlessformalandconstrained;allowsforaopenpublic discursive processes reshaping discursivestructuresasithasbeenpreviously doneandproved policy-making Figure 2.2Linksbetweenlanguage,discourseandpolicychange amongvariousstakeholders andtodevelopenvironmentalpolicy asaconstantcommunicativestruggle,isinfactchallengingthe

offers apotentialforusinglanguage discursive approach “macro” theoryofdeliberativedemocracywhichdeals discourse models holdsthatpolicy-makingshouldbe et al. discourse management canbetheeffectiveway to (1997)suggestexplorationof

purposively isproposed. withthe discursive CEU eTD Collection 1992), are alwaysdifferentwaysofsayingthesamething,andtheynotrandom,accidentalalternatives”, linguist Fowler(1991,4)observesthatmedialanguageoftencarriesideologicalcharacter: shape publicsphereinanespeciallydetrimentalmanner(Dahlgren2002).AwellknownBritish the literaturethatinsocietieswheredemocraticstructuresareweaksocialhierarchytendsto various studies(HermanandChomsky1988;FaircloughWodak2003).Itiswelldescribedin manipulating and/orexploitingwhoandtowhatextent–hasbeenthecenterofattention production (Dijk2001a).Thepowerrelationshipsbetweenthemediaandpolitics–astowhois bearing institution” of thekeydimensionspublicsphere(Dahlgren2002).Itisalsodescribedasa 2003). Themediaasanarenaofsocialinteractionwheredifferentargumentsarepresentedisone 1995; Cotter2001;Dijk2001a;Dahlgren2002;BellandGarrett2003;FaircloughWodak languages ofenvironmental campaigninginvolvingknowledgecontrol.Environmental politics (Bennett andChaloupka 1993), havedescribedandanalyzed analyzed theconceptofnature(McKibben1990; FeindtandOels2005)rhetoricofnature environmental issueshavebeenasubjectofvarious academicinquiries.Researchershave To putenergydiscoursestudiesinacontext, one shouldnotethatoverthepastdecade 2.3 as Cotter(2001,431)notes,withanaim model ofmediaoperationasthe reality (Dijk2001a;Balo media becomesadiscourseactorinitself,withsignificantcontributiontotheconstructionof access tothepublicarena, is acknowledgedthatratheruniversally,because the Considering thediscursivenatureofsocio-politicalrelationships,manyauthorsoftenpointoutat contributions fromcitizens(Renn complement thedecision-makingbasedonprofessionalknowledgeandexpertisewithprudent discourses inenergypolicy-makingandnuclear inparticular. limited (Bickerstaff but cross-culturalmediadiscourseanalysisoftherecentdebateonnuclearpowerappearstobe and Ockwell2009a).Someofthesestudiesalsodoturntomediatextsgreaterorlesserextent, Versteeg 2005)andtherehasalsobeenmorefocusonenergysecuritylately(Scrase discourses inpolicy-makingandenvironmentalpolicyparticular(Rydin1999;Hajer Indeed, someauthorspointoutthatthelastdecadehasseenagrowinginterestinroleof in themedia,researchhastoemployconstructivistframework(Hansen1991). There arealsothosewhoarguethatespeciallywithregardtounderstandingenvironmentalissues

role of Environet Deconstructing energydiscourses

media

(MyersonandRydin1996) in thesepowerstruggles(HermanandChomsky1988;Fowler1991;Fairclough (BellandGarrett2003)oneofthekeyprerequisitesaccesstoknowledge etal. č 2008).Thenextsectionlooksattheliterature examining theroleof kait “filtering-out” ė andRinkevi “systematic propaganda”. etal. 1997). messagesanddecidingon “to makesenseofagreatdealwhatmakesupourworld” č ius 2009).HermanandChomsky(1988)describethe

and of theexclusivedecisivepowergranting Greenspeak Hencetheneedtostudymediadiscourse, Ecospeak (Harré Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus topics etal. (Killingsworth andPalmer that aretobecovered, 1999)asdistinctive he notes “discourse- “There . 17 It .

CEU eTD Collection as carboncaptureandstorage(Wilson practices (Kurtz discourse-oriented workslookatenergytransitions(Bouzarovski2010),consumption literature thatexists. Considering thefocusofthisthesis,remainderchapterisdevotedtoreview nuclear energydiscoursesfromperspectivesincludingmediacoverageandpolicy-making. As mentionedearlier,withinthisbodyofacademicworkthereareseveralstudiesthatexamine and Brossman2010)theconceptofenergy(Amin2009). (Wilson andStephens2009),rhetoricalvisionsindiscussionsabouthydrogeneconomy(Sovacool Vaida Pilibaityte 18 public consultationdocuments (Johnson2007)andnewspaperarticles, leafletsandbooks communication (Windisch 2008),radioactivewastemanagementprocesses frompolicyand third categoryincludes researcherswhousediscourseanalysisto examinepolitical Rinkevi second groupstudytherenewedinterestinnuclear power(Bickerstaff rhetoric (Nehring2004)andthepost-Chernobyl discourses(Schmid2004),whiletheseinthe The researchinthefirstcategorylooksathistory oftechnology(Proops2001),theColdWar nuclear-related issues. categories basedontheresearchfocus:retrospective studies,nuclearrevivalanalysisandother This studydividestheliteratureonnucleardiscourses publishedoverthelastdecadeintothree 2.3.1 Mander 2007;Barry and publicacceptanceofrenewableenergysources(Szarka2004;HaggettToke2006; Johannesson 2005;Grist2008;RisbeySarasini2009;Telešien strategies. Severalauthorstouchuponitinrelationtoclimatechange(Bulkeley2000; theoretical framework,theydolookatenergynarratives,rhetoric,cognitionandcommunicative though someofthestudieslistedheredonotexplicitlyapplyorrefertodiscourseanalysisasa Nonetheless, althoughtheyarefew,thecoverageintermsofissuesisratherdiverse.Even new energychallengesarealsorare. recently andmainlyintheUK,whilespecificdiscoursestudiesofnuclearenergycontext that energy,energysecurityandpolicydiscoursehascomeintoresearchfocusonlyvery be quiteanoverstatement.Searchesinscholarlydatabasesandacademicliteraturereviewshow The claimthatthereisasimilarlysubstantialbodyofrecentliteratureonenergydiscoursewould (Johannesson 2005;Balžekien studies usingdiscourseanalysistostudyclimatechange,environmentalriskandbiotechnology Addams andProops2000;Latour2004;SmithKern2009b).Therearealsosomerecent and policyhasalsocomeunderscrutinyofseveralresearchers(Hajer1995;Dryzek1997;

č Nuclear discourses:fromtheColdWartoclimatechange ius 2009;BergScraseandOckwell2009a;Lehtonen andMartiskainen2010).The etal. etal. 2005),energyinnovation(Lovell2008),emergingtechnologiessuch 2008;ManderStevenson2009;Raven2010).Fewmorerecent ė etal. 2008;Rimait etal. 2009),socio-politicalcontextofwinddeployment ė andRinkevi č ius 2008;Risbey2008). ė 2009;Boykoff etal. 2008;Balo etal. č kait 2010) ė and CEU eTD Collection alternative technologiesdeliveringelectricity;windenergyisassociatedwith windmills andinthelightofoilcrisis1970sfossilfuelsappear Nuclear isseenasmore with thelanguageofnuclearindustry.Bydoingso,authorfindssignificantsimilarities. interventionist statebetweenthe1930sand1960shecompareslanguageoftheseideals issues ofpersonalandsocialidentification.Referringbacktotherisemodernising diverging perceptionsandcomestoconcludethatnucleardebatesarenotascientificmatter,but of nuclearopponentsandproponentsProops(2001)pointsatthedifficultiesbridgingthese of themodernisingandinterventioniststate.Byoutlininginherentdifferencesinlanguageuse topic” modern-day nuclearrevival.Heunderstandsdiscourseas Similarly, the notionsof Proops (2001)studiesdiscoursesofWesterngovernmentsandindustriesasstronglyattachedto the discourseanalyticaltechniquesusedtoobtainresults. movement andmobilisingsocietyinpost-Soviettransition.Unfortunately,noneofthemspecify the roleoflanguageinfosteringrisenuclearenergy,shapingearlyenvironmental Several retrospectiveacademicarticlesreviewedhereoutlinetheresearchaimedatunderstanding 2.3.1.1 discourse studies. The sub-sectionsbelowprovideanoverviewoftheresearchinallthreecategoriesnuclear newspapers editorials(IzadiandSaghaye-Biria2007). (Anshelm andGalis2009);therestcoverissuessurroundingIran’snuclearprogramfrom present wasconsidered an perspective ofthestate. The discussionswerecharacterisedbytheenthusiasm forscience,the intimately relatedwithtechnologicaldiscourses,and focusonplanningandrationalityfromthe was seenasaguaranteeofpeace.Theauthorstates thatanti-nuclearmovementsofthetimewere nuclear waslinkedwithdangersoriginatinginits militaryuse,whiletheciviliannuclearenergy into considerationthehistoricalcontextofeachcountry, thestudyfindsthatmostoppositionto weapons andcivilianuseofnuclearintheUK WestGermanyduringtheColdWar.Taking This echoesresearchfindingsofNehring(2004) whoexaminespublicdebatesaroundnuclear serious accidentsofthepastdecades(Proops2001). liberalization ofenergymarketsandcleanlinesssafetynuclearisquestionedfollowingthe analytical approach,hemaintains,nuclearrevivalishardlypossibleasstatesmovetowards white coatsdelivering . Firstofall,theauthorarguesthatdevelopmentnuclearindustrycoincidedwithrise

Retrospective research “industrial armyofminers” “modernisation”, “independence” “limitless powerforthegreaterbenefitandgloryofmodernstate“. “modern” “atomic age” iscontrastedwith andofferingmore presentingboththreats andchallenges( and “control”, “clean andwell-educated” “control” and triestoapplythisinterpretationa “a setofviewsandattitudesonaparticular Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus asopposedtoconventionaland “insecure” nuclear engineersin Following this and “pre-modern” “curse” “finite” and 19 .

CEU eTD Collection Chernobyl servedasacrucialfactorforthenegotiation ofthenewsocialorder(Schmid2004). The authorconcludesthatdiscourseanalysisreveals howapartforthepolicyimplications and thecompletelackofpublicparticipationindecision-making. the newenvironmentaldiscoursechallenged origins andthesecrecyofnuclearindustry accident, mediauncertaintiesintheofficialreports werediscursivelytransformedintorisks,while experts andthepublic,attitudestowardtechnology andscientificprogress.Followingthe shifts intherelationshipbetweenstateandpress,natureofinteractions This discourseanalysisalsodepictsdiscursivetransformationsdocumentedbythemedia:major rhetoric wasespeciallystrong. Union itconstitutedapowerfultransitiondiscourse as anevidenceofthecatastrophicconsequencescivilusenuclearenergy,inSoviet disaster of1986.Schmid(2004)findsthatwhileintheWestaccidentwasperceivedprimarily Another recentretrospectivestudylooksattheSovietmediadiscussionfollowingChernobyl environmental awarenessduringthe1950sand1960s(Nehring2004). environmental movementsofthe1970sand1980sarerootedinperiodgrowing movements tobeaccusedofinstigatingpublichysteria.Finallythestudyconcludesthat optimistic interpretationscontinuedinparallelanditisthislightthatwasnotrareforthe the nuclearenergyusewhospokeof no concernsaboutdangersofmilitaryuse.Thereweregroupsemphasizingthemoralaspects Vaida Pilibaityte 20 especially inthelightof the so-calledrevival,climatechangeandenergysecurity debates.Some As notedabove,thereseems tobesomerecentsurgeofinterestinnuclear discoursestudies, 2.3.1.2 and theWestwasportrayedasfallingvictimto Meanwhile, reportsbytheWesternpresscitingmuchhigherimpactestimateswerecondemned vicinity oftheplantwerepresentedinmediaasexemplarsstrengthandcalmness. obligation. Itunitedpeopleinasimilarlystrongwayasithadshockedthem.Thoselivingthe was urgingtohelpmitigatetheconsequencesofaccidentasparteveryone’smoral used bythevariousgroupsforconflictinggoals.Duringearlyyearsof Describing ChernobylasapowerfulrhetoricaldeviceSchmid(2004)demonstrateshowitwas learned” activist movementsandthesurvivalofnuclearindustry,asChernobylwasportrayeda collapse. Furthermore,thisdiscourseofnationalandmoralunityresultedintheemergence Nonetheless, Nehring(2004)writes,theexistenceof overcome thelegacyofWorldWarIIandColdWar. “blessing”

forasaferuseofthisenergysource.

). Thepeacefulusewasperceivedasasymbolofmodernityandwelfare,wayto Nuclear revivalanalysis “atomic plague” “this ‘freedom’ofinformation”. “welding togethertheSovietpeople” “nuclear euphoria” and “atomic epidemic”. doesnotmeantherewere The perestroika just before the Scepticaland “us andthem” media “lesson

CEU eTD Collection The studyshowschangesindiscursiveframingfrom North Seaoilandgasithasbeenmovedthecenterofgovernment’srhetoric. the authors,asessentialtosustainingeconomicgrowth.Againstbackdropofdepletion the nationalinterestunderinternationalpressures.Itisalsodiscursivelyconstructed,accordingto the UKwhichwasastorylineprevalentpreviouslyduringpost-warera,butarounddefending The studyshowsthatwhenitcomesto highlight shiftsindiscourseaccordingtocertaininterests(ScraseandMacKerron2009). and environmentalacceptability,arguethateachofthemhasbeendiscursivelyconstructedto policy processthroughfourcentralgoalspursuedbythegovernment:access,security,efficiency same timeholdingontothepositionofindecisivenessissue.Theyanalyzeenergy the governmentofUKconsistentlyfavoured Scrase andMacKerron(2009)theyreviewanumberofpolicydocumentstodemonstratehow the publicdebate.Inrecentlypublishedbook energy transitions.By constraining andenablingeffectsforthepolicychangeespeciallyincontextofsustainable analysis. Theseauthorsstronglybelieveintheimportanceoflinguisticframingandits As mentionedearlier,ScraseandOckwell(2009)advocateforthediscursiveapproachtopolicy source ofdata,whileotherslookexplicitlyatthedebatecoveredbymedia,booksorleaflets. of nuclearweapons.Mostthemutilizepolicydocumentsandexpertinterviewsastheirmain researchers analyzemorespecificissuessuchasahighlevelwastemanagementandproliferation themselves” 2006 theirdevelopmentwasseenasan 2003 tothedependent of nuclearpowerisconstructed byindustry,scientistsandpoliticalelitethrough themanipulated energy asasolutiontoclimate change.Thispapersomewhatsimilarlyargues thattheexpansion Another studyfromthe UK byBickerstaff (Scrase andOckwell2009a). increasing fearsaroundenergysecurityandrhetorical fabricationofanon-existingenergygap years. Thereforetheycometotheconclusionthat theenergypolicydebatewascharacterizedby grounded inanynewempiricalanalysisindicating a majorenergygapthatoccurredinthosethree rhetoric. However,theauthorsunderline,such emphasis onthenewnuclearbuildwasnot shores withmightynavalships.Thenuclearlobby playedanimportantroleinpromotingthis metaphors ofa implying domesticenergysourceastheonlyviablewaytoensuresecurity.Historicallyresonant portrayed theUKthreatenedbyactivitiesofforeignnations,internationalterrorismincluded, “central toreframinginvestmentinnuclearelectricityasnecessarytheUK”. development ofrenewableenergywaspresentedasa to securesupplies “fleet” ofnuclearpowerstationswereusedalludingtoBritain oncedefendingits “framing” “we” . –implyingamorepersonalthreat;similarly,whilein2003 theyimplytheassumptionsmadeand Scrase andOckwell(2009)arguethatthisdiscursiveshiftwas energy security “obligation” et al. (2008)analyzesdiscursive re-framingofnuclear the newnuclearbuildin2006-2007whileat “Energy forthefuture:anewagenda” , thoughrenewableswere itisnotframedaroundjusticeorequityin “major opportunity” “energy supplies” Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus The storylinesaroundnuclear depending onimportsin fortheUKbusiness,in “constructing” “not yetenoughby editedby powerof 21

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 22 gap” where thenewreactorwasapprovedonlyafter thewasteissuewasperceivedas remain importantinthedecision-makingwithregard tofutureprojects.OneexampleisFinland particular startedtoberaised.LehtonenandMartiskainen (2010)stressthatthelatterislikelyto France andtheUKwhenpreviouslyneglectedissues ofethics,safetyandwastemanagementin being talkedaboutasthe public debateaimedatagreateracceptabilityofthiscontroversialresource.Theypointnuclear national securityandsovereignty. Nuclearseemstobealmostuniversallyperceived asthewayto Another keyaspectofnuclear developmentcommontoallthreecountries istheimportanceof and Finland. Nonetheless, thenucleartechnocracyandpublictrust inengineersremainsverystrongFrance legitimizing politicalandeconomicpolicydrivers(Bickerstaff and anticipatealotofmanipulativestrategiesaimedataddressinginstitutionalproblems of institutionalscepticismtracedbacktoproblematictechnologicaldecision-makingintheUK nuclear powerasanacceptablewayofaddressingclimatechange.Theauthorsnotethegreatdeal with intensedreadandfear.Onlytwooutof32individualsaresaidtohaveconsistentlyviewed While impactsofclimatechangeseemtolackpersonalimmediacy,nuclearwasteisassociated The resultsshowthatinbothinstancespeopleperceivethetwoissuesverydifferentways. other things,onclimatechangeandradioactivewaste. conducted earlierwiththetotalsampleof1,547respondents.Theywerequestioned,among the studyusedqualitativedatacollectedfromtwofocusgroupsandarepresentativesurvey in thehandsofindustryexperts.However1970s sawtheemergencein transparent decisionmaking,strongpublictrustin science,pro-nuclearmediaandstrongpower Historical analysisshowsthatearlydaysofnucleardevelopmentweremarkedbyahighlynon- The studyhighlightssomesimilaritiesanddifferencesamongthethreestudiedcountries. technocracy, emergenceofriskandfearpost-Chernobyltothe in thefollowingChapter3.Theyaredividedbyhistoricalperiodsfrompost-war Hajer’s (1995)discursivestorylinesthatunderpintheanalyticalframeworkofthisthesisoutlined structure theirfindingsintofivephasescalled use documentaryanalysisandsemi-structuredstakeholderinterviewsintheirstudy.They and rolesofactorsareattheheartdiscoursestudiesaswell.LehtonenMartiskainen(2010) their mainresearchfocusareassuchasissueframinginpolicydebates,argumentativestrategies Just likeinthepreviouspaper,authorsdonotreallyrefertoitasadiscourseanalysis,but title this gapisaresearchprojectattheSussexResearchGroupofUniversitySussex,under discourses arehardlystudied,cross-culturalworkisalmostnon-existent.Oneattempttoclose The introductiontothisthesishasalreadynotedthatapartfromthefactmodernnuclear

“Governance ofthenuclearrevivalinFinland,FranceandUK and

diversify supplies.Inordertostudypublicriskperceptionsinthecontextofthisdebate, “real green” meanstofightthe “nuclear histories” “devastating climatechange”, etal. – framings,actorstrategiesandpolicies”. withsomeelementsresembling 2008). “death ofnuclear” “counter expertise” plug the andrevival. “solved” “energy in .

CEU eTD Collection of theFinnishParliamentwhoparticipatedinvoteregardingdecisionon5 nuclear development.ThestudybyBerg(2009)isbasedon12focusedinterviewswithmembers provides quiteanextensiveoverviewandincludesasectionondiscursiveaspectsoftherecent work hasbeenpublishedinFinnish,onerecentpublicationEnglish(KojoandLitmanen2009) Finland seemstohavebeendocumentedratherwellbyFinnishscientists.Althoughmostofthis Following thislineofinquiryitmustbesaidthatthehistorynuclearenergyanditsrevivalin Martiskainen 2010). reframing aroundclimateandsecurityinthethreecountriesmaynotendure(Lehtonen remains slow.Thereforeaccordingtotheauthorsconvergenceintermsofrecent “Areva” the globalmarkettostrongerplayerssuchasSouthKoreaandshakytopmanagementof cost overruns,wasteexportstoRussia,uraniummininginAfrica.Franceislosingcompetition radioactive leaksin2008;theprojectFinlandiscloudedbysafetycontrolconcerns,delays, Sceptical non-governmentalorganizations(NGOs)havegatheredstrengthinFrancefollowing to climatechangeoppositionremainsverystrongonthelocallevelduesafetyconcerns. The authorsalsoarguethat were Finnish. “Finnish project”, environmental concerns, economicgrowth,institutionalexpertiseandtechnology areseenin surrounding nuclearpower. Inthelightofecologicalmodernisation andwidespread Berg (2009)interprets these findingsastheendofbipolarway ofdiscussingissues economic growthandexpertiseinchargeofmanaging modernenvironmentalrisks. renewables climatediscourse,andthefourth–reflexive anti-nucleardiscoursethatquestioned reflecting principlesofecologicalmodernization – pro-nuclearclimatediscourseandthepro- characterized bytheideaofsimplemodernisation andeconomicgrowth,thetwodiscourses The studyrevealswhatisdepictedas and examinesthewaytheycompeteindebate. discourse definitionandputsmoreemphasisoncontent,ideas,categories,systemsofmeaning development: simple,ecologicalandreflexivemodernization.Berg(2009)takesthisscientist’s analytical categoriesandteststhetheoreticalmodelassumingexistenceofthreeidealtypes values andthedebateingeneral.TheanalysisisconducteddrawingonHajer’s(1995)discourse their roles,rolesofexpertsandcitizenswhendecidingontheissue.Otherthemesincluderisks, (Berg 2009).Author’sdiscourseanalysisisaimedatthedescribingwayspoliticiansperceived unit inMay2002–halfofthoseinterviewedvotedfavourandrestagainstthenewbuild generate debate onthe5 where seriesofearliersafetyproblemshavediminisheditsimageoverthetime.InFinland does dothelpeither;theprogresstowardsmoreindustryopennessandtransparency “truly domestic” th although themainsupplierwasFrench reactorfeaturedthe electricity andthesourceofnationalpride,withexceptionUK “despite theseeminglysuccessfulreframing” “fear ofRussia” “four nucleardiscourses” argumentandwas “Areva” : thepro-nuclearprogressdiscourse Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus ofnuclearenergyasthesolution andonlyaquarterofworkers “sold” to thepublicasa th nuclear 23

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 24 press onIran’snuclearprogram.Itcanbesaidthat nuclear public communication,radioactivewastemanagement policiesandtheideologicalstanceof Along somewhatdifferentlines,ahandfulofauthors employeddiscourseapproachtostudythe 2.3.1.3 research forthisthesis.Balo One morestudythatdeservesamentionherecomesfromcountrywhichispartofempirical choose nuclearasa modernisation ofthe1980sand1990stooptimisticecologicalenabling overall conclusion,thestudynotesashiftonnuclearenergyinFinlandfromideaofreflexive seem tohaveenjoyedthemostinfluence,whileNGOswereseenasbiasedandprejudiced.An debate withtheindustry.InFinnishdiscussionexpertsstronginstitutionalbackground strip environmentalNGOsofthepowertheyoncehadmakingitdifficulttocounterbalance downplay nuclearrisksandreframethistechnologyasaGHGmitigationoption.Thisseemsto Finland asmeanstosolveenvironmentalproblems.Meanwhileclimatechangeisused oral submissionstotheenvironmental assessmentpanel,consultationdocuments andinterviews. making inthisfield.The studydrawsoninterpretiveanalysisofpolicystatements, writtenand context. Theauthortraced theirnarrativesaimedatadvocatingforamore inclusivedecision Aboriginal organizationsinthecontextofnuclear wastemanagementpolicyintheCanadian Johnson (2007)analyzesdiscursivecoalitionbuilding amongenvironmental,religious,and the policymakingprocessisaprimarysubjectofinquiry. citizen groups(7%),scientists(5%),NGOs(2%),medicaldoctors(0.5%)areleftasoutsiders. (17%) whoretainthe so-called in mediapublications.ResearchersconcludethatLithuanianpublicsphereisdominatedbythe Another significantaspectoftheLithuaniannucleardiscourserelatestomainactorsquoted technologic andenvironmentalrisksordownplayingthemasbelongingtothepast. while nuclearismainlylinkedwithpoliticsandeconomicscompletelyignoringpotential Lithuanian pressheadlinesonthesubjectoftenfeaturesymbolsofdeath,ironyanduncertainty, are confrontational,characterizedbythepowerstruggle.Furthermore,theyobservethat emerging storylines.IndoingsoBalo together. Authorsalsoexamined37longertextsintermsoftheirnarrativestructureand other riskrelatedsubjectssuchasgeneticallymodifiedorganismsandclimatechangeput 2008. Theresultsindicatethatnuclearenergyisamuchmorepopulartheme(50%)comparedto over 400textspublishedinthemostpopularLithuaniadailiesperiodoffourmonths public communication.Theresearchersperformedbothquantitativeandqualitativeanalysisof in theLithuanianmediaandsociety.Theirmainfocuswasriskframingsymbolicmeanings

Other nuclear-relatedissues “talking classes” “cleaner” “legitimacy” –politicians(60%ofpublications),experts(20%)andbusinessmen optionforaddressingclimatechange. č kait ė todiscussnuclearissuesandthuscontrolthediscourse,while andRinkevi č kait ė andRinkevi č ius (2009)studiedthediscourseonnuclearpower č ius (2009)foundthatdominantthemes per se is secondarytothisresearchand CEU eTD Collection discourse. Astrategyof attackandexposureisalsooftenused.As demonstrated inthe different logicofargument basedoncontestation,denialandrejection oftheanti-nuclear Meanwhile, Windisch(2009) demonstrateshowthepro-nuclearactors employ acompletely that nuclearisintrinsicallyevil. fundamental differencebetweenreactorsandsafety cultureoftheSovietUnionandWest generalizations andessentializationstoargue that historyrepeatsitself,thereisno alternative energysources.Forexample,inthesafety debate,theanti-nuclearprotagonistsuse nuclear waste,andthepotentialmilitarythreatto thepowerstations,economics,ecologyand The analysisrevealsthatthedominanttopicsin theSwisspublicdebatearesafety,issuesof study wasalsotoexaminehowtheactorsmaketheirpointsandaddressoneanother. and politicalrepresentation,theconstructionofimagesdiscoursestrategies.Theaim 1990 waschosenanddataanalyzedtoidentifythethemesofpoliticaldiscourse,social decades. Forthesakeofprovidingoneexamplevoteonnuclearenergyheld29September thousands ofarchivedletterswrittenbyordinarycitizenstothepressovercoursetwo ordinary, everydayformsofargumentation,theauthorutilizedanimpressivevolumetens communication intheSwissdirectdemocracycontext(Windisch2008).Withafocuson Pro- andanti-nucleardebatesarethecenterofstudypoliticalargumentationan political cultureasoftenmaintained(AnshelmandGalis2009). between authoritiesandtheanti-nuclearmovementnotconsensus-basedSwedish development oftheundergroundhighlevelwastestoragemethodwasleadbyintenseconflicts waste managementpractices.BasedontheirresearchAnshelmandGalis(2009)claimthatthe scientifically validinthe1950sand1960stocurrentconflictnegotiations-basednuclear The findingsshowtheevolutionofindustry’sstatementsbeingperceivedasuniversally prevalent themes. scientific journals,reports,leafletsandbooksthatwerecloselyreadcodedaccordingto Their researchconstitutesananalysisofover1200documentsincludingnewspaperarticles, economic argumentativestrugglesandthereforecanbestudiedthroughthepublicdiscourse. management inthiscountryoriginatescomplexpolitical,cultural,ethical,geographicaland in Swedenfromthe1950stodate.Theirpointofdepartureisviewthatnuclearwaste nuclear energyindustryandsocialgroupswithregardtothehighlevelwastemanagement Similarly, AnshelmandGalis(2009)usediscourseapproachestoinvestigatetheagendasof their dominancebehindthecloseddoors(Johnson2007) coalition becameavictimofthehistoricalpowerdynamicsasinfluentialdecisionmakersasserted evaluation revealsthatdespitetheireffortsandapparentachievementsthenewdiscursive equality, reciprocity,agreement,andintegration.Accordingtotheauthor,policy-making It goesontoarguethatthissortofconsultationprocessinrealitydidnotleadmoreinclusion, Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus 25

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 26 ideological themesinthreeUSnewspapers: One laststudysummarizedherereliesonmediapublicationschosentocriticallyassess concrete andeverydayoperationofeffectivepoliticalargumentation” author underlinesthattheseadversarial and objectivescience,whiletheothersideisportrayedasinconsistentillogic.Insum, common statementfromthepro-nuclearcampisthattheirargumentsarebasedonhardfacts side contrastswithamorevoluntaristandidealisticdiscourseoftheanti-nuclearcamp.Avery and dialogic.Themorematerialisticeconomicarguments-basedstrategyofthepro-nuclear What regardstheargumentation,Windisch(2009)pointsoutthatitisfundamentallyinteractive would leadtoamuchmoreseverepollution. debate onnuclearandarguethatitprovidesanidealsolutiontoclimatechangerejecting different kindofeconomy.Ironically,thepro-nuclearcampactuallywelcomesecological Amid thedebatenuclearopponentscallforenergysaving,aqualitativechangeinsocietyand Their stanceisthatwasteatechnicalproblemforwhichthesolutioncanalwaysbefound. purely hypotheticalandevenstigmatizessuchargumentsaspsychologicalnotbasedonfacts. contamination andmilitaryattack.Inturn,apro-nuclearlobbyrefusestodebatethisdangeras discussion onwaste,nuclearenergyisportrayedasinherentlydangerousintermsofpotential critical approachtowardstheofficialgovernments’ policies. diplomatic solution.Asaresult,IzadiandSaghaye-Biria (2007)concludethatelitemedialacks about theexistenceofnuclearprogrammeand allseempessimisticaboutthesuccessofa intelligence. Althoughnewspapers’positionsdiverge, noneofthemchallengetheassumption editorials depictIraniannuclearweaponsprogram asarealitydespitethelackofdefinitive and technologicalcapabilitiesnotthepotential militaryapplications.Furthermore,thethree the authorsarguethatthreenewspapersperceive thedangerasinherenttoIran’sscientific common intheeditorialsthatwerestudied.WhenitcomestonucleartechnologyuseIran, The studyfindsthatthethemesofIslamasathreatandOrientaluntrustworthinessaremost players oragents,alsonorms,valuesandrhetoric(IzadiSaghaye-Biria2007). argumentative structuresusedineditorialsordertopromoteacertainperspectiveonevents, threat, JewsversusArabs,strangenessanduntrustworthiness.Additionally,authorstrace identify eightOrientalthemes:inferiority,backwardness,irrationality,submissiveness,Islamas Western worldviewofIslamandMuslimsstemmingfromthestructuralistuselanguage.They (2007) aimstoexaminetheformationofOrientalistimagesbasedondichotomous columns astheyareprimarilyaimedattheeconomicandpowerelites.IzadiSaghaye-Biria Street Journal

. ThefocusofthisresearchisthediscussiononIran’snuclearprogramineditorial “verbal wars” The NewYorkTimes,theWashingtonPost inessencecanlack (Windisch2008). “the vitaldimensionsofthe and TheWall CEU eTD Collection (Bickerstaff climate changemitigation withoutmuchreferencetofactsthatsubstantiate suchclaims linguistically framepro-nuclearpoliciesbypinning themeithertostatesecurity,energysecurityor science (Proops2001;Nehring2004).Several studiesdemonstratevariousattemptsto and/or hamperedbydifferentperceptionsaboutthe roleand/ortrustworthinessofthestateand social transition(Schmid2004)andhowcertain technologicaldevelopmentscanbefostered To nameafew,itshowshownuclearaccidentscan beusedtoconsolidatethenationanddrive indicates thatdiscourseanalysiscanprovideinteresting andvariedinsightsfordecisionmaking. The thirdsectionincludesaliteraturereviewon nucleardiscoursestudies.Insummary,it surrounding theIran’snuclearprogram. examine politicalcommunication,radioactivewastemanagementanddiscursiveframingofissues mainly focusontherenewedinterestinnuclearpower.Theremainderincludestudiesthat Cold Warrhetoric,andthepost-Chernobyldiscoursesoftransitionsociety,whiletopicalones research onothernuclear-relatedissues.Thefirstpartlooksatthehistoryoftechnology, discourses publishedoverthelastdecadeintoretrospectivestudies,nuclearrevivalanalysisand debate onnuclearpowerappearstobelimited.Thisstudydividestheliterature also inenergyandsecurity.Nonethelessacross-culturaldiscourseanalysisoftherecent has seenagrowinginterestintheroleofdiscoursesenvironmentalpolicy-makingandlately The secondsectionfocusesonthelinksbetweendiscourseandpolicymaking.lastdecade making withsignificantcontributionsfromcitizens. management. Withsustainabilitypolicesinmind,someauthorssuggestcomplementingdecision- as alinearprocessandcallsformorediscursivedemocracynormativediscourse perspective towardspolicy-makingasaconstantcommunicativestrugglerejectsdecision-making play thekeyrole.Themoremulti-interpretabletheyare,difficulttochallenge. influence overtheirrivalstoachievethediscursivehegemony.Inthis,simplestorylines manipulations. Discourseactorsnotonlypromotedifferentviewsthoughnarrativesbutalsoseek increasingly influencedbythemedia,societieshavebecomemoresusceptibletopower becomes oneofthekeyprerequisitesaccesstoknowledgeproduction.Associallifeis interaction. Mediaasanarenaofsocialinteractionwheredifferentargumentsareplayedout social constructandisconstantlyproducedreproducedthroughlanguagehuman The firstsectiondefinesdiscourseasaformofsocialpractice.Fromthisperspective,realityis discourse analyticalapproachesisreviewedaswell. hegemony andpolicy-making.Literaturewithfocusonissuessurroundingnuclearenergyusing discourse analysisandlinkitwithdemocracy,mediapublicsphere,argumentativestruggle, This chaptercontainstheliteraturereviewandconsistsofthreesections.Theyintroduce 2.4 end ofabipolardebateon nuclearenergy(Berg2009).

Summary andconclusion etal. 2008;ScraseandOckwell 2009b;LehtonenandMartiskainen2010)note the Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus 27

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 28 Belarus. studied onlyinthecontextofriskperceptionstudies,whilenosuchworkexistsonsituation isolated studiesoriginatingmainlyintheUK.NucleardiscourseLithuanianmediahasbeen security and/ornuclearenergy,democracyandpublicdebateareabsent.Thereonlyfew The reviewalsoshowsthatrecentcross-culturalstudieslinkingnuclearenergyand public discussions(Windisch2008). Saghaye-Biria 2007)andhowconfrontationaladversaryargumentationstrategiesdegrade and Rinkevi manipulate publicoptionand/orinterferewithparticipation(Johnson2007;Balo Moreover, discourseanalysisalsohelpstracingtechniquesvarioussocialgroupsusetoshapeand

č ius 2009),revealshowuncriticalofofficialpolicieselitemediacanbe(Izadiand č kait ė

CEU eTD Collection 3.2 outlinesthecomparativepartofthiswork,while section3.4sumsupandconcludes. introduces theauthor’sanalyticalapproachbasedon conceptsdevelopedbyHajer(1995).Section explains thechoiceofdatasources,sampling strategy andadditionalcriteria.Section3.2 This chaptercontainsdetailsonthemethodology. Section3.1dealswithdatacollection–it themes andnarratives,findingswerecomparedinterpretedinthefinalstage. context; inparalleltextsampleswerecollectedforqualitativecodinganddepictionofrecurring For bothglobalandnationaldiscourseanalysistheliteraturewasreviewedtodescribe followed, andcomparativeanalysistookplacelast. energy discoursewasstudiedfirst,theanalysisofnationaldiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus energy. TheresearchwasdividedintothreestagespicturedinFigure3.1.globalnuclear Discourse analysiswasusedinthisstudyasaframeworktoexaminethedebatesonnuclear 3 source forglobalanalysis andtextsfromthemedia–fornationalcases. and mediapublications. Publications byinternationalorganizationsserved asthemaindata This studymainlyreliedondatafromsecondary sources: publishedresearch,policydocuments, 3.1

METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK Data collection “…Neither theimplications,nordesiredoutcomeofcriticalnewsanalysis Figure 3.1Researchstages are purelyacademic:theysocial,politicalandpersonal” Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus

Roger Fowler 29

CEU eTD Collection publications producedbytheseorganizations: information-rich datasamplewasobtainedby applying theadditionalqualitativecriteriafor (WNA). Theirdetailedprofilesarepresentedin Table4.1includedinthenextchapter.An Programme (UNDP),theWorldEnergyCouncil (WEC)andtheWorldNuclearAssociation Economic Co-operationandDevelopment(OECD), theUnitedNationsDevelopment Greenpeace, theIAEA,IPCC,NuclearEnergy Agency(NEA)oftheOrganizationor A followinglistofglobaldiscourseactorswascompiledfocusingonthestakeholderdiversity: identified firstandsamplingoftheirpublicationstookplaceafterwards. of nuclearpower.Inordertodescribetheglobaldiscursivestorylines,internationalactorswere energy-related publicationsbythekeyinternationalplayersselectedfocusingondifferentaspects discourse analysisratherthanfullyexploretheinternationaldebate.Thereforeitcoversonlyfew The globalpartofdiscourseanalysisisintendedtoprovidethebackgroundfornational 3.1.2 personal contactsduringthefieldresearchinBelarusandLithuaniaaswell. as officialdocuments,doctoraldissertationsandjournalarticlesinpresswereobtainedthrough think-tanks andmediaarticleswasunavoidable.Themostrecentcountry-specificmaterialssuch science institutes’reportsandother media systeminLithuaniaandBelarusarelimitedornotavailable,somerelianceonthenational Since academicpublicationsonthemostrecentdevelopmentsrelatedtonuclearpowerand the LundUniversitylibraryandGoogleBookswasusedaswell. national dataonenergypolicies.AccesstotheCentralEuropeanUniversitylibrary,e-booksof Belarus aswellRussia’s(eLibrary.ru)electronicscholarlydatabasesweresearchedforcollecting Databases oftheLibraryLithuanianAcademySciencesandNational Web ofKnowledge,ScienceDirect,WileyInterScience,andGoogleScholarwereconducted. national mediasystemswasreviewed.SearchesininternationalscholarlydatabasessuchasISI For thediscoursecontextdescriptionliteratureonglobalandnationalenergypolicies, 3.1.1 Vaida Pilibaityte 30 a choiceofsmallersamplesizefocusingon parts datawascollectedusing Since discursivestorylineswerethemainobjectofanalysis,forbothglobalandnationalresearch of datacollectiontechniquesareprovidedinthefollowingsub-sections. data aimedatin-depthstudyofaphenomenonorissueinterest(Patton2002).Furtherdetails



21 Global discourse Context description Topical st century; –addressingnuclearenergy issuesinacontextofglobalenergychallenges ofthe purposeful samplingstrategy “grey” sourcessuchasnon-governmentalorganizations, “information-rich” . Thiskindofstrategyisacharacterizedby cases:specificratherthangeneral CEU eTD Collection to theglobaldiscourseanalysisisthatthreenationalbroadsheet The nationalnucleardiscourseanalysiswasconductedinasimilarway.differencecompared 3.1.3 10 9 “ literature events listedinthefollowingsub-sections3.1.3.1and3.1.3.2.Thesearetermed The textsweresampledaccordingtoapublicationdate,takingintoconsiderationseveralnational nuclear, andneutral)r weekly), Selection criteriaincludesadiversityof chapter. energy-related themesandinterpretedusinganalyticalcategoriesdescribedinsection3.2ofthis in theTableA.1ofAppendix.Thesetextswerequalitativelycodedforrecurringnuclear A listofpublicationspurposefullysampledfortheanalysiscontainssevenitemsandisincluded applying qualitativecriterialistedbelow: thematically irrelevantand/orrepetitiveitems and reduceeachsampletomanageablesize In ordertocompileinformation-richdatasamples,searchresultswererefinedfilterout Lithuanian The textswerecollectedperformingsearchesinonlinearchivesusingkeywords discussion onasubjectmatter(Jäger2001).

Mediathatadherestothehighest professionalstandardscomparedtoalowerqualitytabloidmedia. ядерная Anoteontranslationsandtransliterations: alltranslationsof tables (withoutdiacritics). Russian namesandtitleshavebeen transliteratedusingthe    

governments, industry,public; technology andsafety,industrialpublicadvocacy; perspectives: policyanalysis,sustainabledevelopment,climatechange,energysupply, discourse analysistoenablecomparison. National discourses Policy focus Timeframe – Interests Topical

энергетика circulation discursive events 10 [ “atomin –directlypertainingtotheresearchsubjectandselected discursiveevents; – representingadiversityofinternationalstakeholders:scientists,experts, –dealingwiththeglobalenergypolicyand/ornuclearfromavarietyof ”, “ (high andlow), publishedin2004-2009,i.e.parallelwithtextsselectedforthenational ė АЭС energetika”,“branduolin astheyareemphasizedpoliticallyinthemedia,andtriggerpeaks egular coverage ” ] .

editorial stance ofnuclearenergyandsecurity. type (newsportal,nationaldaily,politicaland/orbusiness ė energetika” textsinLithuanianandRussianare bytheauthor.Belarusian (pro-government,pro-nuclear,opposition,anti- American LibraryAssociation– ofCongress ] andRussian Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus 9 mediaoutletswereselectedfirst.

[ “ атомная “nuclear energy”

энергетика transliteration and in 31 ”,

CEU eTD Collection 2009 period,characterizedbythefollowingdiscursiveevents: The Lithuaniannuclearenergydiscourseanalysisisbasedonthemediatextspublishedin2007- 3.1.3.1 Vaida Pilibaityte 32 11 of 2006-2009.Thistimeframeischaracterizedbythese discursiveevents: The Belarusiannucleardiscoursewasexaminedby reviewingthemediaarticlesfromperiod 3.1.3.2 breakdown ofthesamplebymediaoutletlooksasfollows: analysis canbefoundintheTableA.2ofAppendix;itincludesatotal78items.A Delfi.lt During thefirstsearcharound200publicationsby “Atgimimas” biggest nationaldailynewspaper

Delfi.lt The reviewedmediaarticlesweresampledfromthreenationalbroadsheetoutlets FormoredetailsontheLithuanian mediaoutletsselectedseep.61.

      

andover100–by – 29texts.

NPP thestrategicpriorityinJanuaryand energy securityinDecember2006; subjective pointofview); interviews (in-depthtalkwithoneperson)oracommentary(opinionpiecepresenting background oftheissue; more detailedexplanationsonvariousthemesand/ornationalinternational the newNPPandconnectingLithuaniatowesterngridinMay2008; 2009. 2007; stylistic elementstoexplaintheissue. Genre – Adoption ofthenew The President’sapprovalforbuildingthenewNPP atthemeetingonincreasingnational Polemic, analytical Rhetoric Liquidation ofthe Formation ofthepublic-privateconsortium

Lithuania Belarus [eng. news (reportingfacts),backgroundarticles(presentingviews,explainingcontext), –

“Revival” use ofvariousconnotations,metaphors,allusions,irony,sarcasmandother – includingadiversityofviewsexpressedbymultipleactors;providing ] and “Atgimimas” “Leo LT” National EnergyStrategy

the biggestonlinenewsportal “Lietuvosrytas” anddecommissioningoftheIgnalinaNPPinDecember weekly werereviewed.Thelistoftextsselectedforthe [eng. “Leo LT” whichdeclaresbuildingthenewVisaginas Law ontheNuclearPowerPlant “Lietuvos rytas” “Lithuanian Morning” “Lietuvos rytas” responsiblefortheconstructionof Delfi.lt . daily, 490publications–by

–29, ], thepoliticalweekly “Atgimimas” passedinJune 11 –20, : the CEU eTD Collection When elaboratingontheconceptof messages andalso relationships betweenvarious particular ideascometodominatethediscussion, meanings andeffectsofspecificwaystalking(Hajer1995).Whenanalysingwhyhow Arguably, suchapproachfacilitatesunderstandingoftheformationsocialcoalitionsoncertain discursive storylines graphically depictedinFigure3.2,includesfourcategories:(1)descriptionofthe on argumentativediscoursetheorydevelopedbyMaartenA.Hajer(1995).Theanalysis, As mentionedearlierinChapters1and2,theempiricalresearchapproachemployedheredraws 3.2 12 by suggestingcommonunderstanding.Second, as theygetacceptedbyagroupofdiscourse First ofall,theauthorargues,storylinesactassocial devicesthatreducecomplexityinthedebate fears, etc. follow certainstructuredmodesofcognition:analogies, historicalreferences,clichés,collective simplified narrativesplaythekeyroleinestablishing particularviewsbecausepeopletendto (2) identificationof are themediaoutlets news portal business weekly Belarus Segodnia” The textspublishedduringthisperiodbythemaingovernmentdaily follows: this documentandcontains79texts.Abreakdownofthesamplebymediaoutletlooksas final listofBelarusiantextsselectedforanalysisisincludedintheTableA.3Appendixto “Belorusy iRynok” The initialarchivalsearchesreturnedover400articlesin FormoredetailsonBelarusianmedia outletsselectedseep.88.  

Analytical categories declaring buildingthenewNPPastrategicpriorityinSeptember2007; October 2009. public consultationproceduresontheenvironmentalimpactassessmentofplantin The finaldecisiononbuildingthenewNPPinJanuaryanditssitingDecember2008; Approval oftheupdated “Sovetskaia Belorussia”– “Naviny.by –BelarusskieNovosti” and(4)identificationof [eng. “Belorusy iRynok” and over200in themes 12 actors, servingasadatasourcefortheBelarusiannucleardiscourseanalysis. “Soviet Belarus–Today”, and their expressedbeliefsand storylines actors,

29, Conception ofEnergySecuritytheRepublicBelarusuntil2020 “Belorusy iRynok” [eng. Naviny.by producersandintendedrecipientsofknowledge-producing –symbolicreferencesthatunitethemintocoalitions. discourse coalitions. “Belarusians andMarket” discursive storylines [eng. that werepublishedovertheselectedperiod.The “News.by –BelarusianNews” context – 20and thereafter inwhichstatementsaremadeisstudied, themes

Hajer(1995,56)arguesthatthese “Sovetskaia Belorussia”, , (3)characterizationofprevailing Naviny.by – Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus “Sovetskaia Belorussia” ] andtheleadingprivateonline 30 texts. “Sovetskaia Belorussia– , thereafter discourse context around 100in ] theprivate Naviny.by 33 ] ,

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 34 different contexts.Later these weregroupedaccordingtothediscursivestorylines basedonthe the recurringthemes,beliefs andargumentsexpressedbyvariousactorsabout nuclearpowerin media wereexaminedfollowingthesameanalytical sequence.Theywerequalitativelycodedfor Publications producedbyglobalactorsandarticles selectedfromtheLithuanianandBelarusian 3.3 various disciplinescanreferto(Hajer1995,63). And finally,theyusuallypossesstheabilityofprovidingacommonnarrativethatactorsfrom actors, theystabilizethedebateandsometimescreateasenseofachievedsolutiontoproblem. arrangements (Hajer1995,61). takes theformoftranslationtheoreticalconcepts intoconcretepoliciesandinstitutional is theirmulti-interpretabilitythathelpswinthestruggle fordiscursivehegemony,whichusually but author, themostpowerfulstorylineisnotnecessarilylogicalorstrategicallychosenone, determined bythepowerandattractivenessofstorylines.Whatismore,accordingto These argumentativecommunicativenetworksarethepotentialvehiclesofpolicychange, express them. the basisforformationofdiscoursecoalitionsaswellwillingness,needandwaysto networks ofactorswithsharedperceptions.Storylines,notinterests,Hajer(1995)explains,are solvers, leadersorscaremongers,storylinesactascementfor By clusteringthecollectiveknowledgeandpositioningdiscourseactorsasvictims,problem

“it soundsright” Discourse analysis Figure 3.2Discourseanalyticalcategories(producedbasedonconceptsbyHajer(1995)) tothemajorityofrecipients.Therefore,asalreadypointedoutinChapter3,it discourse coalitions –communicative

CEU eTD Collection findings werecomparedandinterpreted. both globalandnationaldiscoursesfollowingthe samemethodologicalsequence,empirical communicative networksdrivingpolicystalemate orchange.Afterdocumentingandanalyzing debates. Byimplyingsimplifiedproblemresolutions theyformdiscoursecoalitions– proposed byHajer(1995).Storylinesaresimplified narrativesreplacingcomplexdisciplinary The datawasinterpretedusingconceptsofdiscursive storylinesanddiscoursecoalitions were examined. 2009 bytheGreenpeace,IAEA,IPCC,NEA,UNDP,WECandWNA discourse analysis.Forthatpurposeseveninternationalpublicationsproducedbetween2004and analyzed. Globaldiscoursewasanalyzedinordertoprovidebackgroundforcomparativenational items andtoreducethesamplesmanageablesize.Atotalof157textsweresampled keywords. Theresultswererefinedusingqualitativecriteriatofilteroutirrelevantandrepetitive 2006-2009. Textsweresampledbyperformingsearchersinonlinearchivesusingcontextualized analysis werecollectedfromsixnationalmediaoutletsaccordingtomajordiscursiveeventsin The studyreliedonsecondarydatasources.TextsfortheLithuanianandBelarusiandiscourse last. coded forrecurringdiscourseactorsandthemes,globalnationalanalysiswasconducted national discoursecontext,theninformation-richdatasampleswerecollectedandqualitatively The researchwasdividedintothreestages:theliteraturereviewedtodescribeglobaland and nationalgovernancelevelwhenitcomestoconsideringthenuclearoption. energy securityandclimatechangemitigationindentifysimilaritiesdifferencesonglobal framework toexaminethecurrentnuclearenergypolicyformation,describehowitrelates This chapterexplainsresearchmethodology.Discourseanalysisisusedinthisstudyas 3.4 features ofthediscursivepowerstrugglewerediscussed. differences intheactorbehaviour,discursiveframingofnuclear,argumentativestrategiesand global nucleardiscourseanalysiswithresultsofthenationalanalysis.Policyimplications storylines andcompetingdiscoursecoalitionswerecontrastedbyincorporatingfindingsofthe compared. Themostoftenappearingissues,themesandtheirinterpretations,dominant After documentingandanalyzingbothglobalnationaldiscourses,empiricalfindingswere relation tothesocio-politicalandeconomiccontexttheybelongto. similarities inargumentationtoidentifydiscoursecoalitions,describeandinterpretthem

Summary andconclusion Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus 35

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 36

CEU eTD Collection 4 electricity mixbythe1987 (IAEA2004). impressive growthrates averaged 30%peryeartoachievemorethan16% shareinaglobal the globaloilcrisisitstarted growingrapidlyandforadecadebetween1970 and1975reached “too cheaptometer” (IAEA 2004).Althoughinitiallyitcarriedagreatpromise ofalimitlessenergysourcethatwillbe first civilianreactorstartedgeneratingelectricityfor aresidentialpowergridintheSovietUnion discovery in1938andduringtheWorldWarII(Bodansky 2005).Itwasnotuntil1954thatthe The originsofnuclearfissionuraniumgoback tomilitaryapplicationsaroundthetimeofits 4.1 section 4.4. discursive knowledgeonnuclearenergyinsection4.3andasummarytheformoftables description ofstorylinesformingthreediscoursecoalitionsthatdrivecontrastingstrands recurring discoursethemesinthepublicationsanalyzedsection4.2.Italsoincludesa discourse contextoverviewinsection4.1thengoesontointroducetheselectedglobalactorsand in internationalpublicationsproducedbyseveralglobalactors.Thechapterbeginswitha discourse ofnuclearenergy.Discoursewasanalyzedbyreadingintocompetingnarrativesfound This chapterexplorestheargumentsforandagainstnuclearpowerbyexaminingglobal be competitiveundertheliberalizedmarketconditions(FinonandRoques2008). public opposition(EbingerandMassy2009).Moreover,therearedoubtsthatnuclearenergycan technological problemslinkedtounmanagedradioactivewaste,riskofweaponsproliferationand However, somebelievethattheproclaimednucl Westlén 2010). Germany, theUKandUSarereviewingtheirpolicies(Vaughan2009;DJN2010;Wald started cominginagain,theIAEAreportsawaveofnewcomersandcountriessuchasSweden, 2005; NuttallEerkens2006;Müller-Kraenner2008;Wald2008).Newreactorordershave security andclimatechangechallengesnuclearenergyhasbeenposedforarevival(Marshall of the21 projections fornuclearpowerhavebeenstartingtogoupwardsinresponseenergychallenges Despite thestagnationofpasttwodecades,priortoeconomiccrisis2008

GLOBAL NUCLEARENERGY DISCOURSE Global discoursecontext st century(IAEA2009).Manyhavearguedlatelythatduetoagrowingdemand,energy , sincethelate1950sindustrydevelopedratherslowly (Bodansky2005).Amid ear energycomebackmightbeovershadowedby “Nuclear canbebeneficialifemployedcarefully, Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus but cancausegreatproblemsifnot” The IPCC 37

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 38 hurdles associatedwith instability ofsafetyregulationsanddesignlicensing, politicalrisksof nuclear powerunderthe conditionsoftheliberalisedelectricitymarket willhavetoaddress fuel priceandotherrisks were bornebyconsumersratherthansuppliers.The potentialrevivalof nuclear development.Alltheplantsoperatingtoday wherebuiltwhenallthecosts,performance, nuclear buildisverydifferentfromthehistorical arrangementsthatconditionedtheglobal Nevertheless, asnotedbyFinonandRoques(2008) thecurrentregulatorycontextfornew factors (Vaughan2009;Wald2010). have announcedtheirnuclearexpansionplansquoting environmentamongthemainmotivating (DJN 2010;Westlén2010),whiletheUnitedKingdom (UK)andtheUSarelatestonesto sceptical countrieslikeSwedenandGermanyhave beenintheprocessofreviewingtheirpolicies the surveyed12countriesthatalreadyhaveanuclearprogramme(IAEA2009).Previously The IAEApublicacceptanceindexsurveyhasshownincreasedpositiveattitudesamongmostof programme, mostoftheminthedevelopingworld(IAEA2009;WNA2009). In addition,morethan55newcountrieshaveexpressedinterestsofstartinganuclear increase nuclearcapacityfourfoldby2020areunderway(EbingerandMassy2009;IAEA2010). nuclear unitsunderconstructionworldwide;29ofthemarelocatedinChinawhereplansto constructions havebeenstartedsince1985.Inthebeginningof2010,therewereatotal56 since 1955withnonewreactorsconnectedtothegrid,butlargestnumber,ten today (IPCC2007;IAEA2009,2010).AccordingtotheIAEA,year2008wasfirstone countries –nuclearconstitutesaround7%ofprimaryenergyand14%globalelectricitysupply nuclear industry.Therewere436reactorsoperatingworldwideasofthebeginning2010in30 But recentlythereweresignsofwhatsomearecallingarevivalorevenrenaissancethe few newconnectionstothegridmainlyinEasternEuropeandAsia(Bodansky2002,2005). programme hasbeenstartedandtheindustrydecliningwithanageingglobalfleet and Belgiumintroducedphase-outplans(Rüdig1990;Bodansky2005).Eversince1987nonew complete haltofnuclearprogrammesincountrieslikeItaly,whileothersSweden,Germany public healthandsocio-economicconsequencesofthistragedy(Kinley2005).Thisledtoa land contaminationinUkraine,RussiaandBelarusarestilldealingwithenvironmental, (IAEA 2004).AsaresultofChernobyldisasterover5millionpeopleweredirectlyaffectedby Chernobyl in1986,Ukraine,thatwasthemostseverehistoryofciviliannuclearpower concerns thatfollowedtheaccidentsatThreeMileIslandin1979USwasfirst,and The slowdownofnuclearenergyexpansionstartedin1980sduetoeconomicreasonsandpublic programmes (Bodansky2005;FinonandRoques2008). state-run utilitiesthatbaredallassociatedrisksandinmanycasesparallelwithnuclearweapons Soviet Union,France,Germany,JapanandSouthKorea.Itwasdevelopedbyverticallyintegrated During thisperiodthelarge-scaleuseofciviliannuclearpowerstartedinUS,former

CEU eTD Collection

13 of attentiondevotedtonuclear energyinthesevensampledpublications missions andinterestsoforganizations,thetarget audience andthescopeofreporting,degree of energysupply,infrastructuresecurityandnuclear disarmamentadvocacy.Duetodiverging analysis, technologytransferandindustrymatters, tothescienceofclimatechange,sustainability level process.Thefieldofexpertiseamongtheactors selectedforthisstudyrangesfrompolicy Like anyotherinternationalsubjectmatter,global energygovernanceisamulti-actorandmulti- 4.2 announcing theso-called It mightbefairtosay,thatinmoregeneralterms,apartfromthehyped-upmediaheadlines agreements (Jewell2009). management, proliferationconcerns,accidentsandincidents,publicoppositionclimate costs, institutionalandtechnicalcapacities,shortageofqualifiedworkerslackskills,waste In summary,nuclearpowerdevelopmentgloballyisfacinguncertaintiesandchallengeslinkedto economics ofthispowersource(EbingerandMassy2009;Umbach2010). the futureEuropeanmixhasnotbeenreachedmainlyduetounresolvedissuesofwasteand be replaced(WEC2007).Nonetheless,thepolicyconsensusoverstatusofnuclearenergyin 1000 GWandaround1/3ofitnuclear),isexpectedtoretirebetween2010-2030willhave (IAEA 2010).Butmorethan80%ofEuropeaninstalledpowergeneratingcapacity(more technology-based projectsintheSlovakRepublicandBulgariastartedbacklate1980s under constructionintheEU:twomodernreactorsFinlandandFrancefourmoreSoviet compared tomorecentralizedmarketinChina.Outof56abovementionedunitsonlysixare capacity isstillconcentratedintheEurope,thereonlyahandfulofongoingnewprojects These factorsmightexplainthefactthateventhoughtodayhalfofinstallednuclearpower difficulties when electoral cyclesaffectinglong-termprojectssuchasconstructionofwastedisposalfacilitiesand The followingsectionsareaimedataddressingthesequestions. actors regardingtherisksandprospectsofnuclear? What arethecompetingargumentsandknowledgeclaimscommunicatedbydifferentglobal meeting growingenergydemand,ensuringsecurityandlow-carboneconomytransitions? How differentissuessurroundingnuclearenergyarelinkedwithglobalchallengesregarding Chapter 2,littleisknownaboutthediscursivenatureofglobalnuclearrevival. top-ranking worldpodiumsandtherecentinterestinenergydiscoursestudiesreviewed Allthereferencesinthischapter thereafter aremadetotheappendedlistofanalyzedpublicationsin TableA.1.

Global discourseactorsandrecurring themes “re-learning” “nuclear renaissance” thetechnology(FinonandRoques2008).

, context-dependentpoliticalstatementsfromthe Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus 13 varies.Nonetheless, 39

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 40 Chernobyl, alsoweapons proliferation. externalities ofthenuclear fuelcycle,orhealthandenvironmentalrisks andaccidentslike publications gowithout mentioning risks.Theseeitherpertaintosafety performancerecord, emissions, touchuponthedynamicsofglobalenergy policiesandpublicviews.Noneofthe economic costs,availabilityoffuelresources,the extent towhichnuclearhelpsreduceGHG mitigating climatechange.Whenaddressingthe viabilityofthisenergysourcetheycover Most globalactorsdiscussnuclearenergyinrelation toincreasingaccess,securingsuppliesand and futureprospectsforthisenergysource. intended toaddress,justificationfororagainstdeployment, potentialrisksinvolved,constraints presented inTable4.2Thetablebreaksdownthe thesetopicsaccordingtoproblemsnuclearis The qualitativecodingresultedinalistofrecurringnuclearenergy-relatedthemesthatare Data source:(NEA2008;WEC2010;Greenpeacen.d.;IAEAIPCCUNDPWNAn.d.) Table 4.1Profilesofglobalenergydiscourseactorsselectedforanalysis are involvedin. governance level.Table4.1displaysactors’profilesrepresentingthediversityofpolicyareasthey this allowsforcoverageofawiderangeissuesfrommultipleperspectivesontheglobal

Greenpeace UNDP IAEA WNA IPCC WEC NEA

against theuseofhazardouschemicalsandnuclear offices in41countries.Itiscampaigningforsust The Greenpeaceisaninternationalenvironmental industry newsservice since 1975.ItisrepresentedintheIAEAandot forum fortheglobalnuclearindustryfromuranium The WorldNuclearAssociation(WNA)isaninternational all people” 100 countries.Itaimstopromotethe The WorldEnergyCouncil(WEC)istheUK-basedchar Climate Change IPCC aimstopresentrigorousandbalancedpolicy-relevantinformationdecisionmakers.It’s assesses scientific,technicalandsocio-economicdata Nations EnvironmentProgrammeandtheWorldMeteor The IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange(IPCC authored the challenges: governance,poverty,HIV/AIDS,crisisandsustainableenergyforhumandevelopment.It The UnitedNationsDevelopmentProgramme(UNDP) standards andverifiestheuseofnuclearmaterialforcivilianpurposes. secure andpeacefulnucleartechnologies.TheIAEA technology-oriented organizationwith151MemberSt The InternationalAtomicEnergyAgency(IAEA)is Nuclear EnergyOutlook and facilitatingpolicyanalysis.RespondingtorenewedinterestinnuclearNEApublisheditsfirst the globalinstallednuclearcapacity.Itworksasa for EconomicCo-operationandDevelopment(OECD) The NuclearEnergyAgency(NEA)wasestablishedin GLOBAL DISCOURSEACTORS:FOCUSONENERGY renewables. andcoversalltypesofenergy,includingcoal World EnergyAssessment:andtheChallengeofSustainability

2007 reportwonaNobelPeacePrizein2008. World NuclearNews in 2008. “sustainable supplyanduseofenergyforthegreatestbenefit . her UNpolicyforumsandmaintainsafreeonline ainable energy,agriculture,forestryandfishing, forum forsharinginformation,technicalexpertise miners toequipmentsuppliersandpowerproducers the UnitedNationsintergovernmentalscienceand organization establishedin1971withregional powerandadvocatingfornucleardisarmament. facilitates technologytransfer,developssafety ates. Itwasestablishedin1957topromotesafe, . NEAunites28countriesrepresenting85%of 1958withintheframeworkofOrganisation inordertounderstandtheclimatechange.The is aUNbodyfocusingonglobaldevelopment ity establishedin1923withmembersnearly ological Organizationin1988.Itreviewsand ) isascientificbodyestablishedbytheUnited , oil,naturalgas,nuclear,hydropower,and organizationthatservesasaninternational in 2000. CEU eTD Collection 4.3 also fallintothiscategory. determining thefutureofthisindustry.Liability,regulatoryframeworkandnewcomercountries projections, publicacceptanceissuesandtechnologicaldevelopmentarediscussedasconstraints Themes suchaseconomicsofnuclear,fuelavailabilityqualifiedworkforce,installedcapacity mitigation optionalsoabletoprovide Storylines clusteredinthisdiscoursecoalitiondepict nuclearasthe 4.3.1 tables presentedintheconcludingsectionofthischapter. coalitions: pro-nuclear,anti-nuclearandmoderate. Thevariedargumentsaresummarizedinthe document narrativesfoundinreviewedpublications bygroupingthemintothreediscourse A multitudeofstorylinesemergewhenreadingintoselectedtexts.Forthcomingsub-sections involved andfutureprospects. demand, energysecurityandclimatechange,alsodevelopmentofnucleartechnologies,risks to whatextentcannuclearbeasolutionglobalenergychallengessuchasgrowing Although analyzedpublicationssharemostofthesethemes,therearedisparitiesinunderstanding towards thisenergyoption. proliferation prevention. They alsoclaimthatpublicattitudesareincreasingly turningpositive Table 4.2Nuclearenergythemesfeaturingininternationalpublicationsanalyzed have an

Global discursivestorylinesandcoalitions PROBLEMS ADDRESSED Pro-nuclear discoursecoalition “excellent” Regulatoryframework Publicacceptance Wastemanagement Publicacceptance Globaltrends GHGemissions Energy security & access Energy demand Climate change safetyrecord,promising technologicalsolutionsforwastemanagement and

OPTION JUSTIFICATION Economic costs Chernobyletc. Economic costs nryscrt Fe yl Fuel availability Fuelcycle Energy security “cost-effective” THEMES

RISKS INNVOLVED baseloadenergysupply.Theindustryissaidto terrorism Proliferation & safety record Performance & environment Health & Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus

“only viable” CONSTRAINTS & PROSPECTS Liability Installed capacity Human resources Technology Newcomer countries climatechange

CEU eTD Collection Asia. Currently,itis share hasremainedconstantsince1980sandcapacityevenexpandedinEasternEurope Nuclear industrynotes,thatalthoughithasbeenseenas among themainargumentswithrespecttoviabilityofnuclearpower. Low-carbon, economicattractiveness,securefuelsupplyandincreasingpublicsupportare 4.3.1.2 arguably makesitattractivefromthe that comesfromdiversesourceslocatedin mitigating technologywithaprovenrecordatthescalerequired” emissions andsecuringsupplies.Withrespectto meeting increasing This setofargumentsportraysnuclearasapowersourcethathas 4.3.1.1 Vaida Pilibaityte 42 economically viablebuttheir sitingremainsproblematic(WEC2007). IAEA. Narratives summarizedbelowmainlybelongtoindustrialactors,theOECDmembersand In additiontobeing to makeanysignificantimpactonreducingcarbondioxideemissionswithoutrelyingnuclear” international facilitiesfor helps todealwith96% ofthespentfuel(WEC2007).Pro-nuclear actors arguethatan Waste management thousands ofyears” expansion atleastuntil2050.Infact,globalnuclear energyprogrammecouldbe 2008). Evenwithoutspentnuclearfuelreprocessing, thereareenoughresourcestofuelfuture 2009). Large have lowimpactonelectricityproduction Another advantageisthatnuclearpowercharacterized bymorestablepricesasuranium trading schemesforlowcarbonenergygeneration(WNA2009). Additional economicbenefitsareexpectedthoughvariousgovernmentincentivesandemission because ofpossiblecapacityincreases,lifetimeextensionsandlicenserenewals(WEC2007). eventually Nuclear industryisshiftingfromnationaltoglobalserialproductionschemeswhichwill Moreover, thereare the governmentofUKbelievesthatitis carbon-free heatandhydrogentofuelthefuturetransport(NEA2008;WNA2009).Inthislight,

Problems addressed Justification fornuclearenergy “drive constructioncostsdown”. uranium reserves infastbreederreactors,butthosearenotcommercialized yet(NEA2008). energy demand climate change costsrepresentonly3%ofelectricitygeneration costsand “virtually carbon-free” “solid” fuel reprocessingand enrichment economicreasons are energy security , reducinghealtheffectsoffossilfueluse,avoidingCO “practical andaffordable” that Existingplantsareespeciallyeconomicallyattractive

on thewholelifecyclebasis,nuclearcanalsoprovide is costs “politically stablecountries” “in thepublicinterest” “making thecase” climate change (the costoffuelconstitutesonly5%)(WNA to developnuclearinEurope(WEC2007). standpoint (UNDP2004;WNA2009). (NEA 2008).Theabundanceofuranium “dormant” tostoreasitisdenserfuel(NEA fornuclear: to developnuclearpower. wouldmakethemeven more nuclearisviewedas “potentially strongroletoplay” overthesepastdecades,its and

small “Europe wouldnotbeable

fuel requirements (WEC2007). reprocessing “fuelled for “the only in 2

CEU eTD Collection accident were have neverbeenlicensedoutsidetheSovietUnion” considered asingleeventcausedbyabsenceofsafetycultureandspecificdesignflaws and provingmaturityeffectivenessoftheregulatorysystem.Chernobylaccidentis improved The pro-nuclearcoalitionnarrativesarguethatindustry’s management solutionsandproliferation-resistanttechnologiesofthefuture. Talking aboutrisks,pro-nuclearactorsemphasizeabsenceofaccidents,existencewaste 4.3.1.3 statements ofintent” “clearly goingforwardstrongly” under constructiontoday and130moreplannedoverthenextdecade,global nuclearindustryis The industryspeaksabout right governmentpoliciesandregulatoryframeworks thenewtake-offshouldbe capacity two-foldandeventhree-foldoverthecoming decades,themainmessageisthatwith economic viability,inadditiontoreducingtherisk ofproliferation.Withtheprojectedglobal Nuclear industry’sglobalizationisseenasapositive trendthatmayimproveplantsafetyand 4.3.1.4 The IAEAreportsaslightlyincreasing are Volumes ofthe nuclear-linked pollutioncomparedtofossilfuels(NEA2008). health effects nuclear weapons(NEA2008). terrorism” for thesitingoffinalradioactivewasterepository(WNA2009). issue (NEA2008).Moreover,inSwedenandFinlandcommunitieswerecompetingtobeselected information leadstomoresupportandthatscientistsNGOsaretrustedthemostinthis not theactualplantoperations(WEC2007;NEA2008).Worldwideexperienceshowsthatmore in severalcountries” programmes (IAEA2009).Therearealsoclaimsthat And finally, 2009). pools atreactorsoraway-from-reactorfacilitiesthatarebeingexpandedregularly(IAEA “feasible andsafe” “widely available”

threats.Multilateralapproachestonuclearfuelcyclecouldhelpcontrolthespreadof Risks involved Constraints andprospects “dramatically” futurereactors “smaller thananticipated” ofnuclearoperationalemissionsarenegligibleandlessliveslostdueto , thoughnouniversalsolutionexists(WEC2007).Mostspentfuelisstoredin waste (WEC2007).Publicismoreconcernedwithissueslikewasteandterrorism andwellknown.Theinternationalconsensusexiststhat from severalcountriesthat allowtoexpecttheUS,France,Japan,Russia, producedbynuclearplantsaresmall,andtechnologiestomanagethem (IAEA 2009) aredesignedtobemore (WNA 2009) the future

(WNA2009).Ingeneral,contrarytothepopularopinion, is withgreatconfidence, reporting thatwith50reactors “unrivalled” . According totheNEA(2008), thereare (WNA2009).PublichealtheffectsoftheChernobyl public support (WNA 2009), “proliferation resistant” “the percentageofdeclared‘opponents’isdecreasing safety record incountrieswithexistingnuclear Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus “excellent”

over thelast20years andmore

geological disposalis in OECDcountries “smooth”. “robustagainst “authoritative “that could

has 43

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 44 environmental NGOGreenpeace, butalsoothers. This sectionsummarizes discourse storylinesmainlyfoundinthepublication ofaninternational security andclimatechangemitigationpotential healthandproliferationrisksinparticular. dangerous andunnecessary.Itcontainsnarratives thatprovideadifferentstanceonenergy The opposingdiscoursecoalitionpromotesthestance thatnuclearisunsustainable,expensive, 4.3.2 Other estimatesincludean The WNAprojectsanincreasefromofglobalcapacity373GWeto1100by2060. initiated inRomania,Bulgaria,Finland,Switzerland,Slovakia,CanadaandtheUS2008alone. investment agreements,contracts,siting,buildingapprovalsandlicensingapplicationswere ahead withtheirnuclearplans.Italyisplanningtorestartitsprogram,whilepoweruprates, China andKoreatoleadnuclearrevival.Reportedly,anumberofothercountriesaremoving Talking about the nationallevel” For theyearstocomeresponsibilityfor with coalandgas(NEA2008). costs (WEC).Accordingtosomeestimates,incircumstancesnuclearmaybecompetitive clear encourage investments(WEC2007;NEA2008).Actorsarguethatstablepoliticalsituationand financial support,butgovernmentsmayneedtomitigatesomerisksinorder With regardto newcomers access tothistechnologyand (IAEA 2009).Itisarguedthatdevelopedcountriesshouldassistdevelopingtogain Moreover, theIAEAreportsthatinterestinstartingnewciviliannuclearprogramspersists reactors todayarebuiltinunderfiveyears can beconstructedataratemorethansufficienttomeetthehighdemand(NEA2008),asmost countries andAsia(IAEA2009;WNA2009).Moreover, (IAEA 2009). Conference inSwitzerlandarecordnumberofover 500scientificpapershavebeenpresented “smoothly” and bettereconomics(NEA2008).Thistechnologyisnowonthemarket,projectshavestarted most futuregrowthwillrelyonnewGenerationIIIreactordesignswithpassivesafetyfeatures reactors builtin1970sand1980s,theywillremaindominantuntilthemid-century.However,

regulatory framework

Anti-nuclear discoursecoalition inChina,KoreaandRussia(IAEA2009).In2008attheIAEAFusionEnergy are likelytoaddonly5%ofglobalnuclearcapacityby2020(NEA2008). technology costs (WEC2007). , newbuildissaidtobe , around80%ofcurrentnuclearfleetareGenerationIIlightwater

togetherwithexperienceofutilitieshavepositiveimpactonproject increase byafactorof1.5and3.82050,mostlyinOECD “address povertywithoutemissionsofGHG”

(WNA 2009). “economically viableinmostcircumstances” qualified workforce “historic evidencesuggests” (WNA2009).Nonetheless, training “is likelytoremainat thatnewplants withoutspecial

CEU eTD Collection solutions suchasclean,renewablesourcesaredivertedawayfromthem. result oftheglobalpushfornuclearinvestmentsurgentlyneededtoreal nuclear cannotliveuptoitspromise(Greenpeace2009).Moreover,theargumentgoes,asa waste forstorageandreprocessing isplanned(Greenpeace2009). into themostcontaminatedplacesofEarth.One ofthemisMayak,whereimportingforeign facilities arebuiltinremoteclosedcitieslikethose inUralandSiberiaRussia,turningthem Yucca MountainandFinlandarepresentedasprojects causingconcerns.Becauseofthatnuclear appears thatitisimpossibletofindsuitablelocation wheresafetycanbeensured.Repositoriesin commercially viableforalongtime.Nodeep has beenfoundandnew produced: during Greenpeace (2009)notesenvironmentalcontaminationtakingplaceevenbeforeenergyis radioactive wastemanagementsolutions,proliferationandterrorism. occurring throughoutthefuelcycle,publichealthconcerns,industrialaccidents,absenceofsafe Anti-nuclear narrativesemphasize 4.3.2.3 more reliablewaysofgeneratingelectricityaretechnicallyaccessibleandcapableproducing constraints detailedbelow,thepositionofGreenpeace(2009)isthatsimpler,cheaperand Anti-nuclear discoursecoalitionrejectsthispowersourceentirely.Mainlyduetorisksand 4.3.2.2 The industryis security online takesmorethanadecade,nucleardelivers The narrativesinthiscoalitionarguethatsinceplanning,licensingandputtinganuclearreactor 4.3.2.1 significant investmentsmadetodate,nopermanent radioactive that isusedtoproducebombsandremainsdangerousforabout240,000years.Despite turning nuclearfuelintoa electricity generationandglobalGHGemissionsreducedonlyby4%(Greenpeace2009). installed capacitywouldbequadrupledby2050,itssharestilllessthan10%ofglobal energy supplyanditscontributiontoheatingtransportneedsismarginal.Evenifthe Moreover, nuclearpoweronlygenerateselectricity.Todayitrepresentslessthan7%ofaglobal times morethancurrentglobaldemand.

. Risks involved Justification againstnuclearenergy Problems addressed “attempting toexploittheclimatecrisis” mining, enrichment “highly-toxic anddangerouscocktailofradioactiveelements,suchasplutonium” “experiments arestillbeingpresentedassolutions” “complex anduncontainable” and fuelconversion geological repositories “too littletoolate” by

promoting itaslow-carbon,butinreality nuclearriskslinkedwithpollution Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus . Afterwardsoperatingplantsare waste management and cannotguarantee havebeenbuiltandit , buttheywillnotbe climate change solution energy

six 45

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 46 because ithasbeensubsidized bygovernmentsforoverahalfofcentury. Inreality, to boilwater” Taking about and sitingofwastedisposalfacilitiesarealsomentioned (UNDP2004;IPCC2007). are themainreasonsfordiminishing constraints tonuclear.Theabovementionedhealth, environmentalandproliferationconcerns In nuclearopponents’view,inadditiontorisks listedabove,therearesocialandeconomic 4.3.2.4 Nuclear facilitiesandwastetransportsarepotential Such programsexistinChina,India,Iraq,Israel,NorthKorea,PakistanandSouthAfrica. has beendemonstratedthat enrichment andtypicalplantoperationstillcanbeusedtoconstruct10-15bombseveryyear.It Nuclear criticsnotethatnuclearpowerevolvedfrommilitaryuseandmaterialsproducedduring weapons transportation ofdangerousmaterialsacrossbordersandoceans.Moreover,itiscriticalfor waste onadailybasis,andexperienceleaks(IAEA2009).Infact,reprocessingrequiresrepeated carried outonlyinFrance,RussiaandtheUK.Theseplantsreleaselargevolumesofradioactive 2004). However,suchplantsarefewworldwideandcontroversial.Commercial facilities In relationtothisissue,otherglobalactorsalsomaintainthatduesocialoppositiondisposal pose dangerfornuclearplantsworldwide. Finally, apartfromtechnologicalrisks, public exposuretoradiationequivalenthalfofthatreleasedinChernobyl. in France.Italsocalculatesthatoverthenext40yearsreprocessingplantJapanwillleadtoa reprocessing andincreasedleukaemiacases,among25-yearoldslivingwithin10kmfromafaciliy As anexampleofdetrimentalhealtheffects,publicationmentionsaprovenlinkamongwaste 200 ofthemsinceChernobyl.Russia’stherecordmanagingnuclearwastehasbeen misses” more thansevenmillionaresufferingeveryday.Itis bombs droppedonHirosimaandNagasaki.Thedeathtollissaidtoexceed90,000people considered theworstciviliandisasterinworldasitreleasedmoreradioactivitythan marked bydisasters,contaminationand Presenting Russiaasandexample,theGreenpeaceclaimsthathistoryofnuclearindustryis proliferation remainsan

continuetooccuraroundtheworld.TheUSisoneexamplewheretherehavebeennearly

spent Constraints andprospects proliferation (Greenpeace2009).In their view,nuclearpowerisconsideredcheaptoday only economic

fuel reprocessing (Greenpeace2009). “impossible task”

costs weapons , anti-nuclearcriticsliketorefernuclearas remains natural disasters can beproducedinweekswithaminimalindustrialbase. (Greenpeace2009). publicsupport public health “de factorinterim‘wastemanagementstrategy’”

argued that likefloodsandearthquakescontinueto terrorism scandals.TheChernobyldisasteris forthispowersource.Reactorsafety nuclearaccidents targetsandpreventingthe “the mostexpensiveway reprocessing “appalling”. and costs (UNDP “near are is

CEU eTD Collection 4.3.3.2 pollutants” IPCC (2007)believesthatnuclearpowercanprovideenergy 4.3.3.1 technologies alsobringtogetherotheractorstothisdiscoursecoalition. question. Narrativesabouttheimportanceofpersuadingscepticalpublicandfeasibilityfuture challenges andsafetycontroversiesthatmayputthefuturenuclearindustrydevelopmentunder their narratives.Asshowninmoredetailbelow,actorsstresscostunder-estimates,technological completely, butputalotmoreemphasisontheuncertaintiesthanpro-nucleardiscourseactorsin Experts withtheIPCC,UNDPand,insomeinstances,IAEAdonotrejectnuclear 4.3.3 operation andfuelreprocessing arethemainsourcesofcollectiveradiation doses (IPCC2007). of spentfuelandtheassociated Despite thesafetyculture improvementsrecognized,leakagerisksduringoperation andtransport of greaterpublicnuclearacceptancearereiterated in thestorylinesmoderatecoalition. Nuclear-related healthandsecurityrisksoccurduring 4.3.3.3 nuclear energyascompatiblewiththeobjectiveofsustainable development” sustainable energysourcewithbotheconomicalandenvironmental advantages,othercountriesdonotconsider individual countriestodecidewhethergonuclear: (UNDP 2004).Nonetheless,ageneralconsensusamongthecautiousactorsisthatitupto confidence insafetyandnon-proliferationaswellmoreeffectivemanagementpractices nuclear technologiesisseenas that nuclear Considering alltheconstraintsanduncertaintiespresentedfurtherdown,onestorylineconcludes dependence onalimitedsourceofsupply. Furthermore, since Finland wereprojectshavebeenover-budgetuptothreetimes. two tothreetimeshigherthanindustryestimates–itisthecaseincountrieslikeIndiaand concerns areaddressed(UNDP2004). by providingincreasedaccesstoenergyandhelpingdiversitysuppliesonlyifexistingpublic provided bydifferentauthors(IPCC2007).Moderateactorsmaintainthatnuclearcancontribute contribute toGHGmitigationeffortssincecontradictingfiguresonlifecycleemissionsare upgrading. However,withregardto

Moderate discoursecoalition

Justification fornuclearenergy Risks involved Problems addressed andisan “can bebeneficialifemployedcarefully,butcancauseproblemsnot” uranium “effective GHGmitigationoption” canbefoundinahandfulofcountriesrealityitleadsto “worth exploring” health affects climate change

in termsofpotentiallylowercosts,greaterpublic “remain controversial” “While somecountriesconsiderednuclearpowerasa , especiallythroughplantretrofittingand entirenuclearfuelcyclethatareintheway thereisnocertaintytowhatextentitcan (UNDP2004). Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus “without emissionsofconventionalair . Mining,milling,power plant (IPCC2007).Advanced 47

CEU eTD Collection initial decadesof21 (2004) the challenges fornucleardeployment,butmoreconstraintsareinitsway.AccordingtoUNDP Safety, costs,wastemanagementandtransportpublicconcernsaredescribedasmain 4.3.3.4 Vaida Pilibaityte 48 develop andissuesofcostproliferationriskremain(UNDP2004;IPCC2007). volumes andtoxicityofwaste,butnecessaryalternativebreederconceptsmaytakedecadesto potential weaponsmaterial.Therearehopesthatadvancedreprocessingwouldhelpminimize economic gainsandleadstoapile-upofdangerousplutoniumthatrequiressafeguardingas When discussingotherrisks,thescepticsalsonotethatspent requires moreworkontechnical,politicalandsocialconstraints(IPCC2007). have considerableeconomic,safety,securityandnon-proliferationadvantages,buttheresolution involved are repositories havebeenstudiedextensively,theirsafetyhasnotprovenandtheissues Although supply offreshuranium to meettheexistingdemandarerelatedwithdecreasing availabilityof development basedonthe currentdesign(UNDP2004).Additionally,uncertainties aboutthe (IAEA 2009).Generally,thisvaries and financialuncertaintiesarehardtoexplain,justastheimpactofcrisis2008 When itcomesto advantages (WEC2007). more informationandthanhalfoftheEUcitizensbelievethatnuclearrisksoutweighits public decommissioning, non-proliferation,security,andcosts(NEA2008).Whilepreviously “significant fractionofpublic” For themostpart,futureofthistechnologydependsonsuccesspersuading (IPCC 2007;IAEA2009). Lackof it’s use:withofwithoutreprocessing,takinginto accountcommoditypricefluctuationsornot Even withindustryexpansion also comeatahighcostandfurtherdiminishpublic acceptance(UNDP2004;IPCC2007). for lightwaterreactors(UNDP2004).Liabilities for thirdpartiesintheeventofaccidentsmay 2009). Electricitypricesforpowerproducedbyfast breedersarealsoexpectedtobehigherthan pressure onpriceshasbeenalsodrivenbytheshift fromthebuyers’tosuppliers’market(IAEA competition fromalternativeenergysourcesisalso drivingnuclearpowercostsupwards.The expensive andexperiencereducesuncertainty.ExpertswiththeUNDP(2004)alsopointoutthat used aswellregulatoryenvironment.Practiceshowsthatbuildingongreenfieldsiteismore

trustedauthoritiestodecideonnuclearpower(WNA2009),todaypublicisaskingfor

Constraints andprospects radioactivewaste projections “not onlytechnical” st century”. project costs arethatnuclear

thatisconcernedaboutnuclearsafety,wastedisposaland volumes producedinthenuclearreactorsaresmallandgeological (UNDP2004;IPCC2007).International uranium , actorsnotethatestimateshavebeenonthehigherendlately

due todifferencesindefinitions,perspectivesandtechnology “will low-cost uranium reservesestimatesvarydependingonassumptions for

not grow,willgrowonlyslowlyormayevendeclineduringthe may constrainthenuclear power fuel reprocessing waste repositories may doesnotoffer the

CEU eTD Collection conditioned theglobalnuclear developmentbackin1950sand1970s. environment fornewnuclearbuildisverydifferent fromthehistoricalarrangementsthat are plannedaspost-Chernobylpublicconcernsappear tobewaning.However,theregulatory The largestnumber,tennewconstructions,havebeen startedin2008since1985andmanymore construction in30countries.Over55newcomer countries intendtostartanuclearprogramme. global electricitysupply.Thereare436reactors operatingand56nuclearunitsareunder climate change.Todaynuclearpowerconstitutes around 7%ofprimaryglobalenergyand14% hopes thatitcanhelpmeetnewchallengessuch asaccesstoelectricity,securityofsupplyand industry stagnation,projectionsfornuclearenergyhavebeengoingupwardsagain.Thereare This chaptercontainstheglobalnuclearenergydiscourseanalysis.Aftertwodecades-long 4.4 Speaking about 2008). attract newstudentstonuclearrelatedfields,butlittleprogresshasbeenmadesofar(NEA programs available(IAEA2009).Initiativesaimedataddressingthisproblemincludeattemptsto hard tosustainandthereisalackofdataonvariousskilledworkersneededtraining government fundingfornuclearresearch(NEA2008).Duringyearsofdeclineexpertisehasbeen competences. Thisisblamedonmarketliberalization,pressuretoreducecostsanddecreasing What regardsqualified seawater whereitexistsinlowconcentrationswasdeployed(UNDP2004). reprocessing andplutoniumrecyclingcouldbehaltedwhatsoeverifuraniumextractionfrom power is to remain a through closerrelationshipbetweenpolicymakers,industryandsociety(NEA2008),nuclear determinants ofthefuturenucleardevelopments(UNDP2004).Ifthiswasnotaddressed measures Spent fuelreprocessing not beencommercializedyet(NEA2008). that isbelievedtobemoreabundantthanuraniumforenergyproductionalsopossible,ithas secondary sourcesthatmeet40%ofcurrentdemand(IAEA2009).Whiletheuse presented (IAEA2009).Nonetheless, Fusion EnergyConferenceinSwitzerlandarecordnumberofover500scientificpapershasbeen yet andGenerationIVmaycomeafter2030(UNDP2004;NEA2008).In2008attheIAEA safety measuresmaybecommerciallyviableby2020,smallreactorsarenot expected tobecomeviablenoearlierthanafter2050(IPCC2007;NEA2008).

Summary andconclusion tokeepmilitaryandpeacefulnuclearapplicationsseparatearementionedamongother future technologies “controversial andmuch-politicizedaffair” personnel isanotherexamplewherepublicsupportthekey. , industryisfacingproblemsinretainingexistingskillsand , pebble-bed,gas-cooledreactorswithpromisinginherent nuclear fusion arestillattheexperimentalstage,and (WEC2007).Therearehopesthatfuel Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus Institutional thorium 49

CEU eTD Collection discourse coalitionsaccordingtotheissuesdiscussed. The tablesbelowsummarizeargumentativelinesfromthethreedescribedglobalnuclearenergy nuclear energyprojects. emphasis oneconomicandtechnologicaluncertaintiesaswellsocialchallengesfornew the demandandmitigateclimatechange,butcontainsasetofstorylinesputtingmuchgreater moderate radioactive wastethatcanalsobeusedtodevelopnuclearweapons,ifmismanaged.Thethird, waste oftime.ItpointsatlowGHGmitigationpotential,projectcostoverrunsandissueslike The feasible wastemanagementoptions,promisingfuturetechnologyandwaningpublicconcerns. revival, thatnuclearpoweriseconomicallyviableinmostcases,withexcellentsafetyrecord, Vaida Pilibaityte 50 The deployment. coalitions. Theyarecharacterizedbyvarieddegreesofconfidenceaboutnuclearpower have beenidentifiedandgroupedintopro-nuclear,anti-nuclearmoderatediscourse Following Hajer’sdiscourseanalyticalapproach,threedivergingstrandsofdiscursivestorylines power capacityprojections. and availability,liability,regulatoryframework,humanresourcesglobalinstallednuclear and risks,wastemanagement,weaponsproliferationissuesaswellpublicattitudes,fuelcycle shows thatrecurringnuclearenergy-relatedthemesincludeeconomiccosts,technology,safety the IPCC,NEA,UNDP,WECandWNAhavebeenanalyzed.Thisanalysis discursive knowledgeonthetopic,sevenpublicationsenergybyGreenpeace,IAEA, influenced bytheargumentativepowerstruggle.Inordertotrackcontrastingstrandsdriving Global energygovernanceisamulti-actorandmulti-levelprocessthatis,amongotherthings,

pro-nuclear energy anti-nuclear nuclearenergydiscoursecoalitiondoesnotrejectitasawaytosecuresupplies,meet energydiscoursecoalitionconsidersnuclearacostlyanddangerous global

discourse

coalition arguesthattheindustryiswellposedfor CEU eTD Collection

Table 4.3Storylinesrelatingtoproblemsnuclearenergycanorcannotaddressworldwide argued bytheinternationalactorsstudied. Table 4.3includesnarrativespertainingtoglobalenergychallengesnuclearcanaddressas Problems addressed the scalerequired. climate changemitigationoptionon It istheonlyviablelarge-scale It helpstoensureenergysecurity. demand; itisfeasibleandavailable. in meetingincreasingenergy It hasapotentiallystrongroletoplay PRO-NUCLEAR late. mitigation onlymarginallyandtoo It wouldcontributetoclimatechange global security. meet ourneedsandisathreatto It generatesonlyelectricity;itcannot late. It wouldabletodelivertoolittle, ANTI-NUCLEAR Energy security Climate change Energy demand Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus addressed. mitigation, ifexistingconstraintsare It cancontributetoclimatechange existing constraintsareaddressed. It cancontributetoenergysecurityif existing constraintsareaddressed. It canincreaseaccesstoelectricityif MODERATE 51

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 52 Table 4.4Storylinesrelatingtojustificationforandagainstnuclearenergyworldwide The narrativesdescribingreasonstofavouroropposenuclearenergyarelistedinTable4.5.

Option justification repositories. have beencompetingtosite communities inFinlandandSweden Public supporthasbeenrestored; underway. increase; anumberofprojects mitigation; Chinaisplanningsix-fold necessary forclimatechange many countries;theEUseesitas intent todevelopnuclearenergyin There areauthoritativestatementsof energy isvirtuallycarbon-free. On thewholelife-cyclebasisnuclear production costissmall. stocked upanditsshareinthepower several stablecountries,canbe Fuel isabundantavailablefrom capacity increases. attractive duetolicencerenewalsand existing plantsareespecially economically viableinmostcases; New nuclearenergyplantsare PRO-NUCLEAR costs aregoingdown. doubled inthepastthreeyearsand investment inrenewableshas overruns upto300%;global and Indiaarefacingdelayscost Nuclear projectsinFinland,France alternatives. investments shouldbemadeinsafer Nuclear candelivertoolittlelate, limited suppliers. availability leadstodependenceon very longtime;limiteduranium Planning andbuildingNPPstakesa considered. Cheaper alternativesshouldbe ANTI-NUCLEAR Public acceptance Economic costs Energy security GHG emissions Global trends .–

power. increasing incountrieswithnuclear Public acceptanceisslightly potential vary. Estimates ontheextentofmitigation on assumptions. Uranium reservesestimatesdepend dependent, anduncertaintiesexist. are technologyandcontext It ismorecostlythanprojected,costs not compatiblewithsustainability. sustainable option;othersbelieveitis Some countriesconsiderit MODERATE

CEU eTD Collection Table 4.5Storylinesrelatingtonuclearenergyrisksworldwide Different argumentsdealingwithnuclearrisksareincludedinTable4.5below.

Risks involved proliferation resistant. New reactormodelsaremore Safety recordisexcellent,unrivalled. than perceived. Health riskshaveproventobelower fuel availability. problems ofspentfueldisposaland Waste reprocessinghelpstosolve safety culture. specific designflawsandabsenceof Chernobyl accidentwasdueto available. management solutionsarewidely Waste volumesaresmalland PRO-NUCLEAR which thereisnoviablesolution. Nuclear createsdangerouswastefor present significantrisks threats. Naturaldisastersalso Transport ofwastecreatesterrorism continue tooccuraroundtheworld. Accidents and risks. reprocessing causelong-termhealth Mining, plantoperationsandwaste environmental andsecurityrisks. The wholenuclearfuelcyclecauses the world. accidents continuetooccuraround civilian disasterintheworld; Chernobyl accidentwastheworst Performance andsafetyrecord Chernobyl andotheraccidents Proliferation andterrorism Health andenvironment ANTI-NUCLEAR Waste management Fuel cycle “near misses”

Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus obstacles; nosinglesolutionexists. technological, economicandsocial Waste managementisstillfacing proliferation risks. cost effectiveandhelpminimize enrichment facilitieswouldbemore International wasterepositoriesand not. carefully, butcancauseproblemsif It anbebeneficialifemployed Health risksremaincontroversial. proliferation andcostsexist. waste, butuncertaintiesabout volumes ofhighlevelradioactive Waste reprocessingcouldminimize record. water reactorshaveagoodsafety Unlike Chernobyl-typereactorslight MODERATE 53

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 54 Table 4.6Storylinesrelatingtoconstraintsandprospectsfornuclearenergyworldwide Table 4.6listsnarrativesonfactorsconstrainingordrivingnuclearpowerglobally.

Constraints & prospects thorium. nuclear fuelcanalsobebasedon even thousandsofyearsahead; Uranium isavailableforhundredsor information sources. and NGOsarethemosttrusted leads tomoreacceptance;scientists France showthatmoreinformation Examples inFinland,Swedenand awareness raisingisimportant be inOECDcountriesandAsia. triple by2050;futuredevelopmentwill Current capacitiesaresettodoubleor workers remainswiththecountries. Responsibility forpreparingqualified down. and serialproductionwilldrivecosts Globalization, industrialcooperation positive impactonprojectcosts. regulatory frameworkwouldhave Stable politicalsituationandclear gaining accesstocleanertechnologies. Developing worldshouldbeassistedin feasible by2020. gas-cooled reactorsmaybecome economics areavailableonthemarket; reactors withbettersafetyfeaturesand global fleetuntil2050;advanced Generation IIreactorswilldominatethe PRO-NUCLEAR –

accept; taxpayersshoulderthecosts. liability forinsurancecompaniesto Nuclear reactorspresenttoolarge limited. countries, enrichmentfacilitiesarealso Uranium isavailablefromonlyfew proliferation concerns. safety, wastemanagementand Public confidencehasbeenlostdueto options. cleaner andmorereliableenergy paper; itdivertsfundsfromsimpler, Nuclear energyrenaissanceisonlyon viable withoutgovernmentsubsidies. than industryestimates;oftennot In realitycostsare2-3timeshigher Regulatory framework ANTI-NUCLEAR Newcomer countries Public acceptance Human resources Installed capacity Economic costs Fuel availability Technology Liability – – –

case ofanaccident. liable foranydamagetothirdpartiesin Operators ofnuclearplantsareusually more needstobedone. consolidate internationaltraining,but been attemptstoattractstudents,and skills andcompetences;therehave Industry isstrugglingtoretainexisting but isstilltobecommercialized. Thorium canbeusedasanalternative, Low-cost uraniumreservesarelimited. can furtherreduceacceptance. One accidentorproliferationincident acceptance; decline; itwilldependonpublic It willnotgrow,growslowlyoreven more expensive. costs up;buildingongreenfieldsiteis Competition fromalternativesmaydrive technologies areworthexploring. most futurereactors,butadvanced feasibility andcommercializationof There areuncertaintiesaboutthe MODERATE –

CEU eTD Collection have adoptedpro-nuclearenergystrategies. 2008). Aimingtodiversifysuppliesandreducedependenceonasinglesource,bothcountries Eastern EuropeandareprimarilyreliantonenergyimportsfromRussia(WB2005;Vilemas energy securitypolices.ThesystemsofLithuaniaandBelarusremainintegratedwiththe Nonetheless, thegeopoliticalcontextthatcountriesaresharinghassubstantialinfluenceontheir Belarus hasretainedautocraticstateleadershipandclosetieswithRussia. development sincethe1990shasbeendifferent.LithuaniajoinedEUandNATO,while reasons. AlthoughbotharetheformerSovietUnionstates,theirpoliticalandeconomic Lithuania andBelarushavebeenselectedforthiscomparativediscourseanalysisseveral 5 disaster intheneighbouring Ukrainein1986.Increasinglyintimidated by oilandgasprice Belarus international partnersinEstonia, LatviaandPoland(MinistryofEnergy2010). border (Figure5.1).Inthebeginningof2010it startedlookingforaninvestortogetherwith two decommissionedIgnalinaNPPunitsinVisaginas, lessthan10kmfromtheBelarusian In 2007the

NATIONAL NUCLEARENERGY DISCOURSES hasneverhaditsownnuclear power,butwasoneofthemostaffectedby the Chernobyl Figure 5.1ExistingandplannednuclearplantsinLithuania, Belarus,RussiaandPoland Lithuanian governmentmadethedecisiontobuildanewnuclear planttoreplace “Energy isnotabouteconomy,itgeopolitics” “This willbethegreatestachievementofourtimes” Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus

President ofBelarusAleksandrLukashenko President ofLithuaniaDaliaGrybauskait

55 ė

CEU eTD Collection 5.1.1 and coalitions.Thefindingsaresummarizedinthetablespresentedsub-section5.1.4. discourse actorsandthemes,while5.1.3containsadetaileddescriptionofstorylines introduces themediaandnewsoutletsselectedforanalysis.Sub-section5.1.2presents This sectiondescribesLithuaniandiscoursecontextwithfocusonenergysystemandpolicy,also 5.1 Vaida Pilibaityte 56 65.3 thousandsqkm Lithuania isthesouthernmostandlargestofthreeBalticcountrieswithaterritorialsize Moreover, earlyin2010 2010). part ofthecountry,55kmfromLithuaniancapitalVilnius(Lukashenko2008;Krylovich disputes withRussia,in2008thegovernmentdecidedtoconstructanuclearplantwestern market economy,thetrust ininstitutionsincludingtheEUisexceptionally lowandveryfew 2004). Nonetheless,although morethanone-thirdofthepopulationsupport democracyand in Lithuania:asmany 40%ofrespondentsexpressedthemin2001(Duvold andJurkynas and eliteinterests.Scientistsalsonote Political volatilityhasbeenhighoverthepasttwo decadeslargelyduetothecontrastingsocietal Lithuania anditsBalticneighbourscomparedto otherCentralandEasternEuropeanstates. However, accordingtosomeauthors,democratic consolidationhasbeenmorecomplexfor the NATO membership,thishasstronglyrepresented thenationalidentificationtore-orienttowards 2004, citizensvotingforthemembershipwithan overwhelming 90%majority.Togetherwiththe year term.HavingundergoneeconomicandpoliticalreformsthecountryhasjoinedEUin Lithuania isamulti-partyparliamentarydemocracywiththePresidentelecteddirectlyforfive- country tore-gainitsindependencein1990,followingthebreak-upofSovietUnion. and Belarusiantexts.Thereisasummarizingconcludingsection5.3intheend. description ofthenationaldiscoursecontext,followedbyanalysisstudiedLithuanian This chapterisdividedintotwosections5.1and5.2bycountry.Eachofthemcontainsthe 2009). implications ofbuildingthreetofournuclearplantswithinsuchcloseproximity(Krasauskas media the of thecountryonBalticcoast(PolskieRadio2010).ThishasbeentermedbyLithuanian sites forthetwoplannedNPPsandoneoftoplocations,Zarnowiec,isinnorthernpart to atownofNeman(RiaNovosti2010).Furthermore, Russian state-ownedcompany

“West”

Lithuania Lithuanian discoursecontext andawayfromRussia(DuvoldJurkynas2004). “nuclear competition”,

and apopulationof3.3million(StatisticsLithuania2009).Itwasthefirst Kaliningrad “Rosatom” as itinstigatedanewpublicdebateabouteconomicandsecurity “disturbing” , theRussian laidaceremonialfirststoneforitsnewBalticNPPclose preferencestosomeformofauthoritarianrule

enclave betweenPolandandLithuania,the Poland startedlistingthemostsuitable CEU eTD Collection Lithuania togetherwithneighbouringLatviaandEstoniaaretermedthe Estlink has onlyjuststarted.TheelectricitygridisintegratedwiththeEast;anunderwater350MW et al. Baltic States,thermalpowerplants,naturalgasdistributionanddistrictheatingsystems(Miškinis Lithuania hasaratherwell-developedenergyinfrastructuresuchastheonlyoilrefineryin 5.1.1.1 2004). by fearsofexcessiveRussianinfluenceonstrategicsectorssuchasenergy(DuvoldandJurkynas privatization schemes,thoughnotwithoutscandalsandallegedcorruptionaffairsovershadowed Lithuania 2009).Sectorslikebanking,energy,transportandcommunicationwentthrough 2008), Russiaremainsaveryimportanttradepartner(16%oftotalexportsin2008)(Statistics Although thecountryhasreorienteditsmarkettowardsEU(over60%oftotalexportsin projected at15%-20%by2010(EBRD2009b;Gruževskis economic contractionhasbeendramatic:GDPfellby20%in2009,theunemploymentwas average EUincomelevels,butalsoincreasedriskstofinancialstability(WB2009a).Therecent economies. AverageannualGDPgrowthratesupto8%since2000allowedcatch-upwith Before theglobaleconomicdownturnLithuaniawasoneoffastestgrowingEuropean economic crisisthathashitthecountryin2008(Gruževskis decades tocountrieslikeIrelandandtheUK;thesetrendsaresetcontinuedue around halfamillionofLithuaniansareestimatedtohaveleftthecountryoverlasttwo between ruralandurbanareasremainhigh.Thishascontributedtohighlabourmigrationabroad: people participateinpolitics(DuvoldandJurkynas2004;EBRD2007).Economicdiscrepancies level. The2008 (Tubalkain-Trell 2009) 2008; Miškinis natural gasandcoalmorethan90%ofcrude oilcomesfromthiscountry(Miškinis balance, makingthecountryverydependentonRussian importstomeetitsneeds.100%of Lithuania. Theshareofindigenousresourcesconstitutes onlyaround10%oftheprimaryenergy power generationareimportantfactorscontributing tothelowlevelofenergysecurity The relianceonimportedresourcesfromasingle supplierandpredominantlyfossilfuels-based for thepowerconnectionlinkingLithuaniawithSweden(CEC2008;CEU2009;Delfi.lt2010). named the due toanumberofadministrative andlegalhurdles(Ba to meettheEUtargetof 20%shareby2020andevenexceedit,butislikely tofailindoingso showed thatLithuaniahas asufficientpotentialofwind,biomass,solarand geothermalresources 2008).Howeveritsenergysystemremainsverycentralizedandmarketliberalization cableconnectingEstoniaandFinlandisasingleexception(ABB2010).Forthisreason

Energy systemandpolicyinLithuania Baltic InterconnectionPlan etal. Strategic EnergyReview 2009).In2009thenationalauditofuserenewable energyresources . TheproblemofisolationtheregionhasbeenrecognizedonEU apriority.Thishassecuredfundsworthof131millionEuros togetherwiththe č iauskas Energy Securityand etal. etal. Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus 2009). etal. 2009;IMO2009). 2009).

“Balticenergyisland” Solidarity ActionPlan etal. 57

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 58 to haltingitin1988( NPP asanenvironmentalhazardandconfrontedtheplannedexpansion,eventuallycontributing movement. IntheaftermathofChernobyldisasterGreenmovementsawIgnalina independence movementinLithuaniawassynonymouswithastrongmobilizingenvironmental pride (Foss1999;VilemasandGalinis2000).Notably,itssymbolicnaturewastwofold:the independence. Moreover,ithasbecomeasymbolofnationalsovereignty,independenceandeven European countriesthatinheritedstrategicSovietenergyinfrastructureduringtheearlyyearsof importance forLithuania.Itwasconsideredadomesticenergysource,similarlytootherEastern In additiontoitsobviouseconomicsignificance,theIgnalinaNPPhadonemore,symbolic Lithuania intothemainpowerexporterinregion(Štreimikien important roleinprovingaffordableenergyduringtheeconomictransitionandeventuallyturned procedure thatwasnotpreviouslycarriedout(Vilemas1995).TheIgnalinaNPPplayedan necessary nationalexpertisebase,establishtheregulatoryauthoritiesandundergolicensing After 1991whentheplantcameunderLithuanianauthorityLithuaniahadtodevelop speakers withfamilymembersworkingattheplantorrelatedorganizations(Balžekien specific demographicmake-upofthetownwheremajorityinhabitantsareRussian Lithuanian-Belarusian border( and resources,butalsotheworkforcetobuildoperateIgnalinaNPPonwhatistoday Lithuania belonged.SoitwasthecentralSovietgovernmentthatprovidednotonlytechnology the plantwasintendedforneedsofnorth-westernregionSovietUniontowhich country’s electricity(Vilemas1995;Schneider operating outsideofRussia.TheIgnalinaNPPwascapablegeneratingupto87%the channel-type RBMK-1500reactors[similartothoseusedinChernobyl]weretheonlyonesleft power capacitycomparedtothenationaldemand(KTU2004).Until2010twohigh-power, Visaginas, thenorth-easternpartofLithuania(Figure5.1),withmorethandoubleinstalled This situationismainlyattributedtotheexistenceoflargeSoviet-builtIgnalinaNPPin Lithuania’s EUmembership inexchangetofinancialassistancefor the decommissioning Nonetheless, thefullclosure oftheIgnalinaNPPby2009wasmadea pre-condition forthe feel uninformedaboutnuclearsafetyrelatedissues (Eurobarometer2010). new plant(GaidysandRinkevi they wouldsupporttheextendedoperationand55% ofrespondentswereinfavourbuildinga Ignalina NPPdecommissioningin1998.Evenmore, 94%ofthosesurveyedadecadelater,said concerned” was improved(GaidysandRinkevi full shutdownandmorethan60%supportedthe continuedoperation,providedthatthesafety been diminishingovertime.Ayearlater,in1989,lessthanathirdofthepopulationwasforits However, sociologicalresearchshowsthatpublicconcernsassociatedwithnuclearpowerhave

aboutnuclearrisksin1992,thesameshare ofpopulationwasstillopposedtothe Čė sna etal. č Čė 2004;ElliottandCook2004). ius 2008).Ontheotherhand,80%ofLithuanians admitthatthey sna č ius 2008).Although83%ofthosepolledsaidthey were etal. 2004;Schneider etal. 2009).Atthetimeofconstruction,in1983, etal. ė 2009). The latter resulted in a 2008;Miškinis etal. 2009). ė 2006). very CEU eTD Collection terminal arealsolistedamongthekeystrategicpriorities (Seimas2007;Miškinis power networks,renovationoftheexistinginfrastructure, anewnaturalgasstoragefacilityand share ofrenewablesandimprovingenergyefficiency. ConnectionswiththeNordicandPolish include integrationwiththeEUenergysystem, diversification ofgassupplies,increasingthe plant togetherwithpartnersinLatvia,Estoniaand Polandby2015.Otherstrategicobjectives “monopolinink Power Plant Lithuanian parliamentpassed the aspects, itrecognizestheneedtoensure national securityin2007.Apartfromthereliability,diversity,economicsandenvironmental Therefore theLithuanian (EIU 2007;Smith2008;MartewiczandKozlowski2010). “Friendship” 2006. SoonafterwardsRussiastoppedsupplyingoiltoLithuaniabythe “Mažeiki insecurity wasfurtheraggravatedafterPoland’slargestoilrefiner gas pipelinealongtheBalticseabedsurpassingStates(Smith2008).Thesenseof member (Mit sold toRussia’sstate-owned 2009). OneoftheLithuania’sbiggestgascompanies more Balticenergycompanieswentunderthecontrolofstate-ownedRussianbusiness(Rostoks Russian These concernsarenotcompletelygroundless.Observershavebeennotingsignsofactive 2008; BNS2010a). dependence onRussiaandrisingelectricitypriceswereamongtheprimaryconcerns(Vilemas was approachingin2009,theissueofenergysecuritywentveryhighonagenda:increased plant waseventuallyshutdowninDecember2009(BNS2010a).Asthedateoffullshutdown referendum onthematterwasorganizedinOctober2008,butdidnotresolveissue,and economic consequencesandenergysecurityimplications(Samoškait of theIgnalinaNPPunitswereinitiatedwithEuropeanCommissiononbasis much longer(VilemasandGalinis2000).Negotiationsregardingtheextendedoperationofone (KTU 2004).Manynationalexpertsandpoliticiansinsistedthattheplantcouldoperatesafely security situation,retainingthefacilitywasconsideredofakeystrategicimportanceforLithuania sometimes referredtoasbeingofprimaryconcern(WNA2010).Butregardless,giventheenergy were consideredinsufficientfromthewesternperspective;thoughdifferenceinsafetycultureis programmes, thesafetyfeaturesofthisrectordesign[e.g.absencesecondarycontainment] procedure (VilemasandGalinis2000).Despitenumerousmodificationsimprovement “energy diplomacy” ų nafta” 2007)andapprovedthe establishmentofanenergyholdingcompany–the ] pipelineviaBelaruscitingtechnicaldifficultiesandhavenotre-openedittodate ų ė dikato“ 2004).In2005RussiaandGermanyannouncedplanstobuildthe [eng. ] (Seimas2007).Thestrategyoutlinesplanstobuild anewnuclearpower “Oil ofMazeikiai” inEuropeforawhilenow(Smith2008;Makarychev2009).Increasingly National EnergyStrategy “Gazprom” Law oftheNuclearPowerPlant companyin2004rightbeforeLithuaniabecametheEU ] oilrefineryoutcompetingrivalRussiancompanies “independence fromadictateofmonopolisticsupplier” declaredenergysecurityanintegralpartofthe “Lietuvos dujos” Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus thesameyear( “PKN Orlen” [eng. ė 2008).Adeliberative “Lithuanian bought84%ofthe etal. Law ontheNuclear “Druzhba” “Nord Stream” 2008).

Gas” “Lietuvos [eng. ] [lith. , was

59 in

CEU eTD Collection In 2007astudyconducted bytheinternationalNGO or televisionairtimethat hasbeenpaidfor(Nugarait media corruption–awide-spread phenomenonofso-called been questioningcloserelationshipsbetweenbusinesses andpoliticians,raisingtheissueof Iceland andBelgium(RWB2009).Nonetheless,researchers, regulatorybodiesandNGOshave increasing (Jurait in Lithuaniaandthepressreadershipisratherlowwhilenumberofinternetusers increasingly entertainmentorientedlately(Bal all newspaperswereprivatized,privateradioandtelevisionstationssprouteduphavebeen liberalization, diversification,marketizationandtabloidization:afterthecensorshipwasabolished, late 1980sandearly1990s.Eversince,unliketheenergysystem,ithasgonethrough The mediahasplayedaveryactiveroleintheLithuanianindependencemovementduring 5.1.1.2 Vaida Pilibaityte 60 Kaliningrad andsimilarprojectsintheneighbouringBelarusPoland. A senseofurgencyisoftenemphasizedbypointingatRussia’splanstobuildtheBalticNPPin basis ofsecurityneeds,butalsopositivepublicattitudestowardsthisenergysource(BNS2010a). Nonetheless, thecurrentpoliticalleadershipremainscommittedtonuclearpowernotonlyon Therefore PresidentDaliaGrybauskait project, thenewgovernmentwasdeterminedtoreversedecisionofitspredecessor. Although theoutgoingPresidentValdasAdamkuswasurginggovernmenttogoonwith violation oftheEUpolicyregardingenergysectorunbundling(Damulyt projects, butthegovernment’snegotiationswereovershadowedbylackoftransparencyand supposed toimplementboththenuclearplantconstructionandenergymarketintegration main energycompanyandtworegionalpowerdistributors.Thisnationalconsortiumwas elektros organizacija” Lithuania veryhigh,10 In 2009aninternationalorganization name Russiaasthemostinfluentialone(Valstyb of foreigncountriesontheLithuanianmedia.According totheresults,85%ofrespondents survey of80mediarepresentativesandpoliticalanalystsinApril2010askingabouttheinfluence their businessinterestsexists(Gudaitis2009).Themonthlymagazine the publicmediaregistryisabsentinLithuania,noofficialinformationonownersand pharmaceuticals, energy,construction,bankingbusinessamongothers(Nugarait increasing trendofconcentrationthelocalindustrialcapitalinrecentyears:chemistry,food, Notably, theshareofforeignownersisratherlow.Infact,mediabusinesshasseenan liquidation ofthe

Media systeminLithuania ė 2008). “Leo LT” [eng. th outof175countriesworldwideandpositioned amongSwitzerland, “Lithuanian ElectricityOrganisation” alittlemorethanyearlater(Samoškait Reporters WithoutBorders ė , whotookofficeafterAdamkus,proceededwiththe č ytien ė 2010). ė 2006).Televisionisthemostpopularmedia ė 2004;Juozapavi Transparency InternationalLithuania ] , “commissioned” or ratedthelevelofpressfreedomin “Leo LT” ė 2009). č ius 2007;Gudaitis2009). “Valstyb publicationsandradio ,

by consolidatingthe ė 2008;EIU2008). ė “ ė 2004).Since carried outa found CEU eTD Collection The politicalweekly (Gudaitis 2009). The biggestnationaldailynewspaper ownership andfinancingmodel. different audiencesandguidedbyaslightlyvariededitorialpolicydeterminedmainlytheir As detailedinChapter3,thedatasamplecontains78textsfromthreemediaoutletstargeting 5.1.1.3 14 result ispresentedin.Table 5.1 coded toidentifytherecurringdiscourseactorsand themes.Alistthathasbeendevelopedasa The textssampledfortheLithuaniannuclearenergy discourseanalysishavebeenqualitatively 5.1.2 owned company Delfi.lt The thirdmediaoutletselectedforanalysisisthenumberoneLithuanianinternetnewsportal energy policies. pers.comm.). The featured intheleadingnewsportal advertising andhasaweeklycirculationofaround1000copies;thoughsomeitsarticlesare movement ofthe1990sandisregisteredasanNGO.Itmainlypubliclyfunded,butsellssome influential media,politicsandbusinessactorsinLithuaniashowsthat consortium’s liquidationin2009(BNS2010b).Arecentpublicopinionsurveyaboutthemost and hashiredaformerCEOofthe national printmarket(TNS2008).IthasbeenopenlysupportingthenewNPPprojectsince2007 owned formerSovietmouthpiecewithanaveragereadershipamountingto19%ofthetotal common practiceinthenationalpress(Juozapavi offers apositivecoverageinexchangetotheadvertisementand49%believedthatitwasvery that 54%ofbusinessmenwereinthesituationwhenitwasimpliedtothemanewspaper list ofanalyzedLithuanianmediaarticlescanbefound intheTableA.2ofAppendix The samplingtechniqueandcriteriaaredetailedin Chapter3dealingwithmethodology.Thefull coverage. media. has itsowneditorialstaff,butre-publishesalotoftextsproducedbyothernationalandregional Allthereferencesinthischapter thereafter aremadetotheappendedlistofanalyzedarticlesinTable A.2.

with nearly900thousanduniqueweeklyvisitors(TNS2010).ItbelongstotheEstonian-

Delfi.lt Lithuanian discourseactorsandrecurring themes Lithuanian mediaoutletsanalyzed appears tobetryingremainimpartialwhenitcomestheenergysecurity “Ekspress Group” “Atgimimas” “Atgimimas”

weekly hasbeenconsistentlycriticaltowardsthegovernment’s and islisted13 [eng. Delfi.lt “Lietuvos rytas” “Leo LT” “Revival” andthusreachamuchwideraudience(Donauskait č th ius 2007). ] originatesintheLithuanianindependence astheirHeadofAdministrationafterthe intheabovementionedsurvey.Thewebsite [eng. “Lithuanian Morning” Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus “Lietuvos rytas” ] isaprivately- topsthelist 14 . 61 ė

CEU eTD Collection analyzed inrelationtothe themestheydiscuss. quantitatively depictstheactorswhoarerepresented themostandleastintextsample media quoteslawyers,anarchitectandunnamedstate securityofficers. scientists andjournalistscommentingontheabove-mentioned issues.Onseveralinstancesthe Ignalina NPPworkers,NGOs,governmentofficials, politicians,formerandactingpresidents, economic andpoliticalanalysts,businessmen greenentrepreneurs,farmers’associations,the The analysiswasalsoaimedattheidentification ofnucleardiscourseactors.Thelistincludes prospects forLithuaniatoremainthenuclearstate. decommissioning andpublicattitudesarediscussedinrelationtoexistingconstraints costs, geopoliticsandneighbouringnuclearprojects,globaltrends,theIgnalinaNPP The nationalcapacitytoproceedwiththeprojectandavailabilityofhumanresources,capital safety andradioactivewastemanagement. The risk-relatedthemescovertheChernobylaccident,healthandenvironment,technology,plant decommissioning, publicattitudes,theprestigeandprogressitcanpotentiallydeliver. chosen projectmodelandoveralllegitimacyofthecountry’snuclearplans,IgnalinaNPP alternatives, GHGemissions,energycosts,geopoliticsandglobalnuclearindustrytrends,the Topics concerningjustificationforthenewnuclearplantandagainstitrelatetoviabilityof and theIgnalinaNPP. discourse actorsoftenmentionenergysecurityanddependenceonRussianresources,geopolitics The tableindicatesthatwhendiscussingthereasonsforpursuingorrejectingnuclearpower, Vaida Pilibaityte 62 Table 5.1NuclearenergythemesfeaturingintheLithuanianmediaanalyzed

PROBLEMS ADDRESSED Poetmdl Public&critics Otherprojects IgnalinaNPP Prestige&progress Projectmodel Projectlegitimacy Globaltrends IgnalinaNPP Geopolitics Globaltrends Wastemanagement Technology&safety Capacity&HR Geopolitics Chernobyl accident Energycosts Ignalina NPP Alternatives Geopolitics Dependence onRussia Energy security

OPTION JUSTIFICATION Public acceptance Health&environment GHG emissions THEMES

RISKS INVOLVED

CONSTRAINTS & PROSPECTS Capital costs

CEU eTD Collection Chernobyl accident Prestige &progress Climate change Waste management Public &critics Health &environment Technology &safety Capacity/HR Ignalina NPP Project legitimacy Alternatives Global trends Project model/LeoLT Economic costs Geopolitics/other projects Energy security/Russia 18 17 16 15 predominantly discussenergysecurity,geopolitics, economiccosts,projectmodel,globaltrends The tableindicatesthatofficials,politicians, journalists,businessmenandscientists and/or thethemeinsample. shading spectrumthatcorrespondswiththefrequency ofthetotalquotescountedperactor of quotesoneachthemeinthesample,counted separatelybyactor.Thelegendexplainsthe listed inthefarleftcolumn;themetotalcolumnonrightrepresentsnumber Individual cellsindicatethenumberofinstanceseachactorwasquotedintextsonthemes Actor cellvaluescale Theme cellvaluescale Table 5.2ActorsandthemestheydiscussinLithuanianmedia,numberoftimesquoted Numberincludes17quotesonnational capacityand8pertaintohumanresources. Numberincludes21referencesto geopoliticsand22toneighbouringcountries’nuclearprojects. Numberincludes38quotesonenergy securityand31withspecificreferencetoRussia. Category parliamentarians, corporate investors, THEMES “Analysts”

“Scientists” includespoliticalandeconomic commentators,

“Officials” ACTORS15 includesmainlypro-nuclearphysicists. 1 includesministers,civilservants anddiplomats, 0 0 State security 1 1

Farmers

1 2 Lawyers

1 1 1 1 Architects 1 1 2 1 Engineers

1 3 2 1 IAE workers

3 5 Citizens 1 4 1 1 2 1

“Businessmen” President

1 3 3 2 7 2 5 Analysts 1-2 1-5 Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus 3 1 1 2 1 5 3 2 2 3 1 1 1 “Politicians”

NGOs includesbothgreenentrepreneurs and 6-10 3-4 10 4 3 2 5 6 1 6 4 1 1 3 1 4 1 2 Scientists

11-20 includesthePrimeMinisterand 5-6 2 3 5 2 2 5 8 6 3 6 8 1 2 Businessmen

21-30 7-8 19 2 1 5 4 2 4 1 8 5 7 3 4 1 3 Journalists

31-40 9-10 15 10 16 1 8 5 1 9 3 2 1 2 Politicians

≤ <40 10 7 17 6 18 7 25 7 28 1 30 5 31 8 32 9 36 5 4 69 1 7 1 7 4 10 2 15 10 Officials

43 39

63 18 17 16 Theme total

CEU eTD Collection Lithuania (Gurevi by dependence onresourcesimportedfromRussiaputLithuaniaatacertainrisk.Thethreatposed All discourseactorsfeaturingintheanalyzedtextsagreethatissuesofenergysecurityand 5.1.3 Vaida Pilibaityte 64 anti-nuclear. argumentative linesandstrategiesgroupsthemintotwodiscoursecoalitions:pro-nuclear The followingsub-sectiondescribesthestorylinesfeaturingthesethemesindetail,andbasedon sampling strategyusedforthisstudy. dominant themesintheanalyticanddiscussionarticles,sincethiswasprimaryfocusof discourse inthemedia,itcanbearguedthattheyprovidearatheraccurateindicationabout Although resultsinthetablearenotrepresentativeofentireLithuaniannuclearenergy stand outastheydrawtheattentiontoeconomiccosts. and alternativestonuclear,whicharethemostoftencoveredthemesinsample.Analystsalso Section 5.2.4summarizes thefindingsinformoftables. for oragainstthispower source,therisksinvolved,possibleconstraints andprospects. on narrativesexplainingthe problemsthatnuclearenergyisintendedtoaddress, thejustification previously listedthemesfromthetwodivergingperspectives. Thecoalitionsaredescribedbased The followingsectionspresenttheargumentative linesutteredbydiscourseactorsaddressing costs ofproducingnuclearpower. actors intheanti-nuclearcoalitionwhentheyagree withanti-nuclearactorsonthehigheconomic than interestsunitethem.Thusoneshouldnotbe surprisedtofindsomepro-nucleardiscourse Chapter 3thatthesecoalitionsdodifferfrompolitical advocacygroupssincestorylinesrather discourse coalitionbringstogetherthoseactorswho sharethesamestorylines.Itwasexplainedin in theLithuanianmedia:pro-nuclearandanti-nuclear.AsdescribedbyHajer(1995),a solutions ratherdifferently.Thereforehereweobserveatleasttwodiscoursecoalitionsemerging However, asdetailedbelow,differentactorsseethegravityofsituationinLithuaniaand The titleimpliesanewthreattothestatesecurityas the registrationofaRussiancompany,allegedlyinterestedinnationalnuclearenergyprojects. and inthemeantimeaphantomof‘Rosatom’isroamingaroundLithuania”, (Vagnorius 2009). was grantedexclusiverightstosetpricesfortheelectricitytransportedviaRussian-Lithuaniangrid” Prime ministerwritesthatthecountryis business watchingitsbackand serving mediators” media warnsthatLithuania’senergysectoris

Russia

Discursive storylinesandcoalitionsinLithuania isverypronouncedinmosttextsandcolourfullanguageusedtodescribeit.The (Sotvarien č “Politicians andexpertsaretalkingaboutthenecessityofcountry’senergyindependence ius 2009). ė 2008),andthatthecurrentgovernmentneedstohaveastrong “kicking somebutts” “so deeplyinthiscorruptcrapthataRussian-controlledcompany “controlled fromRussiaandentangledbyaclanofMoscow- (Makaraityt “one moreRussiantentacle” ė 2007b).AformerConservative another articlecommentson gets observedin CEU eTD Collection extremity: (Bartasevi (Digryt NPP isdescribedbyitsworkerswhobelieveitcouldhavesafelyoperatedfortwomoredecades the nuclearconstructioncompetition” nuclear plantinLithuaniawouldbethe the analyticalmonthly turning fromtheregionalnuclearenergycenterintoamereprovincial energyactorverysoon”. plant acrosstheborderinOstrovetsisinterpretedasanattemptto not besufficienttoensure fragile atonce.” Scientists stresspotentialrisksaswell: it willbehookedonMoscow’spowerlines” biggest concernsformany: dependent onRussianpoliticsandthegoodwillofthiscountry” highest inEurope(Plunksnis2008).Moreover,withoutnuclearpowerLithuaniabecomes estimated duringwinter(Bartasevi “Lithuania is address challengesof From theperspectiveofpro-nucleardiscoursecoalition,nuclearpowerissupposedtomainly 5.1.3.1.1 counter-balance Russia’sdominanceintheregionandglobaltrends. The argumentativestrategyoftheseactorsisprimarilyfocusedonthegeopoliticalnecessityto Lithuania toestablishitsregionalroleandensurebothenergynationalsecurity. generation atthelowestcostandminimalorcontrollablerisk.AnewNPPisseenasatoolfor main proponentsofnuclearpower.Theyportrayitasanenergysourceenablingelectricity Political leaders,governmentofficials,businessmen,scientists,analystsandjournalistsarethe 5.1.3.1 rejected asinsufficientand/or costly.Theglobaltrends,legitimacyofthe plant Renewables, efficiencymeasures andimportsthroughinterconnections withtheWestare Nuclear powerismostlypresentedasanenergy securityoptionthathasnoalternatives. 5.1.3.1.2 The Russia isfacinggasshortagesinthecomingyears(Makaraityt neighbouringprojects ė

2009)afterover70millionEurosworthofsafetyimprovementsweremade The pro-nucleardiscoursecoalition

č “Not onlyfinancial,butalsoenergycrisis” Problems addressed Justification fornuclearenergy ius 2008).Today,closingtheplantasEUdemands,Lithuaniaisfacingatwo-fold

killing thegoldenegglayer” (Skiniulyt energy security “Valstyb ė 2007).EnergyexpertsarguethatpowerbridgeswiththeWestwould “RightnowLithuaniaischainedtotheRussianpipelineandstartingwith2010 energy security representanotherkeyfactor.ThejointBelarusian-Russiannuclear (Varanavi ė “ [eng. č ius 2008)andtheelectricitypriceisexpectedtobeoneof , onetitlereads.ThisishowtheshutdownofIgnalina and , saysonegreenentrepreneur(Aleksandravi “best waytocooloffneighbours’ambitionstakeoverthe leadin “Russians cancutoffpowerlinesandourstabilitybecomesvery “The State” č ius 2009). dependenceonRussia . ThepowerdemandinScandinaviaisgrowingand (Digryt ] arguesthatafirmcommitmenttobuild (Delfi.lt2007).Importdependenceisofthe ė 2009).Ashortageof100to500MWis ė 2007c). Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus . “threaten Lithuaniawhorisks A commentatorof

financing model, č ius 2009). “fully 65

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 66 Western powergridandliberateourselvesfromtheenergysourcesEast” and unquestionable(Damulyt Most politicalleadersandsomeanalystsrefertothedecisionbuildplantasstrategic,final nuclear policies. prestige, progressandpositivepublicattitudesarethethemesbroughtuptojustifypro- first timeintheEU(Lietuvosrytas2007) 2009). Mediacallsita security, increasedwelfareandwouldhelpLithuaniato gigantic andexceptionallyimportantprojecteveragain” Lithuanian memberoftheEuropeanParliamentbelievesthatLithuania investment inLithuanianhistoryandwillgiveagreatboosttotheeconomy” argumentative lines.TheEnergyMinisterbelievesthenewNPPwillbe Additionally, theimplicationof Early in2007theleadingnationaldaily geopolitical role” deal ashistoric: networks ofothercountries” Lithuania thatwillbeabletomanagebillions-worthprojectsoreveneatupelectricitydistributionandgeneration to privatizethem,butnowit’sturnedtowardsadifferentdirection.Soonthree-headeddragonwillemergein vigilant bird” institutions rejects theconcernsthatdecisionundermines declaring itasthe with theWest.Thefirstpublicmentionaboutthis the consortiumthatisbeingestablishedforbuildingnewplantandlinkingnationalgrid models are consolidation hastakenplace(BNS2008a).Pro-nuclearmediaclaimsthatthistypeofbusiness success referringtocountrieslikeJordanandtheCzechRepublicwheresimilarenergymarket Minister’s argumentsaresecondedbythegovernment’sbusinesspartnerswhoforesee or 2019.Hementionsnew feasibilitystudiesthatareunderway: Conservative government, butthenewPrimeMinisterexpectstohavea plantbyyear2018 However, thisdoesnot becomeareality.Ayearlater,the rytas 2007) guarantee modernmanagementsolutions,whilethegovernment officialswillspearheadthepoliticalice” According topro-nuclearmediacommentators,the countrywillbenefitfromitas national energycompany:Bulgaria,Romania, Poland andLithuania(Bartasevi role”

inthepartnership(Sotvarien

have contributedincludingbusinessassociationsandbanks” . “very popularabroad” picked forthelogoofnewplantrepresentsan of thecountry(BNS2008b). “This ideais “revolutionary” “unique” (Sotvarien

ambitious, andthisdecision–transparentfair” ė projectsincefourcountriescometogethertobuildaNPPforthe (Damauskas2007b)andthegovernmentwillmaintain the 2008a).PresidentAdamkusseesitasawayto plan: ė 2007b).Infact,onlyfourEUcountriesdonothave asimilar national prestige ė 2007a).PrimeMinisterGediminasKirkilasconsidersthis “Up tonow,thegovernmentwasdividingenergycompaniesandaiming “Lietuvos rytas” . According totheofficials,aflyingcrane, andthatanewNPPwouldcontributetoenergy project model repeatedlypublisheseloquentdepictionsof and public “finally facethefuture” progress : “so farthenumbersshowthat theplant “This projectistrulypublic:various “increasingly importanteconomicand “Leo LT” appearsinthisverynewspaper (Lukaityt canbesensedintheir “may notcomeacrosssucha (BNS 2008a).Healso ė isliquidatedbythe (Delfi.lt2009a).One 2007).ThePrime (Damulyt “the biggestgreenfield (Rainyt “integrate intothe “the businesswill “cautious and č ius 2007). (Lietuvos ė ė 2008b). -Bodard “decisive CEU eTD Collection 2009, Grybauskait months. Aftershewinsthepresidentialelectionamidcontroversiessurrounding Meanwhile, thepositionofPresidentGrybauskait sounds more 2011. Mediacommentsthatplanstobuildtheplantby2018are Energy expectstofindaninvestorduringthefirsthalfofyear2010andsigncontractin (Skiniulyt are showingtheirinterest–theFrenchpresentedservicestoPrimeMinisteralready is necessary,worthitandtherearenodoubtsaboutit” attitudes According tothescientists, theabovementionedglobalproblemsdetermine morefavourable emissions by20%2020” Ministry ofEnergybelievesthatthenuclearplant Climate change sceptical aboutviabilityofthreenuclearpowerplants intheregion(Saladžius2009). relatively smallcountryhasevenfivenuclearpowerplants” under constructionandtwomoreareplanned (Makaraityt 2008; Ivašauskas2008).Finlandispresentedby the officialsasanexamplewhereoneplantis energy revivalinthedevelopedaswelldevelopingcountriesworldwide(Delfi.lt2007;Giedra argue thatrisingoilandgaspricestheso-calledenergydiplomacyisdrivingnuclear The nuclear powerplantsimilartothosedevelopedbythe Kaunas, thesecondbiggestcityinLithuania,discussingapossibilityofbuildinganownsmall becoming morewidespreadonthisplanet” starting 2015.Theenergysystemshouldnotbecentralized,as several majorLithuaniancities.Theso-calledIRISreactorsareexpectedtobeonthemarket construction of 670 MWplantformeetingdomesticneedsshouldbeconstructed.Moreover,heproposes Belarus refusestosynchronizeitspowerdistributionsystemwithLithuania,onlyasmall,around data eixsts]capacityforthenewplanthasnotbeenjustified.Oneexpertsuggeststhatincase analysis. Thereareexpertswhoarguethattheplanned3,200MVoreven1,600MW[different A detaileddiscussionabouttheplanned investors isthere(BNS2009c). deems that account nuclearprojectsinRussiaandBelarusisalsonecessary(Samoškait options suchasgeothermal,wastetoenergyandwindpower.Accordingher,takinginto globaltrends ė towardsnuclearenergy (KimtysandRemeikis2008).Businessquotes the 2007)andGermansare “five nuclearplantscouldbebuiltinourregionanyway”, “realistic” “small andreliablenuclearpowerstationsthatwouldnotheatthelakes,butpeople’shomes” ė mitigation isalsomentionedamongreasonsto keepnuclearpower;the representanotherdistinctthemeamongproponents.Thediscourseactors callsformorestudiesonnuclearandpossibilitiesofdeveloping (Deksnys2009). (Delfi.lt 2009a). “veryinterested” (Siurbis2009).Onetextwritesaboutthemunicipalityof reactor type (BNS2009a).Moreover,someforeigninvestors ė undergoesatransitionoverthecourseoffew “will helptoachievethecommitmentreduceGHG , istheanswergivenbyofficialstothose aswell(Krasauskas2009).TheMinisterof “Toshiba” isnotfoundintextssampledforthe ė 2007c). Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus company(Dambrauskas2009). that “wars, piratesandterroristsare “very ambitious”,

“LookatSwitzerland:this the interestfromforeign ė 2009b).Shortlyshe “Leo LT” while2020 public “green” in in 67

CEU eTD Collection from neighboursisrejectedasa Other a according toscientists,thereisapossibilityofobtaininglow-interestbankloanfrom the projectarguethat and theamountofitneededissmall(Giedra2008;Ivašauskas2008).Energyexpertsinvolvedin Vaida Pilibaityte 68 technologies energy (Giedra2008).Themajorityofscientistsquoted intheLithuanianmediaarguethatnew safety” their isolationfromtheenvironment: environmental impact According totheLithuanianofficials,thisis waytoproduceelectricitywiththelowest accidents likeChernobylaredownplayed. management solutionsarepresentedasreliableandlong-termhealthconcernsassociatedwith When itcomestonuclearrisks,actorsemphasizepossibilitiescontrolthem.Theexistingwaste 5.1.3.1.3 tested worldwide,sothe possibility ofanaccidentisminimalifany.They claimthatbuildinga equipment”. attributed to friendly”, this reasonLithuaniaandothercountriesarechoosingnuclearwhichisthecheapestmostenvironmentally (Samoškait developed onlyas and abletocoverup30%ofthepowerdemand,butastheyareintermittent,canbe sarcastic way: economically viable.TheMinisterofEconomyreferstotheso-calledenergyforestinarather Other energysecurityoptionsaredenouncedasunavailable,insufficient,orsimplynot advantage (Krasauskas2009). Political analystsseethefactthat the institutionresponsiblefornuclearpowerdevelopmentinEU(Damauskas2007d). the mostindependentwaytogeneratepower” A numberofotherenergyofficialsandanalystsalsoarguethatnuclearisthe 2009a). plant: opinion compare applesandoranges” agree thatrenewablesourcescannotbecomparedwithnuclearwhatsoeverbecause

. Theyalsoemphasizetheneedtodistinguishbetween militaryandpeacefuluseofnuclear “We hopethatconstantinformationprovisionwillincreasethepublictrustevenmore” lternatives pollstheycommissionedshowingthat61%ofthepopulationsupportsnewnuclear the CEOof

Risks involved ė According Lithuanianscientists theso-calledGenerationIIIreactorsare triedand 2009b). “new materialsandtechnologies usedforbuildingreactors,producingfuelandcontrol operation areabletobringnuclearrisks “You canonlygosofarbyburningwicker” “somekindofexoticgreenenergy,butthereisnocountrywheretheyprovideabaseload” likeupgradingthermalandhydropowerplantsand/orimportingtheshortage “Producing abigshareofelectricityfromwind,sunandbiomassisstilltooexpensive.For “the plantwillcomeatnocosttothestate” . Contrarytofossilfuels,managementofradioactive materialsenables “Leo LT” (Giedra2008). “short-sighted” explains(Ivašauskas2008). Baltic InterconnectionPlan asthe “Proper andresponsibleoperationallowsachievingveryhigh levelsof

Scientists arguethat

to aminimum.Accordingthemincreasedsafety is electricity approachbypoliticians(Rainyt (Makaraityt

price istheEU-backedpriorityalsoasan verylittledependsonthefuelprice renewables ė (Makaraityt 2008b).Energyexpertsgoonto aretwiceasexpensive ė ė -Bodard 2009). 2007a).Moreover, (Samoškait “cheapest and “one cannot “Euratom” ė ,

CEU eTD Collection Remeikis 2008)( recycle it;theUKandFranceareamongfewmostadvancedonesinthisfield(Kimtys resource ratherthandangerouswaste( are usedinFinland,theUSandSwitzerland.Theybelievethatitshouldbeconsideredavaluable Lithuanian officialsclaimthatthemostmodernradioactive Meanwhile scientistsnotethatmanaging 2007). waste” However, regulatorybodiesrespondthatthistypeofreactorgenerates Canadian CANDUreactorwouldsolvetheproblemofspentnuclearfuelmanagement. buried inLithuaniaisnotfoundyet( for recyclingspentfuelusedinRBMKreactors.Theplacewherenuclearcouldbe Ignalina NPPiscontradictoryintheanalyzedmedia.Scientistsadmitthattherenotechnology In general,itcanbeconcludedthatinformationonmanagementofspentnuclearfuelfromthe nuclear accidentslikethatin doses ofradiationona A well-knownLithuanianjournalistAlgimantas able topickmushroomsandfishhere,justlikenow” environment willbedone.Radiationlevelslightlyhigherthannatural,butnotdangerous.People not asimplelandfill: He isalsowonderingwhyneighbouringcountriesexpressconcernsregardingstoragewhich is safeandevenif recycling anyway,soitissafeguardedintemporarystoragecontainers.Thismanagementmethod planning tomanagethiswasteonitsownterritoryandthereis considered awiseapproach” refuse topickmushroomsinBavarianforests,eventhough it’sbeen20yearssinceChernobyl.Thiscannotbe those fromasnakebite.Evensomerespectedcountrieslike Swedensuccumbtosuchpublicfears;theGermans a man’sback,callitpoisonoussnake,scratchwithneedleandmancandie.Symptomswouldlooklike argue thatmuchoftheconcernsareapsychologicalnature: (Kontrimavi bird population: positive impactthewarmwatersoflakecooling theIgnalinaNPPreactorusedtohaveon appears intheanalyzedtextsverymarginally.The manageroftheIgnalinaplanttalksabout Other thaninrelationtowaste,the and thatthereareatleasttenmorereactordesignsLithuaniacouldchoosefrom( č ius 2009). Č “How doweexplaintothetamedbirdsthatthisparadise oftheirsisbeingshutdownnow?” ekutis 2007). “the planehits,thecontainerswillremainleakproof” “In 20years “regular basis” ( Č ekuolis 2008). Chernobyl

it willbeagreenhill.Peopleabletolivehere,noharmthe andthatmostfiguresaboutthevictimshealthimpactof Č ekutis 2007).ButthemanagerofplantsaysLithuaniais environmental andhealth Č are ekutis 2007).However,onlyfewcountriesareableto

incredibly distorted” spent nuclearfuelisthemostchallengingtask. (Kauzanas 2008). Č ekuolis arguesthatpeopleareexposedtovaried anda waste management Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus “Put aharmlesstoothlesswhipsnaketo “too little” , themanagersays. impactoftheexistingplant “mere fantasy”. “seven timesmoreradioactive spentfueltobesentfor He goesonto technologies Č ekutis 69

CEU eTD Collection are alsomentioned.There isanalternativesuggestionregardingthechoice ofprojectpartners: which Russiawouldbeallowed toexportelectricityviatheLithuanianpower linestotheWest Uncertainties aboutthe capacity oftheplannednuclearpowerproject and conditionsunder (Krasauskas 2009). According toofficials,allthreeprojectsareseen as “Our countryunderstandsthenecessityofimplementing itsenergyplansevenbetter” the constructionby2010as discourage constructionplans(BNS2009b).One scientist downplaysRussia’splanstocomplete On theotherhand,governmentofficialsdorecognizechallenge Lithuanian project” Nonetheless theybelievethatthenewexpertswillbeprepared personnel sake of they arecapableofandplanontakingpartintheproject,othersclaimwoulddoitfor located] the capitalcostsisinfrastructureanditalreadyexistsinVisaginas Lithuania’s advantages: The businessinvolvedwiththe documented themes. Issues ofnationalcapacity,humanresourcesandgeopoliticsnuclearenergyareamongthe deployment, mostofthemdownplaythechallengesoremphasizepossibilitiestoaddressthem. Although theactorsofpro-nuclearcoalitionrecognizesomeconstraintstonuclear 5.1.3.1.4 Vaida Pilibaityte 70 (Krasauskas 2009).However,toppoliticiansconsiderita ambassador’s Kaliningrad areserious,eventhoughitmightbedrivenby (Lietuvos rytas2009).AnalystsareconvincedthatRussia’sintentionstohaveownplantin media warnsaboutPoland’sintentions,amidthestalemateinnegotiationswithLithuania (Makaraityt Russia’s invitationtoimplementtheprojectinKaliningradisdenouncedas Meanwhile, institutions inRussiaandFrance(Tvirbutas2008). new plant.Oneuniversityalreadyhasastudentexchangeagreementwithseveraleducational capacity potential andincreasecompetitiveness(KimtysRemeikis2008).Speakingaboutthe scientists areconvincedthatthenewplantwillcontributetodevelopmentofnational

“honour” ”( , theypointattheexistingexperienceandabilitytoeducateworkersrequiredfor Bartasevi

: theEnglishlanguageisone[mostworkersatIgnalinaNPPareRussian-speakers]. Constraints andprospects ė neighbouring countries’ 2009e). “personal ambitions” ifnothingelse(Tvirbutas2008). (Rainyt č ius 2007).Alongsimilarlines,therearenationalbusinessmenwhobelieve “While Lithuaniahesitates,Polandknowsforsurethatitwillbeusingnuclearenergy”, “Our countryhasexperience,expertiseandtechnicalinfrastructure.Around30%of ė -Bodard 2009)or “absurd” as thereisnoevidenceoftheexistenceprojectdocuments “Leo LT” andtheForeignAffairsMinisterrespondsinthis context: planstobuildtheirownNPPsareseenas projectspeaksinfavourofnuclearenergylisting “political gamesandpropaganda” “theoretically competingfortheforeigninvestor” “bluff “on time”

[Where theIngalinaNPPis “political reasons” aimed atseekingashareinthe (Tracevi withtheintentionto

of re-training (Deksnys2008). č i ū orthelocal geopolitical. t ė “provocation” 2007).The national the

CEU eTD Collection having (Prunckien manipulated bythefiguresof has takentoestablishthe partners cangetdrivenawaybyuncertainty” consortium a businessmanwarns(Makaraityt discuss theweakerwe’llbecomeandwithlesspossibilitiestoestablishcompanybasedonnationalcapital”, Lithuania. Thisisalsoarticulatedinrelationtotheallegedurgencyofproject: Critical opinions 2015 (Lietuvosrytas2008a). the criticaldiscoursecoalition. Thesearemainlyrelatingtothemesconcerning highcapitalcosts sources. Therearealsoscientists, analystsandpoliticianswhoseargumentative linescomplement building anewNPPand blamethegovernmentforcreatingbarriers for alternativeenergy critics ofnuclearpower.Theyemphasizegeopolitical, economicandenvironmentalrisksof Green entrepreneurs,NGOsandalternative,publicly fundedmediaareamongthemostvocal 5.1.3.2 scaremongering tacticsand consortium isamongthem(Tilindis2009). Environmentalistsareblamedfortheir the plant(Gintalait suppliers, representativesoftheoilrefinery construction ofnewreactorsisdelayedbecausevariousinterestgroupssuchaspoliticians,gas Lithuanian people’sinteresttogetcheapandsecureenergy The formerMinisterofAgriculturewritesthatleadersthiscountry 2008b). to consortiumpartners “playing businessgamestogainmoreadvantageinnegotiations” guarantee itsenergysecurity,butPolandandEstoniawhohaveresourcesoftheirownaremerely official saysthatLatviaisdeterminedtotakepartintheLithuanianprojectsinceNPPwould 2007a). ThisthemeispresentinnegotiationwithprojectpartnerstheBalticsaswell.One the sitewaspolitical–itismostdistantwithrespecttoBelarusianborder(Damauskas repository neartheBelarusianborder.Officialsadmitthatoneofmainreasonsforchoosing Geopolitical implicationsofnuclearenergyalsoappearinthecontextradioactivewaste importing electricityfromLithuaniathroughthepowerbridgethatwillconnectus?” “Maybe anevenbiggerplantwouldbeeconomicallyviableif,say,Swedeninterestedintakingpartand towards nuclearenergy “personal issues”

The anti-nucleardiscoursecoalition ė 2009).Somemediacommentatorsattackcriticalpoliticiansandbusinessmenfor “Leo LT” areportrayedasfactorsconstrainingthedevelopmentofnuclearpowerin ė 2008)andPresidentGrybauskait orimplytheirtieswithRussia(Ignatavi oneparliamentariancallspopulism: “unlike elsewhereintheworld” “only politicalorgeopoliticalfactors” “Leo LT” “black publicrelationstechniques” ė 2007b).Thediscussionaboutthelegitimacyofenergy “energy systemthatLithuaniaistryingtoescape” (Nastaravi consortiumis “Mažeiki č (Giedra2008). ”, thatis–nuclearpower.Inthemeantime, ius 2008).Inmedia’sview,thetwoyearsthatit ė whoapprovedliquidationofthe maypreventtheNPPfrombeingbuiltby “a very long time” ų (Damauskas 2007a).Moreoveraccording nafta” causingnegative “Each daycostsusalot,international č Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus and ius 2008),greenNGOsopposing “alternativeenergyenthusiasts” (Eigirdas 2007). anditisduetothose “have forgottenaboutthe public (Lietuvosrytas “The longerwe

attitudes “Leo LT” 71

CEU eTD Collection program ontherenovationofresidentialhousingisacompletefailure” officials areabsolutelyignoringevenecologicalinitiativesthatstartcomingfromthepublicandgovernment’s Journalists alsoblamethegovernmentforlackofactiononotherenergypolicyoptions: preventing thedevelopmentofsaferandcheaper ambitions (Krasauskas 2009).Alongsimilarlines,smallerbusinessmenblameLithuania’s are Lithuanianpatriotswithnuclear”,asifwehaveabomb”, “This isamixofeconomicsandpsychology.[…]Seemsthatthereanintentiontoconvincethepublic of alternativesourcesanddangers The storylinesexplainingthenegativeimpactofIgnalinaNPPmonopoly,underdevelopment energy asanurgentandtheonlysolutiontosecuringindependence,butratheraproblem. dependence onRussia As mentionedearlier,anti-nuclearactorsacknowledgeproblemsof 5.1.3.2.1 Vaida Pilibaityte 72 consultation, especially regarding thepublic-privateconsortium Arguing againstthenuclear power,theLithuaniandiscourseactorsbring forward lackofpublic 5.1.3.2.2 will notexperiencepowershortages(Makaraityt says. SheisconvincedthatafteritsclosurethecountrywillnotbedependentonRussiaand are buyingresourcesfromRussiaatahighprice,butbecauseourownmonopolistsexploitingthecountry”, manipulations andpreventedliberalization: says thattheexistence monopoly. WhencommentingontheIgnalinaNPPclosureasEUBudgetCommissionershe President Grybauskait national capacityandlegitimacyofthedecisionarepronouncedaswell. and environmentalrisksposedbynuclearprojectsoftheneighbouringcountries.Doubtsabout was dependentonnuclearfuelandspareparts suppliedby There arescientistswhopointatthefactthatevenbeforeclosingIgnalinaNPPLithuania market andeveryLithuaniancitizenwillbeprotectedfromthelawlessnessofmonopolies” of theIgnalinaplantfinallyopensdoorto country (Vilemas2008). Meanwhile afailednuclearenergyprojectmay havegraveeconomicconsequencesforthe not sodramatic:eventhoughelectricitypriceswill increase,thepowershortagewillnotoccur. argument goes,thesituationLithuaniafindsitself aftershuttingdownitsmainpowersourceis

Problems addressed Justification againstnuclearenergy for “provoking severalneighbouringcountriestobuildtheirown‘hellish’reactors” ė isalsoamongthosewhomentiontheproblemofnuclearpower aswell.Contrarytotheiropponents,theseactorsdonotseenuclear Ignalina NPP “nuclear competition” “Lithuania ispayingsomuchforelectricitynotonlybecausewe hasmonopolizedtheenergymarket,allowedprice ė 2008c).Grybauskait energy security aredescribedhere. alternatives (Makaraityt a well-knownphysicistcomments Russia : “Prices willbedeterminedbythe “Leo LT”, ė ė arguesthattheshutdown (Aleksandravi 2008a). . Havingsaidthis,the energy security (Delfi.lt 2009b). nuclear power also economic č ius 2009).

andfor saying “we and “The she CEU eTD Collection Navickait NPP andthechosen In somepoliticians’,energyexperts’andcommentators’view,thedecisionregardingnew to waysofensuringenergysecurity. assessments, considerationofalternativesandmisinterpretationglobaltrendswhenitcomes to thenewnuclearplantfeasibilitystudy(Gintalait The themeof good olddaysandpubliclyactivelydiscussaboutthenewNPP” NPP expansionwasopposedandbroughttoahalt: made” agrees thatincountrieslikeSwedenorFinland presented tothepublicitismissing” analyze thisnewwonderoftheLithuanianeconomymoredatawouldbenecessary,butininformation Lithuanian Bank,titledthe procedure (Damulyt Financial analystsalsocriticizethechoiceofprivatebusinesspartnerwithoutanytendering consider theentireprocessofcreatingconsortiumveryrushedandunconstitutional. 2008-2009. ParliamentariansincludingtheleaderofthenoppositionConservativeParty “building anewNPPisonly an obligationtoconstructaNPP(Makaraityt conclusion oftheConstitutionalCourtthatlaws regulating theconsortiumdonoteveninclude shareholders inacompanythatnobodyknowswhattodowith”, track illegalactionsbasedontheexistingdocumentation(Makaraityt the governmentandprivateinvestorwasconductedinsuchawaythatitwouldbeimpossibleto quotes thestudyconductedbyindependentlawexpertswhoconcludethatagreementbetween privatized powerdistributioncompanytogainprofit(Makaraityt In 2007oneun-namedanalystarguesthattheconsortiumisabusinessplotaimedatre-selling be conductedfirst(Lukaityt negotiations hehasinsistedthatonacostbenefitanalysisandproperprojectriskassessmentto at profitthroughsharesmanipulation(Damulyt afera” affordable andsecuresupply evenwithoutanewNPP.Moredecentralized powerandenergy 2008). ThelinkwithSweden isexpectedtobecompleteby2015.These linkswouldensure interconnections withPoland andSwedeninstead(Skiniulyt argue thatthenewprojectisveryriskyand thatLithuaniashouldfocusonthegrid Acknowledging theriskofrelyingonelectricityimports from product, andcorruptofficials” ) asitdoesnotguaranteetheconstructionofNPPandpowerbridgesisonlyaimed . GreenNGOsrefertotheenvironmentalmovementoflate1980swhenIgnalina ė 2007).NationalandinternationalNGOscomplainaboutnotbeingabletogainaccess “Leo LT” ė 2008a).RaimundasKuodis,oneoftheleadingeconomists consortiumstandsoutparticularlyinthetextssampledduringyears project model

(Giedra 2008). in theinterestofthoseproducingequipment,supplyingnuclear fuelandsellingtheir ė “Leo LT” 2007;Makaraityt (Eigirdas2007).TheofficialoftheMinistryEnvironment consortiumthebiggest lacksaproper ė 2007c). ė 2009b).Promotersofrenewablesarguethat “it takesanentiregenerationbeforesuchdecisionsare ė ė 2008b).Sincetheverybeginningof “It istimetodustofftheoldbanners,remember 2008).Onejournalistnotesthat ayearlateroneeditorialwritesnotingthe (Lukaityt public Russia “fraud ofthiscentury” Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus ė andNavickait ė

2007a).Twoyearslatermedia consultation ė 2007). , someexpertsandscientists ė 2009a).

ė (Skiniulyt “All ofusarethe 2007;Vilemas (lith. “in orderto “amžiaus ė and 73

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 74 technology (Kimtys andRemeikis 2008). RepresentativesofgreenNGOsargue thatsafe Island andChernobylaccidents have Not onlycritics,butalsoproponentsofnuclear energymentionthefactthatThreeMile the environmentalimpactofnuclearplantsplanned inneighbouringcountries. Ignalina NPPwasteandsafetyoftechnologyingeneral, butalsodiscussspecificconcernsabout With regardtonuclearrisks,discourseactorstouch uponissuesrelatedtothemanagementof 5.1.3.2.3 to theconsumer.” claiming thata Similarly, smallbusinessmenrejectthegovernment’senergybusinessconsolidationplans synchronisation”, “these chaoticlinkagesacrosstheBaltichavenothingtodowithsustainablegriddevelopmentand However, therearegreenentrepreneurswhoopposeeveninterconnections.Accordingtothem, measure (Samoškait also proposebuildingaliquefiedgasterminalandstoragefacilityasanalternativeenergysecurity saving couldalsobepartoftheenergycostsreductionstrategy(Vilemas2008).Someofficials are muchmorestableandcreatejobscompared tonuclear(Gintalait the NGO’sview,decentralized,localrenewablesourcesbasedenergysystemspaybacksooner, This requiresdesignating7%ofarablelandforenergyplantsandincreasingefficiency.In and wind,butalsosungeothermal–Lithuaniacanachieveabsoluteenergyindependence. NGOs claimthatbyintroducingnewlocalrenewablesourcesevery5-10years–mainlybiomass and reducingtheenergyintensityofeconomy(Lukaityt secure energysupplieswithoutbuildingaNPP,butusing In theviewofgreenentrepreneursandNGOstherearestudiesprovingthatLithuaniaisableto sustainable (Pocien was doneincountrieslikeSwedenwherestatesupporthelpedtothemakeenergysystemmore nuclear powershouldberatherinvestedinawarenessraising,renewablesandgreenbuildingsasit public attitudesandenergysupplymonopolies.Inhisview,theresourcesintendedfornew that modern the comingdecades(Giedra2008).Onearchitectspecializingingreentechnologiespointsout energy sourcesthatarebecomingmoreaffordableastraditionalfuelsfacinga trends Contrary totheproponentsofnuclearenergy,greenentrepreneurstalkaboutdifferent (Paulauskas 2008). build aNPPas

intermsofenergysecurity.Accordingtothem,theworldisturningsaferandgreener

Risks involved isamyth: alternatives Theyrefertothegovernmentplanas “natural energysystemdevelopmentleadstodecentralisationandbringsproductioncloser so-called renewables-based “worthless, misleadingandposingagreateconomicdisasterdangertofuturegenerations” ė ė 2009). 2009a). “This islikeanewcarmodel. Itisabitadvanced,buttheinessencestayssame” exist inLithuania,buttheirdevelopmentisconstrainedbyexisting “radically” “supergrids” changedtheattitudestowards thispowersource “a dangerousgamble” isabettersolution(Paulauskas2008). renewables ė 2007;Paulauskas2008).Green such aswindandbiomass andviewthedecisionto ė 2008). “total ban” nuclear global in CEU eTD Collection underestimated hundredsoftimes: impact assessmentcarriedoutbytheBelarusianauthoritieswhosefindingsaresaidtobe and theportofKlaip activists raiseconcernsabouttheeffectBalticNPPinKaliningradwouldhaveonrivers Other actorsdiscuss the staff(Damauskas2007a). transporting thewastetosurfacerepositorywillreceivehighestindividualdosesamong during thewastemanagementworkatIgnalinaNPP.Accordingtoofficials,workers The healthimpactthemeismentionedinonearticledescribingthepossiblerisktoworkers whole worldthinksitis” Representatives ofgreenNGOsnote: source ofdangerouswasteforwhichnopermanentmanagementsolutionexists(Giedra2008). warns (Paulauskas2008).Thebusinessmenadvocatingforrenewablesconsidernuclearpowera can bedoneaboutit.Ithasnothingtodowithprogress,buthazardsalone”, energy sources.[…]Thereisnothingmoredangerousthannuclearradiationthatusuallyfoundwhen (Paulauskas 2008). capacity or generated bynuclearplants.Somegoasfartocallita (Gintalait only marginally,asitsemissionsaresubstantialoftheentirelifecycleistakenintoaccount immediately. Whenthatplant isbuiltwecanforgetaboutfishingwhatsoever”. about environmentalimpact: reactor anydifferent?” they aremodernandreliable,[…]butiftheKremlinmanages tousegasasanintimidationtool,isanuclear Anti-nuclear storylinesarguethatnuclearpowercancontributeto are limited;theyalsorefertoRussianreactorsas (Gintalait plants willbebasedontheRussiantechnology what theNerisriverwillbelikewhenitreachesVilnius”, to usethewaterfromriverssharedbycountries forcoolingpurposes: discussing plansoftheneighbouringcountries.Both BelarusianandRussianplantsareplanning Nuclear powerisseenasdangerousbythosein thepro-nuclearcoalitionaswell,theyare they say(Krasauskas2009). The anti-nuclearactorsarevocalabout (Gintalait Dr ū kšiai thatwasusedtocooltheIgnalinaNPPisaproofofthermalimpactonwatersystems ė ė ė 2008;Pilibaityt 2008) 2008). “castles intheair” . AccordingtoPolishbusinessmen,moderntechnologicaloptionsforreactors “It isfairtosaythateveryLithuanianlosing14yearsoftheirlivesduethemisuse Lithuanianslivingclose totheplannedBelarusianNPPsiteareconcerned (Lukaityt ė environmental risks da (BNS2009b).BelarusianNGOsexpressconcernsaboutenvironmental ė 2009).Accordingtothem,theecosystemchangeinlakeof –depictingwaytooambitiousplansthatmayneverbecomereality ė “When Belarusiansrelease some chemicalsintotheriver,fishgetkilled 2007). “The absurdityoftheexpectedimpactisnotevenworthacomment”

“Nobody seemstoconsideritaprobleminLithuania,althoughthe health andenvironmental posed byothernuclearplantsintheregion.Russian “not testedyet” “marked byChernobyl” onecommentatorspeculates.Thefactthat (Lietuvosrytas2009). “monster” Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus an activegreenentrepreneur risks and climate change They alsomentionpolitics: isalsoofconcern: referringtotheplanned “We canonlyimagine radioactive waste mitigation “Maybe 75 ,

CEU eTD Collection guarantees forloanstosecureinvestment(Skiniulyt risks involved(Delfi.lt2007).Scientistsandanalystsnotethatthestatemayhavetoprovideits analysts admitthatthemaindisadvantageofnuclearpowerishigh new plantsaremoremodernandsafer,buttheyalsoexpensive” electricity ischeap” Ignalina NPP.ItispartlycoveredbytheEU.Wedidnotinvestourselvesinconstruction,thatwhy costs Although scientistsandbankersadvocatefornuclearpower,manyofthemwarnaboutthehigh example representsglobalnuclearindustrytrends(Gintalait quality. Thiswillhaveanirreversibleeffectonthesafetyofthisplant” are contractinginexperiencedcompanies,usingcorrosivemetalsforconstruction.Concreteworksofalow budget overrunsandtechnicalfailures: The greenNGOsnotethefailuresofongoingprojectinFinland–constructiondelays, nuclear energyinLithuania. costs, lackofnationalcapacityandhumanresourcesamongthemainconstraintsforpursuing Actors ofthisdiscoursecoalitionemphasizedifficultiestheindustryisfacingglobally,highcapital 5.1.3.2.4 Vaida Pilibaityte 76 ( of theIgnalinaNPPthatwasbuiltinsameregionwherenewplantisplannedaswell Belarus (Varanavi “historically veryimportantethniclandforLithuania” Moreover, themediapointsatfactthatregionofOstrovets[thatisalsodescribedasa (Dumalakas 2008). “We builtanuclearplantundertheirnoseonce,nowtheyarecomingbackatuswithsimilar“toy” “economic logic” also politicalanalystswho supportnuclearplansforgeopoliticalreasons butadmitthatthe backed bystateinvestments liketheplantsinBelarusandRussia(Krasauskas 2009).Thereare economic reasons,theprojectinLithuaniaisriskiest ofallthreeintheregionasitwillnotbe risk”, lower unlikely thatthenewplantwillbeconstructedsooner thaninadecadeandthatitwillguarantee Furthermore, consideringtheglobalnuclear of allenergysources(Gintalait (Makaraityt sector inparticular: projects ofthisscalemayhaveaserioussystemicimpactonthecountry’seconomyandenergy Č

aplikas 2007). awell-knownLithuanianphysicistJurgisVilemas (2008)warns.Inhisview,exactlyfor ofproducingelectricityinthenewplant: prices

Constraints andprospects ė 2007a).GreenNGOsarguethatthepay-backtime ofnuclearprojectsisthelongest : “We mightrunintogreateconomiclossesandthusputmuch moreimportantnationalprioritiesat maynotbeinfavourof nuclearandthatbuildingpowerbridgestothe West (Žvirblyt č ius 2009).Theserisksarebroughtupbygeologistsinthecontextofsafety “Electricity priceincreaseof10%reducesLithuanianGDPbyseveraltenthsapercent” ė 2009).TheheadoftheIgnalinaNPPsharesthisviewandadds: ė 2008). “Since 2005therehavebeenaround2,000variousviolations.They industry trends “We donotpayforradioactivewastemanagementatthe ] istheareaofhighestseismicactivityin ė 2007;Makaraityt ė . TheyareconvincedthattheFinnish 2008). and economiccrisisitseemshighly (Kauzanas2008).Financial capital costs ė 2007a).Theywarnthat andfinancial “The

CEU eTD Collection After theConservatives-led companies totakepartintheproject(Tvirbutas2008). capacity (Gintalait minister. NGOswarnaboutlackofsafetycultureamongindustryworkersandregulatory agree onthis” highly unlikelythatfourcountrieswithnoexperienceinnuclearenergyandprojectsofthiskindwillbeableto doubts aboutLithuania’sabilitytoimplementtheproject,evenwithitsregionalpartners: Just beforetakingthepostofnewEnergyMinisterArvydasSekmokasalsoexpresseshis imports fromRussia(Lukaityt Meanwhile healludesat would beinterestedinimportingthemainshareofelectricityproducedLithuania. new constructionwouldbeextremelyexpensiveandpossibleonlywithforeigninvestmentthat decades andout-datedgridinfrastructurewiththeEast.Thereforepoliticianarguesthat resource-intensive gridinterconnectionprojectsthathavebeenpendingformorethantwo impossible toassessthepresentvalueofIgnalinaNPP”, the specialopenaccountatUSSRConstructionBankandtherewasasmuchrequired.Thereforeitis contract withtheRussiancompany “Ignalina NPPwasconstructedwithoutanyestimates.Irememberitverywell building anewplanttodayandgeneratingnuclearelectricitycannotbecomparedtothe1980s: sceptical aboutLithuania’scapacitytobuildthenewplant.AccordingBrazauskas,costsof Prime MinisterAlgirdasBrazauskasisoneofthefewinfluentialpoliticalfigureswhoarehighly With regardto system andconnectingtotheWest(Makaraityt systems andlackofcalculationscostsplanneddisconnectionLithuaniafromtheRussian There aretextsraisingtheissueofcompatibilityEasternandWesternpowerdistribution opposition fromthelocalpublicasitcrossescherishedregionoflakes(Vilemas2008). should beprioritized(Samoškait increased energypricesand unemployment. social problemslocallyasresidentsofVisaginaswhere theplantislocatedarefacingthree-fold security duetotheEUcommitmentshutdown thisChernobyl-typeplant.Itcreatessevere And finally,thethemeof their ownnuclearplantswewillbeabletoenjoyatrueelectricity surplus” three timesmoreelectricitythanisproducedinLithuania over thenext20years.WhenRussiaandBelarusbuil NPP orgridconnectionswiththeWest: (Samoškait national capacity ė 2008).Therearebusinessmentooscepticalabouttheabilityofnational ė geopolitics 2009a).However,hechangesthisstanceshortlyafterbecominga “Leo LT” ė 2009). Ignalina NPP ė 2009b).However,thepowerbridgewithPolandmayfacean , theformerleaderofSovietLithuania,Presidentand “Inter RAOJES” advocatingforthe liquidation, mediapointsattherecentelectricityimport “Now wehavecommittedtobuyfromRussiaandBelarus around ė 2007c). appearsinthecontextofdeterioratingenergy he recalls(Lukaityt that eliminatesanymotivationtobuilda “relevant foreignpolicy” (Tilindis 2009). Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus , the

money wasprovidedthrough ė 2009). inordertosecure

He pointsat “It is 77

CEU eTD Collection pro-nuclear andanti-nuclear. The the analysisofsample,recurringstorylineshave beengroupedintotwodiscoursecoalitions: nuclear energyprojects,economiccosts,projectmodel, globaltrendsandalternatives.Basedon scientists mainlydiscussenergysecurity,dependence onRussia,geopoliticsandneighbouring 2009. Thereviewshowsthatgovernmentofficials, politicians,journalists,businessmenand national mediatextswithaprimaryfocusonanalytical publicationsfromtheperiodof2007- The Lithuaniannuclearenergydiscourseanalysis is basedonastudyof78purposefullyselected energy-producing stateandbuildinganewplantwiththeinternationalpartners. resources importedfromRussia.Hencethegovernment’sstrategicgoalofremainingnuclear share oflocalrenewablesourcesinitsenergymixissmallandthecountrymainlyrelieson electricity providersince1983.Lithuanianmarketliberalizationisstillinitsinfancy,the Soviet statehadtoshutdowntheChernobyl-typeIgnalinaNPPthatservedasmaindomestic discourse analysisinthisstudy.In2009duetoitsEUmembershipcommitmentsformerly This sub-sectionlooksatthenuclearenergydiscourseofLithuaniawhichispartnational 5.1.4 Vaida Pilibaityte 78 2009d). drowning, collapsingtogetherwiththeunconstructedpowerbridgestoPolandandevenSweden” build thenewplant.Onecommentatorinthiscontextnotesthatplannednuclearplant delays (Makaraityt they claimthatthesituationisstill everything. ButastheprojectsstarteditprovedotherwiseandwehavetoseekknowledgeinMoscow”. always arguedthatLithuaniannuclearenergyexpertsarethebest,theyknoweverythingandcando qualified workforceisleavingthecountry(Tracevi Another concernisrelatedtothe regional nuclearelectricity exporter’srole.Aconsiderableemphasisisput on Russia’spotentially most economicallyviable solutiontosecureLithuania’senergyindependence andmaintain According totheofficials,thereisissueof (Makaraityt leverage tocontroltheseprocesses.ExpensesmayhavebecoveredbyLithuaniantaxpayers auditors cametoaconclusionthattheyhavebeendeliberatelystalledandthegovernmentlacks may resultinbudgetoverrunsofupto300millionEuros(doubletheestimatedcosts).State project funds( Some authorsdescribesuspectedcorruptionandmismanagementofthedecommissioning since qualifiedworkforceisleaving(Kontrimavi The plantmanagementclaimsthatthishasalsooperationalsecurityimplicationsforthe a braindraintotheBelarusianorRussianplantsplannedbyneighbours(Varanavi

Summary offindings ė 2009g). Č erkauskas 2009).ThereareestimatesthatdelaysoftheseEUfundedprojects ė 2009c).ThecriticsarguethatthisraisesdoubtsaboutLithuania’scapacityto human resources pro-nuclear “better thaninChernobyl” national energynarrativesarguefor nuclearenergyasthe č ius 2009). č i ū t needed foranewLithuanian ė

2007),themediawarnsaboutriskof capacity andthereareobjectivereasonsfor in this context as well: “

(Makaraityt plant. Asthe č However, ius 2009). We have “is ė

CEU eTD Collection

NPP. Thestorylinesofthe detrimental energydiplomacy,globaltrends,absenceofrisksandnationalcapacitytobuildanew Table 5.3StorylinesrelatingtoproblemsnuclearenergycanorcannotaddressinLithuania energy securityasseenbydifferentLithuaniandiscourseactors. Table 5.3summarizesthosestorylinesthatdescribeproblemsrelatedtonuclearpowerand justification, nuclearenergy-relatedrisks,andconstraintsprospectsfordeployment. according tothefollowingargumentativecategories:problemsbeaddressed,option The tablesbelowcontainasummaryofdivergingnarrativesfromthetwocoalitionslaidout national daily online mediaandthepublicly-fundedanalyticalweekly,whiletextsinleadingprivate The majorityofanti-nuclearenergyargumentsarefoundinthearticlesfromforeign-owned technology suchaslong-livedradioactivewaste. and publicdiscussiononalternativesaswellpotentialriskslinkedwithnuclearenergy Problems addressed Europe. shortages andoneofthehighestelectricitypricesin After theIgnalinaNPPclosureLithuaniawillexperience risk. puts Lithuania'sroleastheleadingelectricityexporterat Neighbouring countriesareplanningtheirownplants;this companies resistinganychange. Russia; theenergysectorhasclosetieswithRussian Lithuania entirelydependsonresourcesimportedfrom “Lietuvos rytas” PRO-NUCLEAR anti-nuclear are predominantlypro-nuclearpower. Energy securityanddependenceonRussia Ignalina NPP energycoalitionstresstheabsenceoffeasibilitystudies Geopolitics decommissioning prevented developmentoflocalrenewables. The IgnalinaNPPhasmonopolizedenergysectorand dangerous “nuclearcompetition”intheregion. Lithuania's nuclearenergyambitionsareprovoking increased. resources areunderexploited,efficiencycanbe sources isbepossible;noshortageswilloccur;local network, butimportingelectricityfromnon-Russian Lithuania dependsontheEasternpowerdistribution ANTI-NUCLEAR Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 80 Table 5.4StorylinesrelatingtonuclearenergyrisksinLithuania discourse coalitionsarelaidoutinTable5.4. Argumentative linespertainingtonuclearenergyrisksasseenfromtheperspectiveoftwo

Risks involved environment andpeoplewillbecaused. Radioactive wastewillbemanagedsafely;noharmto NeighbouringplantsputLithuaniaatrisk. possible; Lithuaniaischoosingfrom11reactortypes. Modern reactorsaremuchsafer,accidentshardly Proper managementminimizestherisk. Chernobyl wasahumanerror,repetitionisnotposs PRO-NUCLEAR Technology andplantsiting Health andenvironment Waste management Chernobyl accident be Russiantechnologyis"markedbyChernobyl". ible. RBMK reactorsbuiltinIgnalinaNPP. worldwide; thereisnowaytoreprocessspentfuelfrom No permanentsolutionformanagingnuclearwasteexists activity. NPP andBelarusianplantisplannedhasahighseismic Nuclear safetyisamyth;TheregionwheretheIgnalina ANTI-NUCLEAR CEU eTD Collection

Table 5.5StorylinesrelatingtojustificationforandagainstnuclearenergyinLithuania nuclear powerinLithuania. Table 5.5

Option justification was consulted. 61% ofthepublicsupportnewconstruction, boost economicdevelopmentandresearch. biggest greenfieldinvestmentinLithuanianhistory;itwill It willhelpmaintaintheregionalleader'srole;itbe world; foreigninvestorsareinterested. capital consolidationsarecommonelsewhereinthe The modelistransparentandright;suchpublic-private new plantisbuilt. Operation ofIgnalinaNPPshouldbeextendeduntilthe The wholeworldisturningtonuclearpower. It helpsstrengtheninggeopoliticalrole. would comeatnocosttoconsumer. It isthecheapestwaytogenerateelectricity;anewplant targets. It willhelpmeetingtheEUGHGemissionsreduction expensive andunabletoprovidebaseloadelectricity. There arenoalternatives;renewablesinsufficient,

below presentsnarrativesprovidingdifferentargumentsforandagainstthepursuitof PRO-NUCLEAR Public acceptanceandawareness Ignalina NPPdecommissioning Prestige andprogress Project model/LeoLT GHG emissions Global trends Energy costs Alternatives Geopolitics radically changedpublicattitudestowardsnuclearpower. The ThreeMileIslandandChernobylaccidentshave economic consequences. Nuclear powerprojectfailuremayhaveconsiderable analysis shouldbeconductedfirst. not guaranteethattheplantwillbebuilt;costbenefit The chosenmodeliscorrupt,unconstitutionalanddoes commitments. Ignalina NPPshouldbeclosedasperEUaccession decentralized generationthatcreatesmorejobs. The worldisturningtosaferalternativesand with anewNPP“likebomb". Politicians demonstratepatriotismthroughshowingoff expensive. Power producedinthenewNPPmaybetwiceas It contributestoclimatechangemitigationonlymarginally. development; bridgestotheWestshouldbeprioritized. affordable supplies;monopolieshavepreventedtheir Lithuania hasenoughrenewableresourcestosecure ANTI-NUCLEAR Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus 81

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 82 Table 5.6StorylinesrelatingtoconstraintsandprospectsfornuclearenergyinLithuania for nuclearpowerinLithuaniaandworldwide. Table 5.6depictsstorylinesutteredbydiscourseactorswhendiscussingconstraintsandprospects

Constraints & prospects educated ontime. plant; qualifiedworkforcecanbere-educatedand Lithuania hasexperienceandinfrastructuretobuilda public option. by "personalissues";scaremongersaremanipulating politicians withRussiantiesareblockingtheprojectlead Gas andoilindustry,environmentalistspopulist objective reasons. Ignalina NPPdecommissioningprojectdelaysaredueto and potentialinvestors. If wewastetimeondiscussions,willloseprojectpartners for theforeigninvestor. us orseekingtheirshareintheproject;wearecompeting Neighbours arebluffingabouttheirNPPstodiscourage expensive theprojectwillbecome. The moretimeisspentondiscussions,the PRO-NUCLEAR

Ignalina NPPdecommissioning Capacity andhumanresources Geopolitics andotherprojects Public acceptanceandcritics Global trends Capital costs requirements ofthenewplant(e.g.English). workforce isleaving;existingworkersmaynotmeetthe projects andwillnotbeabletohandleit;qualified Lithuania anditspartnershavenoexperienceinsuch NPP projectisnotavailable. There isalackofpublicdebate;informationaboutthe national capacitytohandlebignuclearprojects. to becoveredbytaxpayers;itisaproofoflacking Corruption, mismanagementandprojectdelaysmayhave overruns; Finland’sfailuresillustrateglobaltrends. These projectsarecharacterizedbydelaysandcost incentive toproceedwiththeproject supply contractwithaRussiancompanyremovesan Russian isseekinginfluenceinthecountry;electricity usually baresallfinancialrisks. These projectshavehighcapitalcostsandgovernment ANTI-NUCLEAR

CEU eTD Collection 2007). Someanalystsdescribethecurrent economic situationinthecountry,mostsayingthat thingshaveimprovedsince1989(EBRD The levelofsocialinequalityinBelarusislowand 70%ofpopulationasatisfiedpoliticaland 2010). newly opened-upBelarusianeconomythathasbeen growingby10%in2008(EBRD2009a, innovation andtechnology(WB2009b).Theglobalfinancialcrisishasalsoseverelyaffectedthe percent offirmsexportingand73%manufacturingusingforeigninputs,butlagsin ownership [10%onaverage].Thecountryiswellintegratedininternationaltradewith26% very largefirms,highfemaleparticipationandgovernmentorstateshareinamixed (EBRD 2010).BelarusstandsoutwithintheEasternEuropeanandCentralAsianregionwith The businessenvironmenthasseensomeimprovementduetorecentderegulationreforms consolidation (Usov2008). regime neo-authoritarianasitusesdemocraticinstrumentssuchelectionsforthepurposeofits 2003; Haiduk said tohaveadaptedsuchstate,andtodaynomore than4%arereadytopersonallytakepart Belarus 2010).Ithas (9.7 million)andgeographicterritory(207.6thousandsqkm)comparedtoLithuania(Statistics south andPolandwithLithuaniatothewest,hasaroundthreetimesmoresizeablepopulation Belarus, theEasternEuropeancountrypositionedbetweenRussiainnorth,Ukraineto 5.3 sub-section attheend. are describedinsub-section5.2.3.Thesnapshotfindingstheformoftablesincluded presents recurringactorsandthemesfoundinthetexts,whilediscursivestorylinescoalitions policy, outlinesnationalmedialandscapeandbrieflypresentsanalyzedoutlets.Sub-section5.2.2 This sectionintroducesthecontextofBelarusiannuclearenergydiscourse,systemand 5.2 19 where democratic “Europe’s lastdictatorship” altered theConstitutiontoextendhisterminoffice(Silitski2005).Belarusisoftentermed autocratic PresidentAleksandrLukashenkowhopersonallycontrolsthestateadministration,and Belarus Unionin1999(Marples2008).Eversince1994thecountryhasbeenledby planned economyandclosepoliticaleconomictieswithRussia.TheyformedtheRussia- Socialcontractisdefinedasasocial ordersecuredbythestate.Societycedesitsrightstoasovereign whoredistributest without theirconsentbysuppressing oppositionandbuyingloyalty(Haiduk

Belarusian discoursecontext Belarus etal. 2009;PianoandPuddington2009).SomeauthorsconsidertheBelarusian “scaffolding”

declared independence and

one ofthemostrepressiveplacesinworldwitha isconcealingdictatorialstyleofgovernance(Korosteleva

status quo

from asthe

the

Soviet Unionin1991,butmaintained “vertical socialcontract” etal. Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus 2009).

19 . Belarusiansare façade regime etal. hem 83

CEU eTD Collection terms oftradeandpricesforRussianimportsby2011 (Kostyugova2009). Rynok 2007;Shuster2010).Nonetheless,thelatest contractenvisagesagradualunificationof Belarus hasretaliatedbyincreasingtransitduties promptingtemporarysupplycuts(Belorusyi disruptions totheEU(BelorusyiRynok2007).Russia hasbeeninsistingonpriceincreases,while 2000. Theoilandgaspricedisputesbetween thetwocountrieshaveresultedinsupply bilateral policieshavebeennotedwhenVladimirPutintookthepostasRussia’sPresidentin along withthepricepreferencesofferedbysupplier(Kostyugova2009).Thechangesin the roleofBelarusasatransitterritoryforRussia’stradewithWestwillgraduallydiminish 2005). However,accordingtotheanalysts,sinceRussiaisdevelopingalternativetransitroutes, estimated RussianenergysubsidyforBelarusamountedto1.1billionUS$in2000-2004(WB heat inthecountry(Chuprov natural gasaccountsformorethan90%ofelectricitygeneration;itisalsothemainprovider local woodresources,theshareofindigenousenergyinmixisverylow.ImportedRussian limited andoperationshavecommercialfocus(WB2005).AlthoughBelarushasextensive On theotherhand,energyinfrastructureinBelarusisaging,oilandgasstoragefacilitiesare macroeconomic stability(WB2005). investments toimprovetechnicalefficiencyandenergysavingswhichcontributedthe 2009). Overall,duringthelastdecadebothelectricityandgassectorshavereceivedsufficient During 2000-2005itresultedinatotalGDPenergyintensityreductionby25%(Chuprov energy efficiencymanagementsystemthatinvolvesassignedsavingplansforcompanies. centralized structureandcommandcontrolmechanisms(WB2005).Belarushasaneffective able sustainandevenimprovetheperformanceofitsenergysectorlargelybecauseitpreserved network andsubstantialoilrefiningcapacity.OverthelasttwodecadesBelarushasalsobeen After thefallofSovietUnion,Belarusinheritedanextensiveelectricityandgastransmission 5.3.1.1 Vaida Pilibaityte 84 20 is commonplace(Sukhypers.comm). state institutionforone’scivilactivity;thereforeconciliationwithautocraticgovernmentpolicies NGOs andindividualstobeharassedbysecretpolice,deniedpublicfundsorgetfiredfroma in aprotestaction(Haiduk crude oilconversionintorefinedproductexportsformanyyearsnow Central andWesternEuropehasbenefitedfromlow-pricedenergysuppliesRussia Moreover, thecountryhasanimportantstrategicroleasatransitrouteforenergyexportsto Forexample,accordingtotheWorld Bank(2005)calculationsBelaruspaid30.6US$/1000m

2009). US$/1000m (compared to135US$/1000m paid bytheWesternEurope)in 2002,36.9US$/1000m

Energy systemandpolicyinBelarus 3 ) in2007andcontinuedtogrowreaching 150US$/1000m 3 ) in2004accordingly.However, in2007itjumpedto100US$/1000m etal. etal.

2009).Accordingtocitizengroups,itisnotuncommonfor 2009). 3 (comparedto104US$/1000m 3 (comparedto255US$/1000m 20 . Asanexample,thetotal 3 ) in2003and47.7US$/1000m 3 (comparedto93US$/1000m 3 ) in2008(Kostyugova 3 (comparedto130 etal. 3 3

CEU eTD Collection transcontinental pipeline About two-thirdsoftransitgascrossingBelarusistransportedbyRussian outlining strictenergysavingplanswithaparticularreferencetothe Amid energypricedisputesof2007,PresidentLukashenkosteppedupwithanewdirective companies (Manenok2009). holding companythatwouldoperatethetransitpipelinesystem,refineriesandpetrochemical Moscow’s strategytogainmoreinfluenceinBelarusistheideaofjointBelarusian-Russian 50% ofitsshareshavebeenboughtby (Dulinets 2008). 54.8% ofthosepolledsupportedthenewstation, 23% wereagainstandover21.8%–undecided on theissue(IISEPS2006).TheBelarusiangovernment reportsdifferentfiguresfrom2008:over were opposedtotheidea,32.5%ofrespondentssupported theplansand14.5%wereundecided registered inLithuaniashowedthattheviewson thenuclearnewbuildremaindivided:47.7% An opinionsurveyconductedtwodecadesafterthe accidentbytheBelarusianresearchinstitute (UNDP 2002;Kinley2005). The socio-psychologicaleffectofthedisasterwill befeltbythesocietyforyearstocome people havebeenresettledandover1.5millionarelivingincontaminatedareas(UNDP2002). 2005). ThenumberofBelarusiancitizensaffectedamountsto18%thepopulation:135,000 Russia wasisoneofthemostaffectedcountriesbyChernobylNPPaccidentin1986(Kinley Although Belarushasneverhadanuclearprogrammeofitsown,togetherwithUkraineand constructing aNPPinthecountry.Itexpired2008(CNS2007). conference inMinsk1997demandingamoratorium,andyearlater10-yearbanwasputon elected PresidentLukashenko.Whileplantsitingcontinued,scientistsheldanti-nuclear Environmentalists insistedonapopularreferendumtobeheldthematterbythennewly considered. ButwiththeChernobylaftermathstillfresh,societywasopposedidea. producers wereheldin1994-1996andfinancingfromtheWorldBankEUwas to construct1-3unitsby2010(CNS2007).ConsultationswithRussian,CanadianandAmerican the projectwashaltedin1986(Chuprov construction wasstartedbackin1983withplanstobuildafacilityof2,000MWnearMinsk,but The ideatobuildanuclearplantinBelarusdatesbackpre-Lukashenkotimes. paradoxical asitmayseem,Russiaseemstobethemainpartnerinthisprojectwell. infrastructure and energy (Manenok2007).Amongotherthings,itmentionstheneedtorenovate according toobservers,forthefirsttimewastakingintoaccountincreasingpricesofimported 2007). Laterthatyeartheupdated “intensify work” “Yamal-Europe” Conception ofEnergySecurity onconstructingthenewNPP(Lukashenko2007a).As “Gazprom” etal. , operatedbytheBelarusianstate-owned 2009).Planswererenewedin1992withintention in2007(BELTA2009).Thisisseenaspartof

for theyear2020 Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus “security ofthestate“ wasapprovedwhich, “Gazprom”- “Beltransgaz”; owned (BISS 85

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 86 prosecutions”, and distributorstodenythemserviceonbusinesses not toadvertisewiththem,andpoliticallymotivated nongovernmental mediaarealreadyhammeredwithcrippling fines,bureaucraticharassment,pressureonprinters citizens, butinrealitythemediaisstrictlycontrolled bythePresident’sapparatus. Officially, thelegislationguaranteesfreedom ofspeechandinformationtoBelarusian 5.3.1.2 (Sergeichik 2010). stock containsnomorethan90kgoflow-levelmaterialthatisusedforresearchpurposes Belarusian scientists,thissoundsaspoliticallymotivatedexaggeration,totheirknowledgethe Belarus stillhas the territoryofBelarusin1990s.Hecalleditan President Lukashenkohasrecentlypubliclyregrettedforgivingupnuclearweaponsstationedon that hasthreateneditswithdrawalfromtheproject(BelaPAN2010). President’s partnershipoffertotheChinesecompanieseliciteddiscontentfromRussianside contract hasbeenpending(Krylovich2010).Inspringof2010themediareportedthat for theprojectandcreditingassurancesfromRussiangovernmenthavebeenreceived, Although ithasbeenannouncedthattheRussianconsortium (Krylovich 2010). planned sitealthoughnoedicthasbeensignedbythePresidentasrequiredBelarusianlaw Several observersalsonotethatinfrastructuredevelopmentinOstrovetshasstartedaroundthe suit againsttheauthoritiesforrestrictingaccesstoinformationonproject(Atomby.net2010). (Sukhy technically, environmentallyandlegallyflawed,consultationproceduresasundemocratic which Belarusispartyto.However,theBelarusianNGOsrejectassessmentaseconomically, countries havebeenconsultedfollowingtherequirementsofAarhusandEspooconventionsto environmental impactassessmenthasbeenconducted,thelocalpublicandneighbouring initially short-listedlocations,issaidtobethemostsuitableone(Gonchar2009).The Lithuanian borderintheregionofOstrovets(Spasiuk2008).Thesite,arguablyselectedout74 Council in2008(Lukashenko2008).Thechosenlocationfortheplantis20kmfrom political decisiontoconstructanewNPPwasmadeinthemeetingofNationalSecurity has noalternatives” President Lukashenkopresentsthenewnuclearplantas Azerbaijan, Israel,Fijiand Russia(RWB2009). Without Borders situation inBelarustheiraddresstoPresident Lukashenkoin2008(Simon2008).

etal.

Media systeminBelarus 2009;Ekodom2010).Citizenassociation – thisishowthe ratethelevelofpressfreedominBelarus151 “hundreds ofkilograms” (Lukashenko 2007b).Theplanswerereiteratedallthroughout2007,butfinal Committee toProtectJournalists ofweapons-gradeuranium(BELTA2010a).Accordingto “awful mistake” “Ekodom” “the waytoguaranteethenationalsecuritythat st outof175countries,amongSudan, inNewYork,US,describedthe “Atomstroyexport” [eng. andwentontoannouncethat “Ecohouse” willbecontracted ] hasfiledthelaw Reporters “The CEU eTD Collection local ideologicalworkers’ consent(BAJ2010a,2010b). Civil servantsandofficials tendtodenythemaccessinformationorrefuse interviewswithout Belarusian journaliststobe harassed,theirhomesraidedandequipmentconfiscated (RWB2010). journalists wereofficiallywarnedfortheirprofessional activities.Itisnotuncommonfor Information, thepublicprosecutionbodiesand theKGBandarefacingclosure;some20 the endof2009.Fourinfluentialindependentperiodicals receivedwarningsfromtheMinistryof The NGO information (BAJ2010a). media, theedictprovidesfordisablingwebsites thatdisseminate services providedattheinternet-cafesinBelarus. Althoughnotexplicitlystatedasaimedatthe computers withinternetconnection,collectionandstorageofpersonaldataonline-users activities. ThePresident’sedictcomingintoforcefromJuly2010authorizesidentificationof One ofthemostseverelycriticizedwerenewplansonregistrationandregulationonline Nefedov 2009). population, althoughonly5%ofusershaveaccesstoabroadbandconnection(EJC2009; Estimates aboutthenumberofinternetusersinBelarusvaryfrom30%to50% 2011 presidentialelectionsapproachingtherehavebeensignsoffurthertighteningrestrictions. Until recentlytheinternetmediamarketwasdescribedasgrowingandvibrant,however,with competence orimproperpremisesforeditorialoffices(BAJ2010a). register, oftenbeingtoldbytheMinistryofInformationthateditor-in-chiefhadinsufficient journalistic activitywithoutofficialaccreditation.Asaresultmanyhavefacedproblemsto introduces anobligatorypressaccreditationforforeigncorrespondentsandconsidersillegalany enables theauthoritiestoorderclosedownincaseofasingleseriousviolationlaw, As ofFebruary2009thenew journalists wereimprisonedandmanymoreharassed(RWB2006;EJC2009). printing. Internationalorganizationsreportthatmorethan30Belarusianand12foreign deterioration; anumberofnewspaperswereshutdownordriventoanabroadunderground During theinfamouspresidentialelectionsin2006Belarusianmediasufferedfurther donations andprintinghouses–torefusecontractsprivatepress(EJC2009). companies areforcedtoadvertiseonlyinstate-runnewspapers;banksordereddeny distribution points–i.e.kiosksandsubscription.Controlbyeconomicalmeansexiststoo:state Meanwhile, majorityofthenon-statepress(around30papers)arebannedfromofficial are controlledandinreturntheygetadministrativefinancialsupport(BAJ2010a). Maastricht, theNetherlands,contentandappointmentsofsenioreditorsstateoutlets media, butfiveoutofsixnewsagenciesareprivate.Accordingtothe The majorityofnewspapers,85%arestate-run.Similarsituationisobservedinthebroadcast Belarusian AssociationofJournalists Law onMassMedia (2010a)reportsthatsituationfurtherdeteriorated in requiresre-registrationtheexistingoutlets, Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus European JournalismCenter “unwanted orbanned” in 87

CEU eTD Collection Belarusian newsagency Naviny.by publications isincludedinTableA.3oftheAppendix Text samplingcriteriaaredetailedinChapter3onmethodologyandthelistofanalyzed energy. own BelaPANnewswires,thewebsitehasateamofauthorscoveringvariousissuesincluding average of70,000uniqueBelarusianvisitorsperweek(Open.by2010).Inadditiontopublishing publishes onlinesince2002andisoneoftheleadingindependentresourceswithan issued anedictrestrictingtheuseofwordssuchas “Belorusskii Rynok” strong regularsectiondevotedforcriticalanalysisofthenationalenergyissues.Initiallytitled the free-market,business-relatedissuesanddevelopmentsofdemocraticinstitutions.Ithasa subscription andfromkiosks(Krylovichpers.comm.).Themainfocusofthepublicationison was establishedin1990.Ithasaweeklycirculationof13,000copiesandisavailablebothby “Belorusy iRynok” (BAJ 2010a). 500,000 (EJC2009).However,manyorganizationsareforciblymadetobuytheirsubscription and meticulousaccountsofhisvisitspublicspeeches.Ithasanimpressivedailycirculation mouth-piece characterizedbytheallocatedspaceforpressreleasesPresident’soffice and establisheddistributionpossibilities.Inotherwords,itisthecentralgovernmentprint “Sovetskaia Belorussia” the existingviews. profiles andwasintendedtorepresentboththerealityofnationalmediadiversity Belarusian mediaoutletsselectedfortheanalysiswasdeterminedbytheirownershipandeditorial As mentionedinChapter2,thedatasamplecontainedatotalof79texts.Thechoice 5.3.1.3 Vaida Pilibaityte 88 21 to addressissuesofenergysecurityanddependence onRussianresources. that similartotheLithuaniandebate,nuclearpower inBelarusisconsideredprimarilyasmeans analysis showsthatthediscussioninBelarusian mediaisrathervibrant.Thesampleindicates Qualitative codingoftextsresultedinalistnuclear-related themeslistedinTable5.7.The 5.3.2 Allthereferencesinthischapter thereafter aremadetotheappendedlistofanalyzedarticlesinTable A.3.

Belarusian discourseactorsandrecurring themes

Belarusian mediaoutletsanalyzed [eng. News.by [eng. [eng. [eng. ] isaprize-winningonlinemediaprojectrunbyprivatelyowned “Belarusians andMarket” “BelaPAN” “Belarusian Market” “Soviet Belarus”

whichwasestablishedin1991(Naviny.by2010). ] isaleadingstate-rundailywiththehighestcirculation ] thenewspaperhadtochangeitafterPresident ] isaleadingprivately-runanalyticalweeklythat “national” 21 . and “Belarusian” in2005(BR2010). Naviny.by

CEU eTD Collection sample. corresponds withthefrequencyoftotalquotes countedperactorand/orthethemein in thesample,countedseparatelybyactor.The legendexplainstheshadingspectrumthat column; thethemetotalcolumnonrightrepresents atotalnumberofquotesoneachtheme cells indicatethenumberofinstanceseachactor was quotedonthethemeslistedinfarleft analyzed Belarusianpress.Justlikeinthesimilartable inLithuaniandiscoursesection,individual Table 5.8providesanoverviewofthesethemesin relationtotheactorsdiscussingthemin doctors, historiansandwritersarecoveredless. different analysts,politicians,businessmen,engineers,NGOs,citizens,churchleaders,medical scientists, officials,thePresidentandjournalistsdominateinanalyzedsample.Theviewsof A varietyofactorsquotedbytheanalyzedmediaisalsoconsiderable.Theanalysisshowsthat constraints andprospects. availability, geopoliticalimplicationsandpublicattitudesareamongissuespertainingto capacity andavailabilityofhumanresourcesfortheproject,constructioncosts,uranium technological options,andsafety,plantlocation,nuclearwastemanagementissues.National risks BelarusiandiscourseactorsbringuptheChernobylaccident,healthandenvironment, accompany thispowersource,projectlegitimacyandpublicacceptance.Inrelationtopotential rejecting nuclear.Otherthemesrelatedtothiscategoryareperceivedprestigeandprogressthat geopolitics andprojectpartneroptionsarediscussedinrelationtoreasonsforchoosingor Availability ofalternatives,climatechangeandpollution,growingenergycosts,globaltrends, Table 5.7NuclearenergythemesfeaturingintheanalyzedBelarusianmedia PROBLEMS ADDRESSED Petg rges Fuelavailability Publicacceptance Wastemanagement Prestige&progress Geopolitics Potentialinvestor Technology&safety Globaltrends Geopolitics Plantlocation Energysecurity Capacity&HR Capitalcosts Chernobylaccident Energycosts Health&environment Alternatives GHGemissions Geopolitics Dependence onRussia Energy security Poetlgtmc Projectlegitimacy

OPTION JUSTIFICATION Public acceptance THEMES

RISKS INVOLVED

Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus

CONSTRAINTS & PROSPECTS

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 90 24 23 22 about theirconcernsandexpectationswithregard to thelocationforplant. President isratheroutspokenontheoverallproject legitimacy.Thecitizensarequotedmainly a lotofsayontechnologicalsafety,globaltrends, healthandenvironmentalrisks,whilethe implement theproject,potentialinvestor,energysecurityandplantsiting.Thescientistshave President mainlydiscussissueslikeeconomiccostsofnuclearenergy,nationalcapacityto The tablequantitativelydetailshowinanalyzedtextsscientists,officials,journalistsandthe Table 5.8ActorsandthemestheydiscussinBelarusianmedia,numberoftimesquoted Public acceptance Plant location Energy security/Russia Potential investor Capacity/HR Economic costs Actor cellvaluescale Theme cellvaluescale Geopolitics Climate change Fuel availability Progress &prestige Waste management Chernobyl accident Alternatives Project legitimacy Technology &safety Global trends Health &environment Thefigureincludes19references toenergysecurityand16–specificreferenceRussia. Thefigureincludes21quoteson nationalcapacityand22referencestohumanresources. Category

and foreigninvestors, and anti-nuclearresearchers(mainly physicists), THEMES “Analysts” includessociologists,economicand politicalcommentators, “Officials”

ACTORS 22 includesboththegovernmentofficers andforeigndiplomats, 2 1 0 0 1 Doctors

1 1 1 Historians 1 1 1

“NGOs” Writers

1 1 1 1 Church and 1 2 2 3 1 Business “Doctors” 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 Politicians 1 1 1 1 2 3 3 2 1 1 includenationalandforeigndiscourse actors. Engineers 1 2 4 2 6 3 1 Citizens “Businessmen” 1-2 1-5 3 2 1 2 3 1 1 1 4 1 2 NGOs 6-10 3-4 1 2 1 2 1 2 4 3 3 1 2

Analysts includesbothlocalentrepreneurs 11-20 5-6 2 2 7 2 2 1 6 2 5 5 5 4 3

“Scientists” President 21-30 7-8 4 4 6 2 4 1 6 8 4 7 3 4 7 2 1 1 Journalists includesbothpro- 31-40 9-10 12 2 2 2 4 7 4 6 8 6 1 3 5 2 Officials ≤ <40 15 10 10 11 17 14 4 18 6 20 6 25 9 7 2 30 2 7 3 8 6 8 3 12 7 11

Scientists 35 43 26 34 39 44 26 28 14

24 23

Theme total CEU eTD Collection associated risks,constraintsandprospectsfornucleardeployment. section, narrativesarelaidoutinthefollowingorder:problemidentification,optionjustification, arguments thatdivergetoformthetwoopposingdiscoursecoalitions.Justlikeinprevious detail. Discursivestorylinesutteredbypreviousactorsarepresentedaccordingtodifferent This sectionlooksatthemediacoverageofabove-mentioneddiscoursethemesingreater just likenotallthecitizensareagainstplantintheirvicinity. differences inargumentationwithinthesamegroupofactors:notallscientistsarepro-nuclear and plantsiting,theextentofpublicinvolvementindecisionmaking.Notably,thereare nuclear energy,legitimacyofprojectpreparation,qualitytheenvironmentalimpactassessment is beingheldtogetherbynarrativesexplainingconcernsaboutcostsandriskassociatedwith considerable shareofdiscourseactorsintothe energy supplies,reduceelectricitycostsanddependenceonasinglepowersourceunites The viewthatnuclearpoweristhecheapestandonlywaytodevelopeconomy,diversify discourse coalitions:pro-nuclearandanti-nuclear. storylines that,followingHajer’s(1995)analyticalapproach,aregroupedintotwodominant The Belarusiannucleardiscourseisquitedistinctlycharacterizedbythetwosetsofcontradicting 5.3.3 global trends.Opposition isneverconfronteddirectly,oftenaccusedof beingincompetent, actors ofthiscoalitioninvolves activereferencestotheauthorityofscientific knowledgeand present theirarguments virtually withoutanyopposition.Theargumentative strategyofmost Their positionseemsparticularlystronginthestate-run mediawheretheyhavethepossibilityto a newplant. engineers, politicians,onehistorianandlocalbusinessmen alsosupportthedecisiontoconstruct elite scientists,governmentofficials,theRussianambassador, thePresidentandjournalists.Some analysis oftheselectedsampleshowsthatpro-nuclear energydiscoursecoalitionunitesmainly The setofstorylinesdepictedherecontainsavariety ofargumentsinfavourtheproject.The 5.3.3.1 debate overthecourseofpastthreeyearsisdocumentedinsections5.2.3and5.2.4below. A moredetailedoverviewofthediverseargumentsandfactinterpretationsinnuclearenergy sampling strategyfocusedonanalyticaltexts. considered ratherindicativeofthenaturediscussionarticlesinBelarusianmediadueto legitimacy. Again,likeintheLithuaniancase,althoughnotrepresentative,theseresultscanbe appear onlyonceandspeakuponChernobyl,risks,publicattitudes,alternativesproject There arealsoafewactorssuchasmedicaldoctors,churchleader,historianandwriterwho

Discursive storylinesandcoalitionsinBelarus

Pro-nuclear discoursecoalition pro-nuclear coalition. The Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus anti-nuclear coalition 91

CEU eTD Collection up to30%(Manenok2007d;LegkaiaandKirilenko2007). are officialswhoinsistthatnuclearpowerwillhelpbringdown and estimatethatNPPwouldhelpsave4bncubicmetersofgasannually(BELTA2006).There independence The MinistryofEnergyalsoreiteratesthattherearenootherwaystosecurethe innovations” and justified” the sciencebehindproject.Thedecisiontooptfornuclearpowerissaidbe The President’sargumentsaresecondedbytheBelarusianscienceelitewhoputinchargeof (Sergeichik 2008). global energyresourcesandbelievesthatfuturegenerationswill the countriesneighbouringBelarus(Sergeichik2008).ThePresidentalsoreferstodepleting and scientistsseemtobelivinginavacuum” (Kirillov 2006).Criticalargumentsarerejectedbyalludingto nuclear stations: TASS 2006).Moreover,thePresidentpointsatfactthatBelarusisalreadysurroundedby apart from about absenceofalternativesandstrategicimportance The President’sreasoningbaresaverydistinctideologicalaswellrhetoricalcharacter.Hetalks introducing ageopoliticaldimensiontotheargumentation. otherwise implied.Influentialactorsalsospeakaboutneighbourspursuingnuclearaswellthus the centerofdebateinmedia.DependenceonRussiaissometimesaddresseddirectly,but The dependenceonasinglepowersourceandtheneedtoensureaccessaffordableenergyare 5.3.3.1.1 Vaida Pilibaityte 92 security strategy,globaltrends orother The public isweary,itlikelytobecomemoresupportive astheawarenessisraised. research baseandchoosingRussiaasaprojectpartner isbasedonobjectivereasons.Although progress, whilelocalalternativesareinsufficient andexpensive.Belarushasthenecessary countries areturningtonuclearenergyasitisthe cheapestoption,guaranteesdevelopmentand The decisionismostlypresentedinBelarusian mediaasnecessaryandirreversible.Many 5.3.3.1.2 and aggressive, pursuingscaremongeringtactics,seekingpersonalpopularityandinducingconflict

“radiopobia” legitimacy

Problems addressed Justification fornuclearenergy and buildaplantisdescribedas energy security and necessarysothat . Officialstalkaboutthenecessitytoreducedependency . ofthegovernment’sdecision isemphasizedeitherbyreferringtonational energy “Whichever waywelook,Europeispacked goals(Volianiuk2007),theplantwillensurenationalsecurity(ITAR- “economy doesnotcollapse” andignoreplanstobuild “studies” “salvation” . Theleadingscientistsnote thatitwouldbe

of thedecision.AccordingtoLukashenko, (BelaPAN2008b;Kuvshynov2008). ; thepossibilitytotake [rus. geopolitics “more thanten” electricity productioncosts “napichkana”

“appreciate” from Russianoilandgas : “some oppositionmembers ] nuclear reactors with nuclearplants” thisdecision “absolutely fair “way towards energy “silly” by

CEU eTD Collection development withthespaceexploration: that thepublicis technological developmentisratherpronouncedintherhetoricofleaders.ThePresidentargues give apowerfulboosttoeducationalandscientificdevelopment” of buildingtheplant(ITAR-TASS2006).Academicsareconvincedthat (Krylovich 2008b).SomelocalsinOstrovetsarealsoconvincedthat as anotherexample(Romanova2008).Thisistheviewsupportedbyresponsibleengineerstoo but eventheyhavemadeadecisiontobuildNPP” is perfectlyfeedingonnuclearenergy” The scientistspointatthe consider itamatterof Crises comeandgo.Weneedtoteachpeoplenewtechnologies” plant isjustlikespaceexploration–acompletelydifferentlevelofthedevelopmentstate.Weneedthis. option forthecountry:NationalAcademyofSciences It isimpliedthatitwastheideaofscienceelitenuclearenergybesttechnological not seenthem,itdoesmeantheydoexist” to assumethatgovernmentmadethedecisionwithoutanystudies: operate onlyafewhoursperweek” nuclear energy: splinter” alternatives deforestation inourcountryandfillskieswith smoke” sources, heisconcernedabouttheoveruseofbiomass: Although PresidentLukashenkomentionstheimportance ofdevelopinglocalrenewableenergy Belarusian governmentismakinga Belarus ischoosingnuclearpower(BELTA2008).Thereforeonecommentatorconcludesthat On topofthat,journalistsquotetheEUofficialswhoclaimthatdoesnotmind from Greenpeacehavechangedtheirviews” concerns as switching tonuclear” situation willnotworsen(Semashko2008).Alocalbusinessmansaysthatthe authorities believethattheNPPwillbringan be betterbuiltintheregionsalreadypollutedduringChernobyldisaster.Whereaslocal nuclear energyandtherearenoalternativestointhenearfuture”. (Vetrova 2008).Nuclearis consideredtobeclean:scientistsmentiontheeconomic benefitofthe farmers fromdevelopingsuch local energysourcesasbiomasswindandhydropowerthat well isknowninEurope” (Nezvanov2007b;LegkaiaandKirilenko2007). Comfortableandcivilizedliferequires “mere speculations” aretrivializedbycommentatorssuggestingitis likechoosingbetween “What elseshouldweBelarusiansdoifonlyhavepeat andforest?Evenwindturbinescan , theprojectwillturnOstrovetsintoa “psychologically “national prestige” global trends (Naviny.by2008).Otherspointoutthat (Avimova2006).TheUnitedArabEmiratesare (Kriat 2008).Atthesametime

ready” “modern andratherEuropeandecision” (Kolchenko2007). (Novitskii2008). : “This for nuclearand (Ermak2008). “China isbuildingnewplants,Iranis.TakeEurope– (NezvanovandKirilenko2008).TheUKispresented “absolutely newstatus”

will

the greatestachievementofourtimes.Nuclearpower (Strazhev2007).Themotifofprogressand (Spasiuk 2009).Similarlypoliticiansalso “real big,richcity”

(Lukahsenko2007).Otherwisethe “If wedoitextensivelymayleadtothe goes ontocomparenuclearenergy “unanimously” Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus However, theybelieveitshould fortheregion,whileecological “nobody ispreventingentrepreneurs, “If someoneclaimsthattheyhave “all developedcountries (Vetrova2008). “today evenauthoritativefigures “just likeasatellite,itwill agreed onthenecessity and denounces “bathinginoiland, “entire worldis “NPP ora

are safety

using 93

CEU eTD Collection The issueof back oneselftwodecadesintermsofdevelopment” from theneighbouringRussiabelievesthatsayingnotonuclearpowermeans tourism development,contrarytoconcernsofthelocals(Kozhemiakin2009a).Onegovernor whereas theMinistryofEnvironmentarguesthatnuclearplantprovidesanadvantagefor residents forthearea,workingpopulationandemploymentopportunities(BELTA2008), The MinistryofEconomyemphasizesbenefitstheNPPtoregion–increasednumber years andnuclearelectricitypriceresistancetouraniumfluctuations(Volianiuk2008). intro threeclearpoints:diversityofnuclearfuelsuppliers,necessitytorefuelplantonlyevery5 tender” plus, theargumentgoes, since companiesarrangedealsamongthemselves, itmaybea “Rosatom” 2007). Accordingtothemanyforeigncompany cantakepartintheproject,butonly the Union’s (Levshina 2007),whereasadvantagesofchoosingRussiaaspartnerinclude However, theirproposalcostssome1.5timesmorethanthatoftheRussian offering the the decisionispresentedasstillopenfordiscussion.Initially storylines reiterateadvantagesoftheRussiancompany motivation is speeding uptheseprocesses (Levshina2008).Atthesametimeitis The scientistsadmitthat preference forthecontractors(Volianiuk2007). think thatwearesomewhatcloser” seems reassuredaswell: 2008e), the Vaida Pilibaityte 94 same timeresponsibleofficialsadmitthat of itsoperationasBelaruswillbesellingtheelectricitysurplus(Krylovich2007).However,at absence of taken intoaccount.However,itisarguedthatthenewplant High costsofdecommissioningthatmayamounttotheprojectconstructionarebe requires effortsandsignificantresources.NuclearismuchmoreadvantageousforBelarus” scientists arguethatbuildingnuclearis1.5timescheaperthandevelopinglocalresources: expensive thanacoal-firedplant,whileproducingelectricityischeaper(Minchenko2008).The from an The localandnationalgovernmentofficialsdiplomatsspeakinfavourofnuclearenergy Kirilenko 2007).

anyway(Krylovich2008a). Belarus economic isreadytoalsoconsidercreditingschemes.Tendering proceduresusuallytakeyears, “same

[Russia-Belarus Union] the choosing theinvestor “most developedandwiderangeofservices” security GHG

language, andpossibilitytotrainworkersinRussianuniversitiescentres,utilizationof pointofviewaswell.Moreover,buildingaNPPissaidtobenotmore (Krylovich2007).Thecommentatorsputtheadvantagesofnuclearenergy : “We willbeabletosellquotasandreceiveadditionalincome” “There areissuesofnuclearfuelanditsutilization,also training ofworkers.We geopolitics (Krylovich 2008d).Notably,thePresidenttriesnot toexpressany budgetaryresources” isveryhighontheagenda.Itfairtosaythatprevalent do determine “simply hasnotime” economics (Minchenko2008).

(Krylovich2007).ARussianambassador andthegloballeaderinnuclearenergy. the choiceofaprojectpartner(Levshina . However,atearlystagesofthedebate, is “secondary” “Areva”

will forthisand

be profitablefromthefirstday isconsideredbyscientistsas inthis,andtheprimary “wrong tosaythatthis “close ties” “luckily” (Manenok 2007b). “purposefully setting “Atomstroyexport” (Legkaiaand lawsallow (Krylovich “fictitious “This

CEU eTD Collection Belarus doesnotwantany the wholedevelopmentandmany yearsofoperationalexperience”. scientist arguesthat The chosen type of reactor, VVER, it is said to be plants” full speedand more” Overall, thegovernmentscientistsarguethatallmodern nuclearplantsare The scientistsdescribenuclearindustryas possibility tocontrolthem,andhopesfortheadvancementoftechnology. The discussionaboutnuclearenergyrisksislimitedtoassurancesanunquestionablesafety, 5.3.3.1.3 (Popko 2009). consultations inOstrovetsandoverwhelmingmajoritysupportedtheconstructionofNPP hearings everybodyhadachancetoexpresstheirviews.Morethan800participantstookpartin contractors andpublicorganizationscitizenshasstartedawhileago.Duringetpublic public opinion The officialsmaintainthatmajorityofthepublicissupportingnuclear,mediaquotesfavourable developed incooperationwithRussianscientistsistobere-locatedhere(Siulzhina2008). radioactive wastemanagement(Nezvanov2007c).Moreoverapowerfulsupercomputer is aplacewhereuniqueresearchtakingthatmighthelpsolvetheglobalproblemof exposure-type publicationsandstreetprotestswereattheirpeak” themselves bigexpertsinnuclearphysicsandstartedfightingenergyseekingpersonalpopularityas journalist tellingthestoryisverystrong: over thesocietyafterChernobyldisaster.Thesarcasmintoneofpro-nuclear With regardtothe 2007a). another countrywouldnotbeasattractivefromthe officials fromtheBelarusianMinistryofEnergynotethatpossibilitytakingpartinaproject about thepossibilityofajointnuclearpowerprojectwithLithuania(Manenok2007e).However construction willbe“forced” destroy “one ofthemostpowerfulcomputersSovietUnion” near Minsktoworkonamobilenuclearplant.Theinstitute,thestorygoes,wasoncehomefor Institute forEnergyandNuclearResearch and presentnuclearresearchinBelarus safer thantheoldoneslikethatofChernobyl;a60-ton jetora9-storeyhousecanhititat (Avimova 2006). “two uniquenuclearplantsthatwereaheadofthetime”

Risks involved “nothing willhappen” surveys.Infact,an national capacity “80% (Nezvanov2007a).AtsomepointtheBelarusianPrimeMinisterspeaks

of “experiment onitsterritory”

the

nuclear plantsacrosstheworld areofthistype;second,theyhaveundergone . Plusnuclearis , thereisaquitedistinctstorylinethattellsaboutthepast “open andhonestconversation”

(Semashko 2007).OnearticletellsastoryoftheUnited “Everyone fromawritertoteacherofMarxismconsidered “Sosny” “absolutely transparent” “the safestintheworld” . UnfortunatelyBelarusianresearchershadto that wasestablishedaroundfourdecadesago (Krylovich2008a)andthe Russiancompany “ecologically safercomparedtotraditionalthermal energy security (Semashko2007).Nevertheless,todayit asaresultof Therefore Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus (LegkaiaandKirilenko2007). betweenscientists,engineers,

this choiceispreferablesince “radiophobia” (ONT2008).Theleading pointofview(Manenok “10,000 timesandeven thathastaken 95

CEU eTD Collection Nezvanov andKirilenko2008).Thereareconcerns aboutthelackoflocal developing anuclearprogrammesolelyontheir ownishardlypossible(BelaPAN2007; project. Althoughtheleadingscientistsemphasizeexperienceinplace,theyadmitthat the scientistsadmitthatshortageof Belarus isreadytooffer will helpbringbackBelarusianscurrentlyworking elsewhere(Siulzhina 2009; NezvanovandKirilenko 2008).Therearehopesthatgoodsalaries andhousingthat experts whowillbeoperatingtheplantand provide themwithhigherstipends(BelaPAN Nonetheless, thereareplanshowtoaddressthis: fourBelarusianuniversitieswilltrainown France, JapanandRussia(BelaPAN2008b). in countrieslikeFinlandaswell.ThatiswhyBelarus willhavetorelyonothercountriessuchas One ofthecentralthemesrelatingtoconstraintsisBelarusian are possibletoovercome. public regardingtheplantlocationandsafetyoftechnologyarepresentedaschallengesthat nuclear projects,findalternativestoRussiaforfuelsupplyandconvincethesceptical Needs toaddressthelackofqualifiedworkers,considergeopoliticswhenimplementing 5.3.3.1.4 Vaida Pilibaityte 96 project (Manenok2007b).Nonetheless, There isanargumentthatitverydifficulttofindageologicallysuitablesiteinBelarusforany radioactive wastesfrommedicalapplicationshavebeenmanagedinBelarussafelyforyears. using so-calledtransmutationtechnology(Ermak2008).Thereareremindersaboutthefactthat churches intheneighbourhood(Minchenko2008). enterprise producingelectricity” world (Bulatetskaia2008).Andfinally,asonecommentatornotes,theNPPis Moreover, requirementsaresaidtobemorestringentinBelarusthananywhereelsethe (Semashko 2008)andthat Kolchenko andVolianiuk2008).ThePresidenthimself is theonlyonethathasactuallybuiltreactorstheyofferelsewhere(Krylovich2008e; concerns about there are only 5-6cubicmetersofwasteoverthecourse problem ofaverydistantfuture(Nezvanov2007c).Moreover,theystressthatplantproduces be returnedforthepermanentstoragetohostcountry,butthisisconsidered returned forrecyclingtothecountrysupplyingit.However,therearestillmaterialsthatneed According tothescientists,globalpracticeofmanagingspentnuclearfuel will beensuredtominimizerisks(Bibkov2006).

“many waysofmanagingit” Constraints andprospects radioactive waste thatatthesametimecontributestosupportingmuseumsand “the bestnationalforces”

by qualified workforceisaseriousissuenotonlyinBelarus, but (NezvanovandKirilenko2008).Otherscientistsreject

saying the chosensite

that in30-50yearsitwillberenderedharmless 3-4years(LegkaiaandKirilenko2007)that areutilizedforitsselection(Krylovich2007). “guarantees” inOstrovetsisthe thatthehighestlevelofsafety capacity human resources “most promisingone” toimplementthe

is suchthatit “just asimple : CEU eTD Collection “rumours andlowawarenessoftheissue” power productionhasthelowestdeathrateofall energysourcesandallthefearsarerootedin convinced that opportunities” support theideaassoontheyare Sciences MikhailMiasnikovichsaysthat them ina (Lukashenko 2008).Thegovernmentpromisestocollectallthequestionsandanswereachof However, thePresidentrecognizesneedtotake countries (NezvanovandKirilenko2008). protesting there?” would livenearthemintheWest,whereenvironmentalistsareactive: “in citycenters” Chernobyl aremostlydenouncedasunfounded As mentionedearlier,negative important oneissafety” Even thescienceeliteconfirmspeculation: monitor allthe radioactive wasteclosetheBelarusianborder,itwouldbeeasiertosellelectricitythem,and described as nuclear project.Herewe findscientistswhousedtobepartofthescience eliteinthepast(some The privately-runBelarusian mediapresentsavarietyofcriticalarguments directedagainstthe 5.3.3.2 (Naviny.by 2007). rhetorically asks: about government’splanstobuildthenuclearplantinNorthatRussianborderand Moreover, someauthorsimplythatnuclearpowerhasalways hydrogen –anecologicallycleanfuelforcars(NezvanovandKirilenko2008). generation reactorsthataretwiceasefficient.Moreover,nuclearpowercanbeusedtoproduce (Krylovich 2007).Moreover,nuclearweaponscanbeusedasafuelandtherearenew Russia, butalsofromtheUS,FranceorChina(Ermak2008)andstockedupfor10years for resources Another constraintbroughtupbytheopponentsrelatesto are alsowillingtoworkinBelarus(Nezvanov2007b). 2008; LegkaiaandKirilenko2007).ExpertsfromLithuaniawheretheplantwasrecentlyclosed “professionals”

Anti-nuclear discourse coalition . Thepro-governmentscientistsarguethattalksabouturaniumdepletionare “clear andunderstandableway” “political” (Kirillov 2006).Thereisalsoahistorianwho denounces Furthermore, in Franceformanyyearsnow(Minchenko2008).Ifitwasdangerous,nobody “greens” “professionals havetakeneverythingintoaccount” . Theproponentsofnucleararguethatfuelcanbeboughtnotonlyfrom “But willtheneighbourlikeplacementofsuchadangerousobjectintheirproximity?”

Selecting thesiteintownofOstrovetsnearLithuanianborderisalso (Naviny.by 2007). in morewaysthanone:Iwouldbeagoodrevengefortheirplanstostore sinceitisaborderzonerequiringcarryingpassport(Krylovich2008f). “regions arefightingtobeselectedasaNPPconstructionsite” public opinion (NezvanovandKirilenko2008). (Nezvanov2008).TheheadoftheNationalAcademy of “informed aboutthesituationinenergysectoranddevelopment the public “We doconsiderthepoliticalbasisaswell,butismost “radiophobia”. andfearsmostlyrelatedtomemoriesof willgetridof “psychological stateofsociety” (Lepeshko2008).Afterall,nuclear It ispointedoutthatNPPsoperate geopolitics Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus “post-Chernobyl syndrome” availability ofuranium toit.Onearticlewrites “Have youseenthelocals “radiophobia” intoaccount “worthless” inthose andis and 97

CEU eTD Collection (Krylovich 2008e). participation (Ianushevskaia 2008).Some journalistsbelievethatRussiahasavested interestinthe purpose isRussiathatinvolvedinprojects countries likeIran,India,ChinaandBulgaria Western countriesdonotsubsidizeforeignprojects andtheonlycountrywhodoeslendforthis (Novozhilova 2007).Talkingaboutinvestment questions ofwastemanagementandmaintaineddependence fromRussiaintermsofnuclearfuelsupplies” argue that electricity, alsoconsideringcostsofsafeguarding thenuclearwaste(BelaPAN2008d).Analysts nuclear physicistsalsoarguesitisthemostexpensive andthemostdangerouswaytoproduce of theexpensesneededtoensuresecuritysuchobjects(BelaPAN2008c).Oneanti- “complicated” Several criticalparliamentarianspointoutthatnucleartechnologyis heart ofthediscussiondetailedbelow. risky. Apoorpublicconsultationprocessandthelackofconsiderationforalternativesisat The followingstorylinesofthisdiscoursecoalitionarguethatnuclearenergyisexpensiveand 5.3.3.2.2 the issueof resources, theymaintaintheviewthataNPPbuilttogetherwith While theanti-nucleargroupsrecognizeriskslinkedtodependenceonimportedenergy 5.3.3.2.1 Vaida Pilibaityte 98 perceived asuntrustworthy. Belarusian politicalsystem:autocraticgovernmentandRussiaasitsnuclearprojectpartnerare argumentation theyemphasizethegravenessofChernobylaftermathandgivereferencesto opinion, pointatdifferentglobalindustrytrendsandpotentialrisksinvolved.Intheir journalists fromanon-statemedia.Theyarevocalaboutlimitedpossibilitytoexpresstheir analysts, citizen,FrenchandLithuanianambassadors,doctors,awriter,Churchleader of themstudiedtheaftermathChernobyl),national,RussianandinternationalNGOs, Several analystsarguethatthedecision dependence. this lastdecadesothattheonlywayoutwouldbeNPP?” equipment andsubsequentlyalsofuel?” analytical articles: (Avimova 2006).Thepositionoftheprivately-runmediacanbeoftenfeltamonglines “very dubious” lacks

“elementarylogic”

Justification againstnuclearenergy Problems addressed “there arecontroversiesthatnotduetothefact nuclearenergyisbadinitself,butwith . Intheirview, energy security (BelaPAN2006)andriskyforcountry’seconomyalsoduetohighcostsinvolved “not only “What sortofdiversificationsourcesisthatifwearerelyingonRussiaagaininterms

to getanorderfromthebrotherly country,butsupposedlywinoveritskeycompetitors” (Sergeichik 2008).TheinternationalgreenNGOsdescribetheprojectas economic viability ; quitetheopposite–theystressthatitwouldleadtoanincreased (Krylovich 2007),or

which wasmadesecretly of

options, theRussiangreengroupsnotethat the (Krylovich 2008a). new buildisquestionedworldwidebecause “why weweresoeagertobecomedependentduring

and Russia “under theeffectofnuclearlobby” can notpossiblyaddress “expensive”, “unsafe” and

CEU eTD Collection Russian consideration ofother Several Belarusianparliamentariansnotethatthedecisionwasmadewithoutaproper isolation thislooksratherflattering” government wantsis speculations aboutthefictitioustenderingproceduresanothercommentatorimpliesthatall of companythatwillbuildtheplantthereisnosuspenseatall” Commenting onthe One ofthemnotesthatthegovernment The journalistsandNGOsareoutspokenaboutthelackofconsideration (Sergeichik 2008). choice wouldbetheonemadeintoenergysavingwhichhasbeenignoredincountry country (Avimova2006).Thereareanalystswhobelievethatamuchmoreeffectiveinvestment supply heat.Accordingtothem,thereare2,000suitablesitesforproducingwindenergyinthe working day: also pointatthefactthatconsultationsrequireregistrationandareorganizedinmiddleof violating theAarhusconventiononpublicaccesstoinformation(Bykovski2008).Thejournalists government’s plans into thediscussion,Lithuanianambassadorcomplainshehasonlyheardabout this ambitiousprojectisnotviableinsuchashorttimedespitethegreatenthusiasm?” whatsoever: presentation ofthenew does notsupporttheidea(Kirillov2006).Anotherjournalistnotesthatofficialsin century’ iscoming” (Levshina 2007).Anotherauthorpointsoutsomewhatsarcastically: the tragedythatresulted fromaChernobyldisaster,Belarusiansociety showing increasingsupport fornuclearoneBelarusianwritersayssheisdeeply sorrythatdespite razygrannaia karta” remains them saysandaddsthattheproblemofChernobyl isoftenconsideredasa “The absenceofopenpublicdiscussiononcertainproblems blockspossiblewaystothebestsolution” new stationandpointatthefactthat “liquidation” In thecontextofpoorsocialstatus Belarusianswhotookpartintheso-called those speakinginfavourandinterruptingthecritics(BelaPAN2009). consultation commentator sarcasticallynotes(Krylovich2009b). “submissive totheflowoflife and circumstances,tothetotalitariangovernment” Greenpeace ofthe “One evenmaystartwondering:isitpossiblethatexpertsmanagedtoconvincethePresident inOstrovetswasorganizedaveryimproperway,givingobviousadvantageto “Who willnotmakeitontime,sorry,toolate,theplantbebuiltwithoutyou”, and some ) (Spasiuk2007a).Commentingonthelatestresults ofsociologicalsurveys emphasizesthatnuclearproducesonlyelectricity,whilebiomasscanalso Chernobyl “on television” choice ofinvestor, “to enjoyprivateconnectionswithwesterncompanies–underthecircumstancesofpolitical alternatives Conception “ideological work” aftermath politicalanalystsmakethelinkwithplans tobuildthe (Krylovich 2008e). only(Krylovich2009a).TheNGOsaccusetheauthoritiesfor

of EnergySecurityuntil2020 suchasrenewableenergysources(BelaPAN2008a).The public opinion “seemingly onecorrespondentconcludes: withthepublicwillbeneededasmajoritystill

has forgottenaboutitspromisesto“consultthenation” inthecountryisrarelytakenintoaccount.

(Avimova2008).Inthelightof According toNGOs,the Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus did notmentionnuclearproject

“Another ‘constructionofthe “When itcomestothechoice (Manenok 2007c). “did notwakeup” (Spasiuk2009). “done deal” public opinion (rus. , –

public one of –

“uzhe and one Well 99 .

CEU eTD Collection will besentforrecycling to Russia,finalburialwilltakeplaceontheBelarusian territory: also raisedbytheNGOs who areconcernedaboutthefactthatevenifparts ofradioactivewaste doses ofirradiationcompared totheBelarusianstandards(Spasiuk2007b). Issuesofwasteare border inLithuaniaandnotewhatisarguablyless stringentrequirementsintermsofallowed In thislightBelarusianscientistsraiseconcernsregarding revival intheWestreferringtonuclearstandstill theUSandFrance. “increasingly morecountriesseekanon-nuclearstatus” Belarus” has been scientists whoworkedwiththeaftermathofChernobyldisasteralsopointoutthatthisfact would equalthatofthe One ofthemwarnsthatover15yearsnormaloperationthe Not onlycitizensandtheNGOs,butalsosomephysicistsareconcernedaboutnewproject. project isstillreversible(Krylovich2009c). not beapproved(BelaPAN2009).Thereforegivenalltheviolations,NGOsbelievethat times. Theybelievethatifitwascarriedoutproperlywouldbeobvioustheprojectshould that authoritiesunderestimatedthepotentialnegativeimpactofaseriousaccidentatleast4,000 on tourismandlocalecosystems(Naviny.by2008;BelaPAN2008e).Environmentalgroupsnote at nuclearwasteissuesandlongtermhealtheffectsofstationsaswellnegative the greenNGOswhomaintainthat Belarusian scientistsunitedintheinitiative increased cancercasesinthepopulationlivingvicinity(Ianushevskaia2008).Agroupof everything alivewillbetakingplace” turned intoonemore the nuclearplanta about 106localresidentswhosentaletterinprotesttothePresidentcallingdecisionbuild In thecontextoffinaldecisionmadeabout plant isapotentialnuclearbomb” the reversalofdecisiontobuildaplantandadvocatingforsafer story quotingthelocalleaderofaprotestantChurchwhohascollected300signaturescallingfor media. However, thevoicesofprotestinglocalresidentsOstrovetsarepresentinnon-state neighbouring Lithuaniaarediscussedinrelationtonuclearrisks. linked toexperiencesaftertheChernobyldisasterandradioactivewastemanagedin The potentialhealthandenvironmentalrisksthelackoftrustinnucleartechnology 5.3.3.2.3 Vaida Pilibaityte 100

“Belarusians donotwanttoliveonagunpowderbarrel”, ] believethatnuclearenergyisnoteconomically,socially andtechnicallyjustifiedthat

“confirmed bynumerousstudies” Risks involved “tragic mistake” “black “Chernobylhole”ontheEuropeanmap,whereslow,butirreversiblemutationof Chernobyl –theyinsistandthatmakesitanillegalproject(Sergeichik2008). (Naviny.by 2008;BelaPAN2008e). . Thepeoplearesayingtheydonotwantarecreationalsitetobe safe nucleartechnologies disaster(BelaPAN2008d;Ianushevskaia2008).Other anditiswellknownthatnormaloperationleadsto “For BelarusWithoutNuclear” . Theyalsorejectclaimsaboutnuclearindustry location ofthenewplan –announcesanotherheadlineofthe radioactive waste radioactive fallout simplydonotexist.Theypoint

Similar positionissharedby alternative [rus. t, themediareports storedacrossthe s. “Za beziadernuiu inthecountry “Nuclear power “We need CEU eTD Collection With regardtothe not missthechancetotie-upBelarusevenmore” (Ianushevskaia 2008).Othersalsonotethatitwas clearfromtheverybeginningthat experts willbeabletooperatetheplantand required fuelwillbesuppliedalsofromRussia believe Belarusisnotabletohandletheconstruction oftheNPPonitsown.OnlyRussian international agreementsinthisarea” French ambassadorpointsoutthat The scientistspointtothefactthat well asopendiscussionareconsideredtobekeyconstraintssuccessfulnucleardeployment The highcosts,risingpricesofdepletinguraniumresources,lackexpertise,safetycultureas 5.3.3.2.4 Belarus properly” (Levshina 2007).According tosomecritics, certain nuclearsafetycultureand safetycultureingeneral,butthissensewehavevery littleclueinthecountry” Many agreethatinrealityparticipationofothercountrythan theoretically –apossibilityofdifferentstanceontheissue(Krylovich2008a). interview thathewasnotalwayspro-nuclearpowerandjournalistsinterpretedthisas–atleast already toolate” economically viable doubts aboutitsfinancialcapacity whatsoever. TheyalsoconsiderpartnershipwithRussiaastheonlyviableoption,butraise Some expertssaytheybelievethatthereisthepossibilityforprojecttobe of nuclearpowerintheregionrenderingBelarusianprojectunprofitable(Krylovich2008a). Russia’s planstoconstructplantsinVisaginasandKaliningradtheremightbeanoverproduction Among other compared tothefossilfuels(BelaPAN2008f). development (Korotkaia2008).TheNGOsalsonotethaturaniumpricesaregrowingevenfaster alternatives willnotbepossiblesincealltheresourcesconsumedbynuclearpower plant willnotbeabletofunctionin10yearsasthefueltooexpensive,whiledeveloping cost ofbuildingthestation.Inopinioncritics, than itseemsatthefirstsight” comes todiscussingradiation-relatedhealtheffects,whiletheseare The internationalmedicalexpertsarequotedreferringtotheBelarusiansocietyas resolved inanycountry” to considerthefactthatnuclearplantsalsoproducewasteandproblemofsafemanagementthisisnot

Constraints andprospects (Kozhemiakin2009b).However,thePresidentissaidtohaveadmittedinone energy costs and thatthewholeprocess sofarindicatesthatitshouldnotbebuilt today national capacity (Bykovski 2008). , itisbelievedthatPresidentLukashenko (Spasiuk 2007b). relatedargumentsthereareviewsthatgiventheLithuania’sand (Krylovich 2008c).TherearealsoRussiangreen groupsthat

to fullyfundaNPP.Eveniftheprojectwillturnoutnot “given thepoliticalsituationinBelarusthereisasubstantial lackof costs ofdecommissioning thenationalregulatornotesaswellthat (Levshina2008). “it is a very complicated “the cheapnessofnuclearisamyth”. Russia Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus “will hardlyturnback,itseemsis theplantmaycomeupto

object thathasnotbeenbuilt in is hardlypossible.Eventhe “considerably morecomplicated “there hastobe “closed” “Russian will Thenew whenit “frozen” 101

CEU eTD Collection purposefully selectedfordiscourseanalysis:fromtheleadingstate-rundaily A sampleof79mediaarticlesfromthreedifferentBelarusianoutletshavebeen for theproject. increase itsenergysecurity.Russiahasbeenchosenasthemaininvestorandtechnologysupplier Europe lately.AmidoneofsuchcrisesBelarushasdecidedtobuildanuclearpowerplant However theyhavebeenhavingimportpricedisputesthatcausedsupplydisruptionsto economy modelfuelledbysubsidizedoilandgasimportsfromtheneighbouringRussia. pursued somereforms,thoughitseconomicstabilityhasbeenmainlyattributedtoplanned strategic roleasanimportanttransitcountryforRussianenergytradewiththeWest.Belarushas the autocraticPresidentLukashenkosince1994andretainedstrongtieswithRussia.Ithasa discourse analysisconductedinthisstudy.BelarusisaformerSovietstatewhichhasbeenledby This sectiondocumentstheBelarusiannuclearenergydiscoursewhichispartofnational 5.3.4 Vaida Pilibaityte 102 takes awaysocialbenefitsfromthosewhosufferedanucleardisaster(Ianushevskaia2008). the societythatis the NPPanditmayleadto One criticalscientistisconcernedthattheBelarusiansocietywillneverfindout reference” organizations wouldliketohavenotonlyadvertisementleafletsandmediaarticles,butmoreseriouspapersasa about thelevelofpreparednessgovernment: between theBelarusianandRussianside,referringtostateengineermediaraisequestion state cannoteventhinkaboutnuclearpower(BelaPAN2008d).Amidtheprolongedtalks (BelaPAN 2008a).TheanalystsquotedbytheBelarusianpressalsoarguethatanon-democratic nuclear, favourableglobal trends,Russiaasthechosenprojectpartnerand substantialnational authority ofscientificknowledge praisingenergysecurityaspects,economic advantagesof The Belarusian discoursecoalitionshavebeendocumented: pro-nuclearandanti-nuclear. press. Basedonthemultitudeofdiscursivestorylines describedduringtheanalysis,twodistinct but analysts,NGOsandcitizensarealsorepresented, thoughmainlyinthepagesofprivately-run the Presidentandjournalistsseemtodominate discourse,especiallyinthestate-runmedia, risks, publicinvolvement,geopoliticsandglobal trends. Pro-nuclearenergyscientists,officials, economic costs,nationalcapacitytoimplement a nuclearpowerproject,wastemanagement, The Belarusiannuclearenergydiscoursefeatures variousissuesincludingenergysecurity, recurring inthediscourseoverstudiedperiodof2006-2009. qualitative analysisresultedinalistofdiscourseactorsandsetnuclearenergy-relatedthemes a privatebusinessweekly

pro-nuclear

Summary offindings (Krylovich2008b). energydiscoursecoalition promotesnuclearpowerbyemphasizing the “closed” andwherethegovernmentdoesnotrespect “Belorusy iRynok” “repetition ofChernobyl”. andoneofthetoponlinenewsoutlets Inhisview,aNPPshouldnotbebuiltin “It isunderstandablethatourresponsible “universal publicvalues” “Sovetskaia Belorussia”, Naviny.by. “true costs” and The of

CEU eTD Collection

capacity todevelopanationalnuclearprogramme.Meanwhile, Table 5.9StorylinesrelatingtoproblemsnuclearenergycanorcannotaddressinBelarus in Belarus. provides asummaryofthemesrelatedtoenergysecurityissuesandgeopoliticsnuclear Tables belowsummarizethestorylinesusedbydiscourseactorsoftwocoalitions.Table5.9 technological dangerslinkedwiththememoriesofChernobylaccident. point atdifferentglobaltrends,risksofpartneringwithRussia,ignoredpublicopinionand

Problems more areplanned. Belarus isalreadysurroundedbynuclearplantsand and contributestonationalsecurity. Nuclear helpstoreduceelectricitycosts,diversifysupply PRO-NUCLEAR Energy securityanddependenceonRussia Geopolitics means evenmoreincreasingenergydependence. Nuclear isexpensiveandrisky;thereactorfromRussia ANTI-NUCLEAR Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus anti-nuclear – energystorylines 103

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 104 Table 5.10StorylinesrelatingtojustificationforandagainstnuclearenergyinBelarus themes fromalternatives,globaltrendsandpublicawarenessarelistedinTable5.10. Simplified narrativesdescribingreasonstofavouroropposenuclearenergyaccordingvarious

Option justification the decision. Public consultationschemeisinplace;majoritysupports EU doesnotmindBelarusgoingnuclear. Scientists haveinformedthedecision;studiesexist; development. Nuclear willdrivenationalresearchandeconomic tested anditconsiderscreditingschemes. “Rosatom” hasthemostexperience,theirreactorsare communities wantnuclearplantsintheirregion. nobody isprotestingagainstnuclearelsewhere; Everybody isgoingnuclear;itaEuropeandecision; them andcontroltrespassers. repository nearby;itwillbeeasiertoexportelectricity Lithuanian borderisan“answer”totheirradioactivewaste Politics playaroleinplantsiting;nearthe are smallandcanbestockedup. Nuclear fuelisavailablefromseveralsources;volumes NPP canhelpreduceelectricityproductioncostsby30%. generate additionalincome. Nuclear doesnotemitGHG;sellingpollutionquotascan Renewables areinsufficientand/ormoreexpensive. PRO-NUCLEAR Public attitudesandawareness Prestige andprogress Project legitimacy Potential investor Energy security GHG emissions Global trends Energy costs Alternatives Geopolitics information. Public wasnotconsultedandhadlimitedaccessto impact; it’sillegal. alternatives; assessmentsunderestimateenvironmental Decision wasmadesecretlyandwithoutconsidering hole onthemap”. NPP willturnOstrovetsinto“anotherblackChernobyl NPP inBelarus. Russia maynothavethefinancialcapacitytobuild countries areseekinganon-nuclearstatus. Nuclear industryisinastandstill;increasinglymore Russia isjustseekingmoreinfluenceinBelarus. resources willbeavailabletodevelopalternatives. In 10yearstheplantwillnotbeabletofunction,butno unprofitable. Rising fuelpriceseventuallywillrendertheplant wind andenergysavingpotential. Nuclear onlyproduceselectricity;thereisabigbiomass, ANTI-NUCLEAR

–

CEU eTD Collection Table 5.12StorylinesrelatingtoconstraintsandprospectsfornuclearenergyinBelarus Table 5.12listsnarrativesrelatedtofactorsconstrainingordrivingnuclearpowerinBelarus. Table 5.11StorylinesrelatingtonuclearenergyrisksinBelarus and safetyaswellradioactivewastemanagementcanbefoundinTable5.11below. Different argumentsdealingwithChernobyl,environmentandhealth-relatedrisks,plantlocation

Constraints & prospects Risks involved problem willbesolvedcompletely. taking backspentfuelforrecycling;in30-50yearsthe Many solutionsexist;volumesaresmall;fuelsuppliers Ostrovetsisthelastnon-pollutedareaincountry. are 10,000timessafer. Industry isverytransparenttoaccidents;modernreactors Ostrovets isthemostpromisinglocation. Even ifaplanehits,noharmwillbedone. happen again. Chernobyl disasterwascausedbyoldtechnology,itcannot Uranium isanabundantresource and itspriceissteady. Critics induce“radiophobia”bypursuingpersonalpopularity. “closer” andconsidersacreditingscheme. Any countrycantakepartintheproject,butRussiais and 1.5cheaperthandevelopinglocalresources. Building NPPisnomoreexpensivethanacoal-firedplant return, newexpertswillbeeducatedontime. development plan;Belarusiansworkingelsewherewill Belarus hasworld-classnuclearresearchand PRO-NUCLEAR PRO-NUCLEAR Public attitudesandawareness Capacity andhumanresources Technology andplantsafety Health andenvironment Waste management Chernobyl accident Fuel availability Plant location Capital costs Geopolitics near theIgnalinaNPP. they havelessstringentrequirementsforthewastestored managed inBelarus;neighbouringLithuaniaposesrisks– There isnosolutiontowasteworldwide;itwillneedbe Safe nucleartechnologydoesnotexist;NPPisabomb. increased cancercases. 15 yearsofnormaloperationequalsChernobylfalloutand New projectcanleadtoonemoreChernobyldisaster. fuel price. Uranium isendinganditsprice growing fasterthanfossil participate; NPPshouldnotbebuiltina“closed”society. Civil societyinBelarushaslimitedopportunitiesto No foreigncountrywillinvestinBelarus. safety measuresbringupcosts. Cheapness isamyth;nuclearinvolveshighfinancialrisks; brought fromRussia. culture andlackofdemocracy;expertswillhavetobe Belarus hasnofinancialandhumanresources,poorsafety

ANTI-NUCLEAR ANTI-NUCLEAR Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus 105

CEU eTD Collection and globalenergytrends.TheLithuanian journalists andbusinessmendiscussenergysecurity,geopolitics,economiccosts,projectmodel power isprimarilyapolitical,geopoliticalandeconomicissue.Governmentofficials,politicians, The analysisofthetextssampledfrom the mediaofeachcountry. and antinuclearenergyhavebeendocumentedbasedonsimilaritiesofargumentativestorylinesin actors discussingthemhavebeenidentified.Twodominantdiscoursecoalitions–pro-nuclear variety ofnationalmediaoutlets.Thetextswerequalitativelycodedfortherecurringthemesand Discourse analysisofthetwocountriesisbasedon157mainlyanalyticalmediaarticlesfroma had itsownnuclearenergy,buthasbeenaffectedbytheChernobyldisasterin1986. built nuclearpowerplantaspertheEUmembershipcommitmentsin2009andBelarusnever diversify suppliesandreducedependenceonRussia.LithuaniahasjustdecommissionedaSoviet- Recently theybothhaveexpressedthecommitmenttodevelopciviliannuclearpowerinorder their politicalandeconomicdevelopmentsimilaritiesinpro-nuclearenergypolicies. states: LithuaniaandBelarus.Thesecountrieshavebeenselectedbecauseofthedifferencesin This chaptercontainsnuclearenergydiscourseanalysisofthetwoneighbouringformerSoviet 5.4 Vaida Pilibaityte 106 project, potentialinvestor,energysecurityandplantlocation.The and thePresidentwhodiscusseconomicsofnuclear,nationalcapacitytoimplement In the studies andthelackofpublicdebateonalternatives. exporter’s role,whilestorylinesofthe the cheapestwaytosecureLithuania’senergyindependenceandmaintainregionalelectricity though slightlymoreemphasized inBelarus. national capacityandlack ofpublicconsultationisparticularconcern inbothcountries, way togenerateelectricity, raiseissuesofwastemanagementandhealthrisks. Insufficiencyofthe capacity –sufficient.Alla progress. Inbothcasesthetechnologyisconsidered safe,risks–manageableandnational important justificationforbuildingtheirownplant andlinkitwithregionalprestigenational Lithuania about theroleasasourceofcheapest, cleanestandreliableenergysource.Inboth In summary, linked withthememoriesofChernobylaccident. warn aboutincreasingdependenceonRussia,ignoredpublicopinionandtechnologicalrisks favourable globaltrendsanddevelopmentopportunities.Meanwhile, coalition promotesthisenergysourcebecauseofthesecuritygains,economicadvantages,

Summary andconclusion Belarusian and pro-nuclear Belarus case,thedebateismuchmoredominatedbyscientists,officials,journalists pro-nuclearenergyactorsaretalkingaboutglobal nuclearrevivalasan energystorylinesinbothcountriescontainvery similararguments nti-nuclear energystorylinesrefertonuclearasthemostexpensive anti-nuclear pro-nuclear Lithuanian coalitionstresstheabsenceoffeasibility discoursecoalitionarguesfornuclearas mediashowsthatdeploymentofnuclear anti-nuclear pro-nuclear discourse storylines CEU eTD Collection countries. outlets. Itseemsthatthealternativeanalyticmediatendstobemoreanti-nuclearenergyinboth dailies ofbothcountries,whilethetextsrepresentingmorediverseviewsarefromonline Talking abouttheroleofmedia,mostpro-nuclearenergystorylinesarefoundinleading the twodiscoursesinglobalcontextispresentedfollowingchapter. strategies amongthediscourseactorsthatarediscussedinmoredetailcomparativeanalysisof appears tobemoretechnicalinBelarus.Thisismainlyduethedifferentargumentative Overall, politicalaspectsofnuclearenergyareemphasizedmoreinLithuania,whiledebate nuclear powerplant. complementing dependenceonRussiangaswiththetechnology-based all discoursecoalitions.In imports fromRussia,unlikeinBelarus, When itcomestodifferences,canbeconcludedthatalthoughbothcountriesaredependenton Belarus onlyanti-nuclearenergycoalitionisconcernedabout Lithuania Russia isperceivedasauniversalthreatby Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus 107

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 108

CEU eTD Collection very samecountryBelarusisdependenton. around theobviousparadoxintryingtoincrease energy securitybypartneringwith articulated themost.Howeveratsametime thepro-nuclearcoalitiontriestomanoeuvre Belarus energy gapoccurringafterthe In Lithuania Belarusian discourses. among themainmotivatingfactorsforpursuingnuclearpowerreflectedinLithuanianand of thesethemes. national discourseactors.Moreover,therearesomesubstantialdifferencesintheinterpretation such asliabilitiesandtechnologicaldevelopmentareeitherleftoutorlargelymisinterpretedby discussed onlyonthenationallevel.Severalglobalconstraintsfornuclearenergydeployment nuclear energyjustificationandrisks,butgeopoliticsothercountryspecificissuesare differ globallyandnationally.Thenationaldiscoursesincludemostglobalthemespertainingto As illustratedinTable6.1,thecentralproblemsnuclearenergyissupposedtobeaddressing 6.1 energy. discusses theeffectpoliticalsystemandmediahaveondiscussionssurroundingnuclear especially thetwonationaldebates,looksintoargumentativestrategiesofdiscourseactors,and This chapterprovidesinsightsintothedifferencesofcontentandrhetoricglobal nuclear power. the twogovernancelevels,butcanalsohelptounderstandnationaldiscursivedriversfor the globaldiscourseanalysis.Thismaynotonlyhighlightimportantdifferencesindebateon worthwhile comparingthecharacteristicsoftheirnuclearenergydiscourseswithfindings establishing andmaintainingdiscursiveadvantagesinLithuaniaBelarusdiffer.Thereforeitis The institutionalconditionssuchaspoliticalsystemandthelevelofpressfreedomfor 6 energy discourses. alternatives, andtherole ofpublicopinionarethethemesfeaturinginall thestudiednuclear Economics ofnuclearenergy, abilitytosecuresupplies,globaltrends,GHG emissionsreduction, 6.1.2 Unlike intheglobalnuclearenergydiscourse, 6.1.1

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ANDDISCUSSION

Contextualizing globalstorylines Justification fornuclearenergy Problems addressed theneedtodiversifyenergysuppliesandsecure accesstoaffordableelectricityis thenuclearpowerprojectismainly Ignalina NPP climate change isdecommissioned,asrequiredbytheEU. geopolitically Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus or growing driven andintendedtoplugthe demand Russia that arenot , the 109 In

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 110 25 Belarus hopestobenefitfromsellingCO The Lithuanianpro-nuclearnarrativesmentionthe EUemissionsreductioncommitments,while ones intheglobaldiscourse, supply, theglobalandnationalnarrativesareverysimilar.Asnotedabove,oneofcentral When itcomestoadvantagesoralternativeofnuclearenergyfromthepointviewfuel effective climatechangemitigationoption. counter-arguing narrativesechoingglobaldebate aboutdoubtswhethernuclearisthemost Table 6.1Nuclearenergythemesfeaturingininternationalandnationaltextsanalyzed Inthetable that arefoundeitherinbothnational discourses,butnotinglobal,oracombinationofnationaland global.

PROBLEMS ADDRESSED Shared themes Ignalina NPP Geopolitics Russia Dependence on Energy security Project model Energy demand Climate change ”Shared themes”

Alternatives Global m trends representissuesfoundinbothglobal andnationaldiscourses,mixedshadingindicatesthethemes

OPTION JUSTIFICATION Ignalina NPP Project legitimacy progress Prestige & Geopolitics Potential investor emissions GHG Public acceptance Energy security Economics Global themes

climate change THEMES 2 quotas.OnlytheLithuaniandiscoursecontainssome m Plant location Chernobyl Liability

argumentisonlymarginalinbothcountries. Lithuanian themes RISKS INVOLVED Proliferation & Fuel cycle management Waste safety Technology & environment Health &

terrorism

m Capacity&HR

CONSTRAINTS & PROSPECTS Belarusian themes framework Regulatory Fuel availability acceptance Public (installed capacity) Global trends Economics countries Newcomer Other projects Ignalina NPP Geopolitics Technology m

CEU eTD Collection plants andfewer to renewableenergysources”, counter-argue that construction asatruly justification fortheirownnuclearprogrammes.TheBelarusianmediareferstoplant actors ofthetwocountriesinsistthat installed nuclearcapacitiesmainlyinAsiaandOECDcountries.Nonetheless,thepro-nuclear France, Japan,Russia,ChinaandRepublicofKoreaprojecteddoublingoreventripling about is oneofthecentralargumentspro-nuclearcampsinbothcountries.Globalnarrativestalk by bothLithuaniaandBelarus: There arealsoseveralthemesthatonlycharacteristic tothenationaldiscourseandareshared as themembersofpublicareprovidedwith opinion pollstobacktheirclaimsaboutmajoritysupporting nuclearpowerandclaimthataslong acceptance ofnuclearenergyprojectsinEurope.In bothcountriespro-nuclearactorscitepublic forward byglobaldiscourseactors.ButinBelarus thatisturnedintoa supposedly can merelysaythatthereisa problems requiringspecialattentionandmoreawarenessraisingeffort.Apro-nuclearstoryline appears thatonthegloballevel,lackofpublicacceptanceisrecognizedasonekey Variations onthethemeof further down. The developing localrenewableresources. reactors as conditional aboutit[e.g. pro-nuclear globalstorylinesaddresstheissueof There areafewinterestingdiscrepanciesincoveringotherthemes.Notably,noteventhemost program. Moreover,this introducestheaspectofurgencyto debate. InLithuania plans inneighbouringcountries isaverystrongmotivatingfactortoproceed withtheirown project legitimacy. cheapest” for nuclear.Butnationalpro-nuclearnarrativesarealmostunilaterallyreferringtoitas times initialestimates.Inotherwords,costs such projects,ormanyfinancialuncertainties,whilecriticsarequotingcostoverrunsuptothree International actorsemphasizeeithertheneedforgovernmentstominimizefinancialrisksof out thatnoestimatestakingintoaccountglobaleconomiccrisishavebeenmadesofar. globalnuclearrevival “authoritative statementsofintent” and evencoming “not moreexpensive” “competing” “more andmorecountriesareseekinganuclear-freestatus” “declared opponents” In generalterms,inboth countriestheexistenceofnuclearpowerplantsor forwasterepositoriestobesitedintheirregionarea but “European decision” “economically viableinmostcases” “at nocostforconsumer” isonemorethemethatworthwhiletakingacloserlookatsinceit

their voicesaremuchweakerandthereasonsforthatdiscussed “slight increase” public acceptance than acoal-firedplantsandcertainlymuchcheaperalternativeto geopolitics toreneworextendnuclearcapacitiesincountrieslikeUS, “the wholeworldisturningtonuclear” . LocalcommunitiesinFinlandandSwedenthatare inanumberofsupporterscountrieswithoperating . Atthesametimenationalanti-nuclearcoalitions

become morepartofconstraintsthanjustification of energy, “all theinformation” .

The are followingsomewhatsimilarpattern.It economic

Belarusian storylinesalsodescribenuclear ] . nationalprestigeandprogress One exampleistheIAEAthatpoints Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus

costs theywilleventuallyit. andthat withoutcautionorbeing and presentitasthemain universal trend “countries areturning single example ofpublic and put “the 111

CEU eTD Collection discrepancy relatedtothisthatisdescribedinthenextsub-section. main projectpartner,whileinLithuaniathisissimplyano-option.Thereaninteresting discussion inBelarusispredominantlyaboutthecontroversialdecisiontochooseRussiaas government announceaninternationaltenderandtrytoattractaforeigninvestor.Asimilar the plant–shoulditbeanationalcapitalbasedpublic-privatepartnershipor What regardsanuclear “studies” decision topursuenuclearpower.Inbothcasesstatementsabout Another themethatunitesthetwocountriesisanoverallneedtoconfirm perceived regionalnuclearenergyleadershipasopposedtobecomingan Belarusian proponentscompareittoaspaceexploration,whileLithuaniaaimsmaintain Belarus nuclearpowerispresentedasamajordriverfornationaleconomyandresearch: among opponentstodreadpossiblenegative spent nuclearfuelmanagementisleftforthedistant future.Butthereisageneraltendencyeven and Belaruspresenttheproblemofmanagingradioactivewasteasresolved,whileissue Similarly likeintheglobaldiscourse,nationalpro-nuclearenergydiscoursecoalitionsLithuania straightforward. point atindustry’sfailures.Innationaldiscoursesportrayalofriskperceptionisnotso claim risksandimpactstobelowand/orcontrollablethosethatnotecontroversies The globalnuclearenergydiscourseanalysisdividesthesestorylinesratherclearlyintothosethat interpretations ofriskthemesexist. grave disasterthatprovesfallibilityofnucleartechnology.Inmostothercasesvariationson nuclear storylinesmoreorlessmatch:iniseitherperceivedasaone-timetechnologicalevent The themeofChernobylisperhapstheonlyonewhereglobalandnationalpro-nuclearanti- 6.1.3 Vaida Pilibaityte 112 hand andontheother–asaresultofLithuania’s neighbouring plantsareunderstoodaspotentialcompetitorsforaforeigninvestorontheone concerned aboutpossibility ofasimilaraccidentanduncertaintiesabout wastemanagement– However, Belarusianswho arestilllivingwiththeaftermathofChernobyl disasterarealso waste repositoriesacrosstheirborder. through sharedrivers,whileBelarusianlocalinhabitants fearthemismanagementofradioactive example. Lithuanianmediatellsstoriesaboutdangers ofpollutionfromRussiaandBelarus well. Theradioactive as amoremanageabletechnicalproblem.Thisholds trueinrelationtotechnologicalsafetyas nuclear installations,atthesametimeperceiving risksfromfacilitiesinyourownterritory

Risks involved arecommonandcriticscomplainaboutdifficultieswithobtainingsuchdocuments. waste management project model Lithuaniandiscourseactorsfocusonhowtobestfinance andlinkedhealthenvironmentalimpactsis one environmental “nuclear energyambitions”. impactsfromtheneighbouring “no alternatives” “energy backyard”. BothinLithuaniaand legitimacy orabstract of the CEU eTD Collection for opponentstocontradict. “the onlytechnologytestedelsewhereintheworld” specific toconvincethepublicthatitissafe.Nevertheless,scientists’argumentsaboutbeing Chernobyl disaster,thereforethoseadvocatingforanother dependent onRussialeavesthisoptionout.Meanwhile,Belarushasbeenseverelyaffectedbythe and advancedreactors not yetmadeadecisionaboutthetype,Russiantechnologyisconsidered Another interestingdiscrepancyexistsintheframingof pertaining tofuelcyclearelinkedwithhealthandenvironmentalimpactsaswell. not consideredasequallyrelevantforthenationaldiscourse;thoughinglobaldiscoursethemes countries donotfeeltheimminenttreatofterrorism,whereasimpactsoccurringelsewhereare coalitions areabsentinnationaldiscoursesstudied.Thereasonforthismaybethefactthatthese enrichment andrecyclingthatareemphasizedbyanti-nuclearmoderateglobaldiscourse lifecycle not holdtrue.Infact,thestorylinesonweaponsproliferationalongwithothernuclear possibilities totrainthem thatarepresentinglobaldiscourseverymuch downplayedonthe The storylinesaboutdiminishing expertisebaseandlackof alternative. project inFinlandthatisfacingdifficultiesand suggestingpowerlinkstotheWestasan measures andradioactivewastemanagement.InLithuania theyarealsoreferringtotheongoing energy demandatmuchlower Both nationalanti-nucleardiscourseactorsargue thatlocalalternativeswouldabletomeetthe optimistic claims. anti-nuclear energycoalitionsinbothcountriesare tryingtocounter-arguesomeoftheseoverly installed globalcapacityprojections,publicacceptanceandthestateoftechnology.However, debatable factsonthenationallevel.Thisisespeciallytrueforconstraintslinkedtocosts, there isoneratherdistincttendencytointerpretglobalexpectationsandprojectionsasnon- As alreadynotedearlier,whendiscussingstorylinesrelatedtonuclearpowerprojectjustification 6.1.4 about This showsthatthepro-nuclearglobalstorylinearguingpublicismainlyconcerned in thelightofcostsandcorruptionrelatedtomanagingplantdecommissioningfunds. operating nuclearpowerplantontheirterritory.Wastemanagementissuesarediscussedmainly regulatory institutionsarealsoofconcern.MeanwhileLithuaniahasyearsexperience Russia. Suitabilityofthechosen especially risksassociatedwithitspossibletransportationacrossthecountryforrecyclingin

proliferation andterrorism Constraints andprospects -related riskssuchasaccidentsandpollutionoccurringduringuraniummining, “not testedyet”. cost. plant location andlesssoaboutoperationsofnuclearplantsassuchdoes InBelaruscriticsemphasizetheresourcesneeded ofsafety Moreover, thewholeideaofbuildingaplanttobecomeless and andagenerallackofsafetycultureinBelarusian “10,000 timessaferthaninChernobyl” reactor “Russian” Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus

safety human resources planthavetobemuchmore . AlthoughLithuaniahas “marked byChernobyl” are veryhard as well as fuel 113

CEU eTD Collection issue hasmuchstrongerlinkstoenergysecurityandgeopoliticsinBelarus. than RussiagiventhatRussiancompanyisalsoprovidingnucleartechnology.Thereforethis theme isgreaterherebecauseofthequestionwhetheruraniumcanbesuppliedbyothercountry become atrulydistinctthemelikeinglobalandBelarusiandiscourses.Theimportanceofthis Fuel availability main constraintforanyotherforeigncapitaltotakepartintheproject. relates tofearsaboutRussia’sinfluence,butnotsomuchasinBelaruswhereitisseenthe competition overaforeigninvestorasperceivedbythepro-nucleardiscoursecoalition.Italso Lithuania itismainlylinkedwithneighbouringcountriesambitionstobuildtheirownplantsand Geopolitics actual plannedconstructioninthecountry. “advanced modernreactortechnology” promises suchasinherentsafetyfeaturesorfastbreederstosupporttheargumentabout However, thenationalpro-nuclearactorsoftentalk technological A numberofratherspecificconstraintssuchasfinancial the globalnuclearresearch. Meanwhile inBelarusiandiscoursenationalscientistsareportrayedasstandingattheforefrontof and manypointatthefactthatLithuaniadidnotactuallybuildexistingplantitself. Vaida Pilibaityte 114 from promotingtheirviews,actorsareaimingtoachieve As explainedinChapter2ofthisstudy,accordingtothe 6.2 in Lithuania,wheredecommissioningofthe workforce athomeareconfrontedbyanti-nucleardiscoursecoalitions.Thisisespeciallythecase national level.Eventhoughinbothcountriesclaimsaboutthepossibilitiestotrainnecessary for winningovertheargumentative struggleinthestudiedcountries. nuclear discourseshavemanysimilarities,thereare somesignificantdifferencesamongstrategies Comparative discourseanalysisdemonstratesthat althoughintermsofthecontenttwo others. factors: credibility,acceptabilityandtrustinterms ofhowparticularargumentsareperceivedby concrete policies.AccordingtoHajer(1995),discourse hegemonyisdeterminedbyatleastthree coalitions inbothLithuaniaandBelarusarehegemonic, sincetheirviewsarebeingtranslatedinto others (Hajer1995).FollowingHajer’s(1995)definition,itcanbearguedthatpro-nuclearenergy

Argumentative strategies asaconstraintbyitselfhasratherdifferentinterpretationinbothcountries.In advancement ofnewreactorsisonlypartglobaldiscourselinkedtoconstraints. istoucheduponinLithuaniarelationtoenergysecurity,butitdoesnot , althoughinrealitymostofthesehavenothingtodowiththe Ignalina NPP aboutnuclearindustry’sfuturetechnological “social-interactive” discursive hegemony isnotgoingassmoothlyplanned liabilities discoursetheory,apart andthestateof or dominanceover CEU eTD Collection themes suchasnationalcapacity tohandlebignuclearprojects. of theIgnalinaNPPdecommissioningandhelped tointroducethedebatemorediverse discussion onissuesliketechnologyandsafety.But thisparticulardebatealsohighlightedfailures struggle onthisissue.TodaytheLithuaniandiscourse remainsverypolitical,withoutmuch themes ofprojectmodelandlegitimacydocumented inChapter5serveasexamplesofdiscursive was liquidatedduetowide-spreadcorruptionconcerns. Thenarrativesmainlypertainingto pro-nuclear coalitionhasinLithuaniaasitnever proceededwithnationalnuclearprojects,but The storyaboutthe and opinionpieces.Nuclearprojectisportrayedasa competing withwar,slaveryandmythicalmetaphorsthatareparticularlyeloquentineditorials on thecriticalcamprarelybaresanopenlypejorativecharacter.Thedivergingnarrativesare Moreover althoughthetoneofLithuaniandebateisalsogettingemotionalattimes,attack mainstream media. questioning thefeasibilityofprojectnotonlyinpagesalternative,butalso Department oftheBankLithuaniaandsomeotherprominentfinancialanalystswhoare physicists whoisalsorepresentingtheNationalAcademyofSciences,headEconomic Belarusian debatedescribedbelow,theLithuaniandiscoursealsofeaturesoneoftopnuclear trustworthiness ofdiscourseactors,especiallyintheanti-nuclearcoalition.Incontrastwith one rathersignificantdifferenceamongthetwonationaldiscoursesintermsofcredibilityand Lithuanian politicalleadersarepressedtopresenteconomicfeasibilitystudies.Thereisatleast more equalterms.Ratherthanonlyjustifyingwhynuclearisthebesttechnologicaloption, such line-updoescreatemoreopportunitiestochallengethedominantpro-nuclearcoalitionon less monopolyoveracredibleargumentassuch,comparedtoscientistsinBelarus.Itseemsthat Political leadersandofficialsarethemainpro-nu 6.2.1 dependence onthe referring tothe the nationallevel.Onesuchillustrativeexamplecommonforbothcountriesisanti-nuclearactors discourses. Second,thelanguageplaysanimportantroleindiscursivestruggletakingplaceon can beconsideredindicativeofthepowercertainactorshaveoverotherinstudiednational previous Chapteroutlinethedominantactorsandthemesmainlyinanalyticaltextssampled,they Belarus theissueisdiscussedinamoretechnocraticway.Althoughtables5.1and5.8 First, itcanbearguedthattheverynatureofdebateinLithuaniaismoredemocratic,while “monstrous” “giant”

thatisthreateningto Lithuania and “hellish” “dependence onRussia”, “East” “Leo LT” reactorthatmayeventuallybringonthe orsimplya “enslave” consortiumcanbeconsideredsymbolicofarelative strengththe Lithuaniaandturnintoan whiletoppoliticalleadersdiplomaticallypreferringtosay “single source”. clear advocatesinLithuania,buttheyhavemuch

“three-headed dragon” Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus “nuclear winter” “energy desert”; fightingRussiangas others dread it as a . 115

CEU eTD Collection nuclear projectsina foreign medicaldoctorsorrandomlyquotedsociological analysts.Theyraiseconcernsabout comprised ofwearylocalcitizens,churchleaders, concernedintellectuals,retiredphysicists,and Meanwhile, theopposingcamphaslessleverageintermsofcredibility,sinceitismostly solve energyproblemsinanycountryandjust “babushka” promoting suchviews.Thosewhoopposenuclearhaveknowledgearecalled today tonotallowthis” political banditsofasecondChernobylwave.[…]Iwilluseallresourcesandpowerinmypossession 2007). Otheropponentsareportrayedaspeoplepursuingpublicityorpersonalbenefit: These areeitherbrainlesspeopleorwithoutconsciousness,andmostprobablyeither” manner. Forexample,heattacksanti-nuclearscientistsforscaremongering: straightforward abouthisopinioncriticswhomheattimesaddressesinaratherpejorative security. Moreover,whileheleavesthetechnicaldiscussiontoscientists,Lukashenkoisrather was scientistswhosuggestednuclearasthemostsuitableoptionforstrengtheningenergy Their argumentativepositionisstrengthenedbyPresidentLukashenkohimselfwhonotesthatit the criticalpublictoconfront. Government officialsandengineerswhoarecomplementingtheirargumentsalsodifficultfor “psychological”, political argumentationcitedintheliteraturereview,theyrejectanypublicdoubtsas they becomemoredifficulttochallenge.SimilarlylikeinthestudybyWindisch(2008)on educating ratherthanjustifying,theygainanadvantageofframingnuclearthemesinthewaythat chosen investor.Sincemostoftentheyareexpressingtheirviewsunilaterallybyexplainingand answer mostofthenuclear-relatedquestionsbeitsafety,wastemanagementoradvantaged denounces theirargumentsasill-informedoranti-state.Elitescientistsareputattheforefrontto given theroleofstatemediathatexcludescriticalactorsfrompublicdiscourseor much moredifficulttoquestionandcounter-arguedominatingproponentsofnuclear,especially A technocraticdiscourseisunfoldingintextssampledfromtheBelarusianmedia.Hereitproves 6.2.2 Vaida Pilibaityte 116 as in thenextsectionfurther down. of bothcountriesareputting atplaytotheadvantageof-pronuclearcoalition. Theyarediscussed However, apartfromthe abovementionedpowerimbalances,thereareinstruments thatmedia “nuclear physicist”. form ofunderliningthebackgroundleader ofaRussiangreenNGOwhoispresentedas “radiophobia”. dangers orbecominganother

“professionals”

Belarus ) and Someattemptstoemphasizethecredibilityof alternativeexpertisecomeina notbasedon whodonotsuccumbto

“green loudmouths(rus.“zelionyiekrikuny”)” “closed society” (Krylovich 2008a). “hard facts” “black Chernobylholeonthemap” , secrecyofdecisionmaking,underestimatedenvironmental or simply

Pro-nuclear mediacommentatorsalsocontributeto “want Belarusianstoliveatthesplinter” “radiophobia” “silly”. Belarusianscientistsrefertothemselves who haven’tnotsuggestedaviableway (Ermak 2008;Lukashenko2008). that areeasytodenounceas “Are thesescientists?! (Kriat2008). “old ladies” (Lukashenko These are (rus. CEU eTD Collection The leadingLithuanianprivately-owned 6.3.1 attacking thecritics. dailies areproducingexclusivelypro-nuclearstorylines,leavingoutscepticalargumentsand The studyshowsthatdespitethissignificantdisparity,boththeLithuanianandBelarusianleading media ranksamongthelowestisalsoworthwhile. Lithuanian mediawhichisconsideredamongthemostfreeinworldandBelaruswhere some extentthedegreeofinfluencequotedactorsaswell.Thereforecomparingdebatein structure inthestudiedcountriescanhelptounderstandoriginofrecurringnarratives; power struggle.Theinformationaboutmediasystem,regulation,circulationandownership contributes toknowledgeproductionandoftenbecomesanideologicalmanipulationtoolinthe As notedintheliteraturereview,mediaasadiscoursesceneandanactorsubstantially 6.3 inconsistencies andallows vagueandunsubstantiatedpoliticalclaimsgounchallenged. national capacitytoimplement nuclearprojectoralternatives.Medialargely disregardspolicy depth analysisofthegovernment’s energypolicies,nucleartechnology, globaltrends,and Lithuania. Evenbackgroundstoriesoftenaremere collectionsofdifferentviewsratherthanin- formal regulatorymediafreedomjournalistshardly doagoodjobwhencoveringenergyissuesin surrounding energysecurityoptionsornuclear power inparticular.Furthermore,despitethe media, buttheirjournalistsfocusmoreonenergy politicsratherthanthevarietyofissues However, themostanti-nuclearstorylinesoriginate inalternativepublicly-fundedanalytical ownership thatappearstobemoreresistant national businessinfluenceontheircontent. The discursivestorylinesaremuchmorediverse intheLithuanianonlinemediaofforeign subjective author’sopinionsthatqualitymediaissupposedtoadhereto. rather crudeviolationofastandardrequirementjournalisticethictoseparatefactsform inclinations ofthisnewspaperwereobviousnotonlyineditorials,butthenewsitemsaswell,a denouncing themas consistently praisingthenationalbusinesscorporation(Sotvarien that wastakingplaceintheparliamentandreflectedothermediaoutlets,thisdaily completely differentprinciples” help thecountryto the consolidating publicandprivateenterprisesas propaganda purposes.Enthusiasticjournalistsdescribetheplantobuildanewplantby for itsownbenefitinasimilarwayanautocraticgovernmentisusingmedia example oftheextenttowhichbusinessandgoverningpartycanmanipulatepresscoverage “project ofthecentury”

The roleofmedia Lithuania “escape fromtheRussianenergytrapandintegrateintoEUsystemoperatingon (Sotvarien “bristling” (Sotvarien and ė 2008)thatwill ė 2008).Amidtheheateddebateaboutlegitimacyofdeal “panicking loudmouths” “Lietuvos rytas” “revolutionary” “cut theumbilicalcordwithmotherRussia” hasatag (Lietuvosrytas2007) Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus (Ignatavi “independent” ė 2008a)andlashingcriticsby č ius 2008).Pro-nuclear , butisarathergood , purported itas and 117

CEU eTD Collection state securitywithoutmuch referencetofactsbacksuchclaims(Scraseand Ockwell2009b). policies arepromotedusing adversarialargumentation(Windisch2008)and pinnedtoenergyor nuclear energyisperceived asasourceofnationalprideinLithuaniaand Belarus,pro-nuclear Rinkevi 2007) or media andlackof marked bynon-transparentdecision-making,dominance ofnucleartechnocracy,pro-nuclear many traitsoftheearlydaysnucleardevelopment inFrance,FinlandandtheUKwhereitwas rather thanrisksinLithuaniannuclearenergydebate. TheBelarusiandiscourseseemstobare similar studiesreviewedinChapter2.Thisworkcomplements similarfindingsbyBalo In summary,thecharacteristicsofLithuanianand Belarusiannuclearenergydiscoursesmirror nature ofthepoliticalsystemincountry. scientists andexpertswillingtopubliclycriticizeoranalyzethegovernment’spoliciesdue explain thisstyleofreportinginBelarusianmediacouldbealimitedavailabilitypoliticians, many communitiesinterestedindiscussingsomethingoddlycalledtheEIA” watching ofthetelevisionbroadcastingpressconferencePresidentonallthreechannels,therearenottoo impact assessment: nuclear powerprojectandisencouragedtoshowaninitiativediscusstheenvironmental journalist isscepticaltowardstheofficialstatingthatanyonecanobtaininformationon apart fromastandardtechniqueofprovidinganalternativeopinion.Asexample,one author’s sarcasmappearstobeawayattractcriticalattentionflawedofficialstatements opinion. Onlyinthiscasetheyaremostlydirectedagainstthegovernment’snuclearplans.The It isworthnotingthattheprivately-ownedBelarusianmediaalsotendingtomixfactsand form of unnamed analytical textsfromthispaperactuallyquotecriticalexpertsorscientists.Instead,referringto Belorussia” An illustrativeexampleofmediamanipulationsinBelaruscanbethestate-owned 6.3.2 Vaida Pilibaityte 118 interviewee’s argumentreceptionwithcommentslike not uncommonforjournaliststosometimessubtlyimplyorsuggestthe follows ascenariowhere sounding polemicdialoguebetweenapro-nuclearcitizen[himself]andsceptic[hisfriend]that In oneinstanceajournalistof theoretically perfectlystandardinterviewgenre,onlywithideologicallypre-determinedpurpose. nuclear poweropinions.Thiswayadiscursiveillusionofdebateiscreatedutilizingotherwise leaders. Anothersimilartechniqueobservedisaninterviewwithseveralintervieweessharingpro- position ofpower,authorityandexpertisetoanswer:scientists,governmentofficialsorpolitical

č Belarus ius (2009)aboutthedominanceof “logical andwelleconomicallygroundedstance” “critical” andthewayitmanagestoimitatepublic “experts” interviewer’squestionstobe orconcernedmembersofthepublicsomecriticalargumentsareincludedina “counter-expertise” “It isobviousthatinthecountrywherecitizenactivitiesmainlytakeformofcollective “reasonable” “Sovetskaia Belorussia” (Lehtonen andMartiskainen2010).Justlikeinthese countries personconvincesthe “talking elite” (Minchenko2008). “explained” goesasfartopublishingafictitious- “a seriousargument” “debate” andfocusoneconomicspolitics and “ill-informed” . Notably,noneofthesampled (Krylovich2009b).Onewayto “clarified” (LegkaiaandKirilenko sceptic.Moreover,itis bythoseputinthe “right” “Sovetskaia č wayof kait ė and CEU eTD Collection 7.1 debate. Finally theanalysisdrewsomeconclusionsaboutroleofpoliticalsystemandmediain and winadiscursivestruggleovercredibility,acceptabilitytrustinLithuaniaBelarus. National analysisalsoexaminedargumentativestrategiesusedbyactorstopromotetheirviews waste management,publicacceptance,nationalcapacitytobuildaplantandseveralothers. nationally suchasenergysecurity,dependenceonRussia,globalindustrytrends,economics, Comparative analysisfocusedontheinterpretationsofvariousrecurringthemesgloballyand coalitions foundintheglobaldiscourse. The resultsofthisanalysiswereinterpretedbycomparingwithsimilardiscursivestorylinesand 2006-2009. Pro-nuclearandanti-nuclearcoalitionshavebeendescribedinLithuaniaBelarus. storylines andcoalitions.Nationaldiscourseswerestudiedfrom157mediatextspublishedin Discourse analysisconductedinthisstudyreliedonHajer’sanalyticalconcepts–discursive argumentative powerstruggle,determinedbycredibility,acceptabilityandtrustamongactors. problem solutions.Withinthisanalyticalframeworkpolicy-makingisunderstoodasapartof discourse actorstodefinepolicyissuesthatformcommunicativenetworkspromotecertain (1995) theoreticalconceptsofdiscursivestorylinesandcoalitions:simplifiednarrativesusedby Belarus incontrastwithaglobalnuclearenergydiscourse.TheanalysiswasbasedonHajer’s This thesisaimedtoexaminetherecentnationalnuclearenergydiscoursesinLithuaniaand 7 development andespecially socialchallengessuchaspublicdistrustinnuclear projects. much greateremphasisontheeconomicandtechnological uncertaintieslinkedwithnuclear the growingdemandandmitigateclimatechange. Instead, itcontainsasetofstorylinesputting The third, unresolved radioactivewastemanagementissues and riskofthenuclearweaponsproliferation. ongoing projects,thelegacyofChernobyl,pollution andrisksthroughoutthefuelcycle, produces electricity,hencethelowGHGmitigation potential.Theyalsotalkaboutfailing energy asacostlyanddangerouswasteoftime. Discourseactorsstressthatnuclearonly technology andwaningpublicconcerns.The most cases,withexcellentsafetyrecord,feasiblewastemanagementoptions,promisingfuture nuclear characterized byvariousdegreesofconfidenceaboutthefuturenucleardeployment.The The threeglobalnucleardiscoursecoalitions,pro-nuclear,anti-nuclearandmoderateare

CONCLUSIONS ANDRECOMMENDATIONS Global nuclearenergydiscourseanalysis coalition arguesthatnuclearenergyiswellposedforrevival,economicallyviablein moderate coalitiondoesnotrejectnuclearsolutionasaway tosecuresupplies,meet anti-nuclear discoursecoalitionrejectsnuclear Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus pro- 119

CEU eTD Collection In thestudiedsamplemostnarrativesarefocusingongeopoliticsofenergy.The nuclear andanti-nuclear. analysis ofthesample,recurringstorylinesweregroupedintotwodiscoursecoalitions:pro- main country’selectricityprovideruntil2010,standsoutasacountry-specifictopic.Basedonthe other topicsdominatethereviewedtexts.DecommissioningofIgnalinaNPP,thatwas geopolitics, ownandneighbours’nuclearprojects,economiccosts,globaltrendsseveral causing peaksindiscussion.Thethemesrelatedtoenergysecurity,dependenceonRussia, on analyticalpublicationsfromtheperiodof2007-2009ascharacterizedbynationalevents The Lithuaniannucleardiscourse 7.2 Vaida Pilibaityte 120 economic costs,national capacitytoimplementanuclearproject,potential investors,energy media outletsoverthe period 2006-2009.Inthesepublicationsthe recurring themesare For theBelarusiandiscourse analysis79mediaarticlesweresampledfrom thethreenational 7.3 contained predominantlypro-nuclearnarratives. publicly-funded analyticalweekly,whiletextsinthe leadingprivatenationaldaily The majorityofcriticalargumentswerefoundin thearticlesfromonlinemediaand scientists, economistsandjournalistsonbothsides. with greenentrepreneursareontheanti-nuclearside,thereequallycrediblepoliticians, politicians, officialsandbusinessmenseemtodominatethepro-nuclearcoalition,whileNGOs, links withRussia]strategyusedagainsttheopponents.Althoughpowerfulactorssuchas relation toRussia;therearesomeexamplesofverbalattackandexposure[accusingforhaving Eloquent languageandsymbolsofpoverty,slaverywarareverycommonespeciallyin economics, linkingtechnologicalaspectsandriskswithneighbouringprojectsforthemostpart. As mentionedearlier,thenuclearenergydebateinLithuaniaismainlyaboutpoliticsand of lackingnationalcapacitytohandletheconstructionanewplant. controversies surroundingtheIgnalinaNPPdecommissioningprocessareseenasanindication mentions abouteconomicconsequencesofafailedprojectsuchastheoneinFinland.The absence ofeconomicfeasibilitystudiesandpublicdiscussiononalternativeoptions.Thereare waste isarticulatedastechnicalandsolved.Meanwhile, project isexpressedduetoothercountriesplanningnuclearplantsintheregion.Theproblemof detrimental relianceonRussianelectricityandgasimports.Asenseofurgencytogowiththe is putontheenergygapoccurringafterclosureofexistingIgnalinaNPPandpotentially from Russiaandmaintaintheregionalleadingelectricityexporter’srole.Aconsiderableemphasis discourse storylinesdepictnuclearenergyasthe

Lithuanian nuclearenergydiscourseanalysis Belarusian nuclearenergydiscourseanalysis

analysis wasbasedon78nationalmediatextssampledfocusing only viablewaytosecureenergyindependence anti-nuclear storylines pointoutthe “Lietuvos rytas” pro-nuclear

CEU eTD Collection energy showsthat A closerlookathowglobalandnationaldiscourse actorsdiscussdifferentaspectsofnuclear change onthenationallevel. on bothglobalandnationallevel,whilegeopolitics playsamoreimportantrolethanclimate for nuclearenergyinLithuaniaandBelarus.Energysecurityisasinglesharedmotivatingfactor Comparative analysisrevealsdisparitiesbetweenthemainglobalandnationaldiscursivedrivers 7.4 The studiedBelarusiandiscourseispredominantlyeconomicandtechnical. narratives weregroupedintopro-nuclearandanti-nucleardiscoursecoalitions. security, dependenceonRussiaandplantlocation,butalsoanumberofotherissues.The technology. The own plant,andthatRussiaistheonlyproviderofaffordabletestedmodernnuclear common argumentsarethattheworldturningtonuclear,Belaruscapableofbuildingits low-cost electricitygenerationandnationalscientificeconomicdevelopment.Equally knowledge. Modernnuclearenergyissaidtobesafetheonlyknownwaysecuresteadyand storylines promotethisenergysourceasthemostfavouredoptionbasedonscientific substantiate nationalpro-nuclear policies.Forexample,theanalysisshowsthat pro-nuclearactors into unquestionable risks arecontrollable.They tendtooversimplifyindustry’sglobalfuture and Belaruspromotethisenergysourceasthecheapest andthemostreliable,claimingthatall (2008). Inotherwords,pro-nuclearpoliticians,officials, scientistsandbusinessmeninLithuania daily, whilealternativedebateisconfinedtotheprivateandpublicly-fundedmedia. Similarly totheLithuaniandiscourse,mostpro-nuclearstorylinesappearinleadingstate-run gain morecredibilityandtrust. emphasize theireducation[e.g.NGOmemberspresentingthemselvesasnuclearphysicists]to as predominant strategyofpro-nuclearcoalitionisattackanddenouncementtheopposingside who aremainlyexpressingtheirconcerns,doubtsanddiscontentaboutbeingignored.The the anti-nuclearside,therearemainlyNGOs,sociologistsandpoliticalanalystslocalcitizens are theonesmainlybringinguptechnicalaspectsofreactorsafetyandwastemanagement.On pro-nuclear scientistsandofficialswhoareattheforefrontofdecisiontobuildaplant.They Technocratic natureoftheBelarusiandiscoursecanbemainlyattributedtodominance status, ignoredpublicopinion,andthedangerofanotherChernobyl-likedisaster. being linkedwithsubstantialrisks.Therearenarrativesaboutmorecountriesseekingnon-nuclear diminishing uraniumresources,thatpartneringwithRussiaisdangerousandnucleartechnology “radiophobic”,

Comparative nuclearenergydiscourseanalysis ill-informed andlackingnecessaryexpertise,whileanti-nuclearsideistryingto anti-nuclear pro-nuclear de factotrends, coalitionarguesthatnuclearfuelpricesarerisingdueto storylinescontainso-called brush offnationalconstraints anddownplayuncertaintiesto “nirvana concepts” Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus projections describedbyMolle andturnthem pro-nuclear 121

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 122 growth projectionsmademainlyfortheOECDcountriesandAsia.Conversely, in thetwocountriesbasedtheirpoliciesonmostoptimisticglobalassumptionsandcapacity effort. on nuclearenergy.Therefore, amoreinclusiveandinformeddecision-making requiresmore misinterpretations ofglobal trendsandknowledgegapsseemtooccurin both nationaldebates the debatebothindemocraticandpoliticallyconstrained publicsphere.Asaresult,significant coupled withlackofspecializedreportingskillscan havesimilarlyadverseeffectonaqualityof system doesinatechnocraticdebate.However, it seemsthatpoliticalandcorporateinterests opportunities tointroducenewargumentsand challenge dominantnarrativesthanautocratic democratic andcomprehensivepublicdebateon nuclearenergy,itdoesprovideformore It canbearguedthatalthoughpressfreedomin democratic systemdoesnotinitselfguarantee energy security. few exceptions,itrarelyprovidesanin-depth,contextualizedanalysisofnuclearenergyand energy. Nonetheless,eveninLithuania,wheremediahasmoreregulatoryfreedom,apartfrom views andonlinemediaseemstobethemostvibrantintermsofcompetingnarrativesonnuclear pro-nuclear storylinesandignoringcritics,thoughsmalleralternativeoutletscontainmorediverse In bothcountriesleadingmediatendstomanipulatethedebatebypredominantlypromoting opposition astheyareconfrontedbyseveralhighprofilescientistsandeconomists. democratic characteristics.Pro-nuclearpoliticiansandofficialsfacesomemorecredible Russia, butmorediscourseactorsaredebatingonequalgroundsandthushas dominated byverypronouncedgeopoliticalargumentsmainlyrelatedtotheperceivedthreatof to denounceanycriticismasill-informed technocratic natureofthedebatedominatedbygovernmentscientistsandofficialswhotend discourse coalitionswithequallycrediblearguments.Thissituationoccursbecauseofthe In general, columns andopinionpieces,butcanbefoundeveninthespeechesbyPresidentofBelarus. used towardstheopponents.Defamatoryandderogatorystatementsarecommonineditorial confrontational styleofargumentationcharacterizedbysarcasm,attackandexposuretechniques debate inthesecountries.Thereareplentyexamplesfrombothcountriesillustrating differences amongstrategiesforachievingthepro-nuclear although thetwonationalnucleardiscourseshavemanysimilarities,therearesomesignificant The analysisalsolookedatargumentationinLithuanianandBelarusiandiscoursefoundthat Lithuanian discourse. global discoursearehardlypresentinnationaldiscourses,withanexceptionoffewstorylines contain manyconcernsaboutthelackofpublicinvolvement.Thestorylinesfrom nuclear astooexpensiveanddangerous.Additionally,nationalanti-nucleardiscoursestorylines narratives inbothcountriesmirrorthosefoundsimilarglobaldiscoursecoalitionthatrejects

inBelarus itismoredifficultfornationalanti-nuclearactorstochallengedominant “radiophobia” . Meanwhile discourse hegemony in Lithuania ordominanceinthe thedebateis anti-nuclear moderate

CEU eTD Collection view ofregionalsecurity. development ofenergypoliciesinthesecountriesisequallyimportantalsofromthepoint Belarus. Nevertheless,giventhenatureofpowersourcesuchasnuclear,understanding It isreasonabletoexpectimprovementsbemoreviableincountrieslikeLithuaniathan decision-making. way tofillknowledgegapsoccurringduelackofqualitymediacoverageandnon-democratic Promoting medialiteracyandabilitytoindependentlyseekforalternativeinformationisanother specialized socialnetworkshaveapotentiallystrongroletoplayforincreasedpublicawareness. sustainable energyaswell.Moreover,analternative,particularlyinternet-basedmediaand training forjournalistscouldimprovemorecriticalreportingandeventuallyapublicdebateon manipulation toolsevenincountriesrankinghighpressfreedomlists.Specializedprofessional generation. Moreover,theleadingprintmediaoutletsseemtobecomeprimarydiscourse issues, butmostcitizensfeeluninformedeveninthestateswithalonghistoryofnuclearpower According toEuropeansurveys,mediaisthemainsourceofinformationonnuclearenergy decision-making morethanitcurrentlydoes. constructive andtrustworthyalternativeexpertiseinthedebateonnuclearenergyshouldinform economic, technologicalandsocialaspectsofnucleardeployment,therolecredible, policies withgraveeconomicandsocialconsequencesinalong-term.Consideringpolitical, nuclear energyproject.Greaterattentiontotheseissuescouldhelpavoidill-informed national economicandtechnologicalcapacities,socialconstraintstoimplementtheirown national pro-nuclearactorsdolittlejusticetothecontext.Theyseemundermine This studyshowsthattheglobalandnationaldiscursivedriversfornuclearenergydiffer,but 7.5

Recommendations Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus 123

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 124

CEU eTD Collection Balo Ba Atomby.net 2010.OO“Ekodom”cherezsudtrebuetpredostavitinformaciubezogranicheniidlia Antal, M.andHukkinen,J.I.2010.Theartofthecongnitewartosaveplanet. Anshelm, J.andGalis,V.2009.Thepoliticsofhigh-levelnuclearwastemanagementinSweden:confined Amin, T.G.2009.Conceptualmetaphormeetsconceptualchange. Addams, H.andProops,J.L.R.2000. ABB Group(ABB).2010.EstlinkHVDCLightlinkTallinn:TheGroup. BIBLIOGRAPHY Balžekien Bal Balžekien ______. 2010b.Prizyvaiupravookhranitelnyeorganyostavitzhurnalstovvpokoe...[Iurge Belarusian AssociationofJournalists(BAJ).2010a. Barnaby, F.andKemp,J., eds.2007. č č iauskas, V.,Borisevi ytien č kait AES.html [consulted14April2010]. cherez-sud-trebuet-predostavit-informatsiyu-bez-ogranicheniy-dlya-ekspertizyi-belorusskoy- Belarusian NPPthroughcourt]. ekspertizy belorusskoiAES[“Ekodom”demandsunrestrictedinformationfortheassessmentof press). research versusinthewild. viešojoje nuomon Publishing. 28 February2010]. URL: http://www.abb.com/cawp/gad02181/fd74043145b157aec1256fa30036f52f.aspx[consulted Technology. their reflectionintheLithuaniansocietalviews]. PhDdissertation,KaunasUniversityof Journalism Review http://baj.by/m-p-viewpub-tid-1-pid-8278.html [consulted13April2010]. administrative bodiestoleavejournalistsalone...]. Belarusian AssociationofJournalists. Lietuvoje [Auditontheuseofrenewableenergysources]. visuomen the emerging“talkingandactingclasses”inrisksociety]. [Nuclear powerdiscourseinLithuanianmassmediaandpublicopinion:attitudinaldivergences Klimato kaita:socialiniorizikossuvokimoiržiniasklaidos diskursoLietuvojekonfig Oxford ResearchGroup. Mintis irveiksmas change: socialriskperceptionsandmassmediadiscourse configurationsinLithuania]. ė ė ė ė , A.2006.MassmediainLithuania:changes,development,andjournalismculture. , R.andRinkevi , A.,Telešien , A.2006.Socialinisbranduolin ė s poži 2(22). 8 (190). ū ė riuose č ė je: nuostat ius, A.,andGaitanži,A.2009. , A.,Rinkevi č ius, L.2009.Branduolin į IgnalinosAE[Socialperceptionsofnuclearrisk:theoretical insightsand ų takoskyrosir„kalban č Secure energy?Civilnuclearpower, securityandglobalwarming Social discourseandenvironmentalpolicy ius, L.,Balo Atomby.net Environmental PolicyandGovernance ė s rizikossuvokimas:teorin , March18.URL:http://atomby.net/OO-Ekodom- č Vilnius:NationalAuditOfficeofLithuania. kait ė Mass mediainBelarus2009.Annualreport s energetikosdiskursaiLietuvosžiniasklaidojeir Atsinaujinan Belarusian AssociationofJournalists ė č , R.,Mick i ų j ų klas Filosofija. Sociologija. Human Development ė Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus č s“ formavimasisrizikosvisuomen i ū ų ė energijosištekli nas, A.,andMurphy,J.W.2008. s į žvalgos irj 19:269-280. . Cheltenham:EdwardElgar Ecological Economics 52:165-197. T20(4):259-270. ų ų potencialonaudojimas refleksijaLietuvos ū , April2.URL: racijos [Climate . Oxford: Sociologija. . Minsk: European (in 125 ė je

CEU eTD Collection Belorusy iRynok.2007.Khronika“neftianoivoiny”[Timelineofthe“OilWar”]. Belarusian InstituteforStrategicStudies(BISS).2007.Theenergysecurityasanewpriority:takingthe Baltic NewsService(BNS).2010a.D.Grybauskait Byrne, J.andToly,N.2006.Energyasasocialproject: Recoveringdiscourse.In ______. 2010.Onas[Aboutus] Minsk:BelorusyiRynok.URL: Bickerstaff, K.,Lorenzoni,I.,Pidgeon,N.F.,Poortinga,W.,andSimmons,P.2008.Reframingnuclear Berg, A.2009.Thediscursivedimensionsofadecentdeal:Hownuclearenergyevolvedfrom Bennett, J.andChaloupka,W.1993. ______. 2010b.MezhpravitelstvennoesoglasheniesRossieiostroitelstvebelorusskoiAESmozhetbyt ______. 2010a.Lukashenko:vBelarusiostalissotnikilogramovfaktizheskioruzheinogourana Belarusian TelegraphAgency(BELTA).2009.Beltransgaz,Gazpromsignsupplementarycontractto Bell, A.andGarrett,P.2003.Mediadiscourse:acriticaloverview.In BelaPAN. 2010.Semashko:Belaruspredpologaetvozmozhnoeuchastiefrantsuzkoikompaniiv Barry, J.,Ellis,G.,andRobinson,C.2008.Coolrationalitieshotair:arhetoricalapproachto Vaida Pilibaityte 126

nepriklausomybes-pradzios-metais.d?id=27213047 [consulted21January2010]. http://www.delfi.lt/news/economy/energetics/dgrybauskaite-2010-uosius-vadina-energetines- independence]. pradžios metais[Grybauskait 3Aenergy&Itemid=28&lang=en [consulted5March2010]. http://belinstitute.eu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=45%3Anone&catid=10% "Directive No.3"seriously?Vilnius:BelarusianInstituteforStrategicStudies.URL: Publishers. environment andsocietyinconflict http://www.belmarket.by/ru/1/240/39/ [consulted17 April2010]. 15-22. Public UnderstandingofScience power intheUKenergydebate:nuclearpower,climatechangemitigationandradioactivewaste. Finland environmental enemytoclimateremedyintheparliamentofFinland.In University ofMinnesotaPress. http://news.tut.by/158672.html [consulted2March2010]. might besignedwithRussiainFebruary]. podpisano vfevrale[IntergovernmentalagreementregardinthecontructionofBelarusianNPP 2010]. URL: http://naviny.by/rubrics/politic/2010/04/14/ic_news_112_329313/[consulted21April [Lukashenko: Belarusstillhashundredsofkilogramsweapons-gradeuranium]. http://www.belta.by/en/news/econom/?id=328811 [consulted21May2010]. define thisyear’sgaspriceforBelarus. A. BellandP.Garrett,1-21.Oxford:BlackwellPublishers. the NPPproject]. stroitelstve AES[Semashko:BelarusisconsideringpossibleparticipationoftheFrenchcompanyin understanding debatesonrenewableenergy. 2010]. , ed.M.KojoandT.Litmanen,91-125.NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan. TUT.BY 17(2):145-169. , April2.URL:http://news.tut.by/165982.html[consulted13 , ed.J.Byrne,N.TolyandL.Glover,9,1-32.London: Transaction BNS ė says2010willbethe year ofthebeginningenergy In thenatureofthings;language,politicsandenvironment , December 26. URL: Global EnvironmentalPolitics ė 2010-uosiusvadinaenergetin TUT.BY (Belorusskoetelerafnoeagentstvo) BELTA Approaches tomediadiscourse 8(2):67-98. , February2.URL: The renewalofnuclearpowerin Transforming power:Energy, Belorusy iRynok ė s nepriklausomyb Naviny.by . Minneapolis: , April14. , January . URL: , ed. ė s CEU eTD Collection Cotter, C.2001.Discourseandmedia.In ______. 2005. Bodansky, D.2002.Nuclearpowerinthecontextofcriticalglobalproblems.In ______. 2010b.G.Mažeikavadovauja„Lietuvosryto“administracijai[Mažeikaisheadingthe Commission oftheEuropeanCommunities(CEC).2008. Center forNonproliferationStudies(CNS).2007. Burr, V.1995. Bulkeley, H.2000.DiscoursecoalitionsandtheAustraliancimatepolicynetwork. Brauch, H.G.,Spring,U.O.,Grin,J.,Mesjasz,C.,Kameri-Mbote,P.,Chadha-Behera,N.,Chourou,B., Bouzarovski, S.2010.Thediscursiveproductionofpost-communisturbanenergytransitions.Paper Boykoff, M.T.,Frame,D.,andRandalls,S.2010.Discursivestabilitymeetsclimateinstability:acritical Čė Chuprov, V.A.,Bodrov,O.V.,andShkadiuk,I.E.2009. Council oftheEuropeanUnion(CEU).2009. Dahlgren, P.2002.Thepublic sphereashistoricalnarrative.In sna, B.,Davulien Academic Publishers. power inthe21stcentury /37962 [consulted28January2010]. administration of“Lietuvosrytas“]. C: GovernmentandPolicy security andpeace.Berlin:Springer. health andwatersecurityconcepts and Krummenacher,H.,eds.2009. Kingdom, 25-26February. and wherearethefuturesocialscienceresearchagendas?”,UniversityofSussex,Brighton,United presented atSussexEnergyGroupconference“Energytransitionsinaninterdependentworld:what Environmental Change exploration oftheconcept“climatestabilization”incontemporaryclimatepolicy. 6 March2010]. http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Belarus/Nuclear/chronology_1996-2000.html [consulted Institute CenterforNonproliferationStudies.URL: H.E. Hamilton,416-431.Oxford:BlackwellPublishers. scenarios] i innovatsionnyiistsenarii[Reducingconsumptionofnaturalgas intheRepublicofBelarus:nuclearandinnovation [consulted 2March2010]. http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/trans/106225.pdf Brussells: CounciloftheEuropeanUnion.URL: and solidarityactionplan. ed. D.McQuail,195-200.London: Sage. Lithuanian EnergyInstitute. . Minsk:Dekomatom. An introductiontosocialconstruction Nuclear energy:Principles,practices,andprospects ė , L.,andAliulis,K.2004. 20:53–64. , ed.B.N.Kursunoglu,S.L.MintzandA.Perlmutter.NewYork:Kluwer 18:727-748. Brussels: CommissionoftheEuropeanCommunities. . EditedbyH.G.Brauch.Hexagonseriesonhumanandenvironmental The handbookofdiscourseanalysis Facing globalenvironmentalchange:Environmental,human,energy,food, BNS . London:Routhledge. Lietuvos branduolin , January5.URL:http://www.bernardinai.lt/straipsnis/- Council meetingontransport,telecommunicationsandenergy. Belarus: nuclearchronology. Snizhenie potrebleniaprirodnogogazavBelarusi:iadernyii Second strategicenergyreview.AnEUsecurity . NewYork:Springer. McQuail's readerinmasscommunication theory ė praeitis[Lithuaniannuclearpast]. Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus , ed.D.Schiffrin,Tannenand Monterey,C.A.:Monterey Environment andPlanning The challengestonuclear Kaunas: Global 127 ,

CEU eTD Collection ______. 2003.Principlesofcriticaldiscourseanalysis.In ______. 2001b.MultidisciplinaryCDA:apleafordiversity.In ______. 2001a.Criticaldiscourseanalysis.In Dijk, vanT.A.1997.Discourseasinteractioninsociety.In Devine Wright,P.2007. Delfi.lt. 2010.Elektrosjung Damulyt Vaida Pilibaityte 128 ______. 1997. Dryzek, J.S.1994. Down JonesNewswires(DJN).2010.Germangovernmentsaysnodecisionmadeonnuclearlifespan. Eerkens, J.W.2006. Ekodom. 2010.Zakliucheniekomissiiobshchestvennoiekologicheskoiekspetizyproektastroitelstva Ebinger, C.andMassy,K.2009. Duvold, K.andJurkynas,M.2004.Lithuania.In Dulinets, L.V.2008.ObshchestvennoemneniepovoprosustroitelstvaAESvBelarusi[Publicopinionon ______. 2008.Lithuania:Dirtyenergy. Economist IntelligenceUnit(EIU).2007. Eurobarometer. 2010.

Wodak andM.Meyer,95-120.London:Sage. ed. T.A.vanDijk,2.London:Sage. review jungciai-su-svedija---452-mln-lt.d?id=29649703 [consulted8March2010]. connection withSweden]. Februrary 2010]. Delfi.lt gets thegreenlight Tannen andH.E.Hamilton,352-371.Oxford:BlackweelPublishers. 702794.html?mod=WSJ_latestheadlines [consulted24January2010]. Wall StreetJournalOnline Wetherell, S.TaylorandJ.Yates,300-318.London:Sage. Belarus]. Minsk:Citizensassociation“Ecohouse”. environmental assessmentoftheconstruction nuclearpowerplantintheRepublicof atomnoi elektrostantsiivRespublikeBelarus[Findings bythecommissiononPublic Brookings Institution. Berglund, J.EkmanandF.Aarebrot,133-181.Cheltenham:EdwardElgarPublishingLimited. the newNPPinBelarus]. reliability andquality.Dordrecht:Springer. ė , J.2008.„LeoLT“uždegtažaliašviesa . ManchesterSchoolofEnvironmentandDevelopment,UniversityManchester. , February12.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?id=15941503[consulted28 The politicsoftheEarth:Environmentaldiscourses Discursive democracy The nuclearimperative:Acriticallookattheapproachingenergy crisis Europeans andnuclearsafety Reconsidering publicattitudesandacceptanceofrenewableenergytechnologies:acritical – AdamkushassignedtheamendmentstoLawonNewNuclearPlant]. č iai suŠvedija Energeticheskaia strategia , 26JanuaryURL:http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20100124- Delfi.lt Security implicationsfortheexpansionofnuclearenergy . Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress. . URL:http://www.delfi.lt/news/economy/energetics/elektros- Economist InteligenceUnit Country reports.Lithuania – 452mln.Lt[452millionLitaswillgofortheelectricitygrid . Brussels:TNSOpinionand Social,DGCommunication. – The handbookofdiscourseanalysis The handbookofpoliticalchangeinEasternEurope V.Adamkus pasiraš 4(4):14-16. . Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress. Discourse studies:Amultidisciplinaryintroduction Discourse theoryandpractice:areader , March31. . London:EconomistIntelligenceUnit. Methods ofcriticaldiscourseanalysis ė AE į statymo pataisas[“LeoLT” , eds.D.Schiffrin, . Topicsinsafety,risk, . WashingtonD.C.: , eds.M. , eds.S. , ed.R. , CEU eTD Collection ______. 2010. ______. 2009b.Lithuania.Economicoverview.London:EuropeanBankforReconstructionand ______. 2009a.Belarus.Economicoverview.London:EuropeanBankforReconstructionand European BankforReconstructionandDevelopment(EBRD).2007. Elliott, D.andCook,T.2004.Symbolicpower:ThefutureofnuclearenergyinLithuania. European JournalismCentre(EJC).2009.Medialandscape.Belarus.Maastricht: Fairclough, N.andWodak,R.1997.Discourseassocialinteraction.In ______. 1995. Fairclough, N.1993. ______. 2003.Discourseassocialinteraction.In Foss, N.1999. Finon, D.andRoques,F.2008. Feindt, P.H.andOels,A.2005.Doesdiscoursematter?Discourseanalysisinenvironmentalpolicy Gaidys, V.andRinkevi Fowler, R.1991. Gonchar, O.2009.PreimushchestvaOstovetskoiploshchadki dliastroiFrastvaAES[Advantagesofthe Grist, N.2008.Positioning climatechangeinsustainabledevelopmentdiscourse. Greenpeace. n.d.Whoweare.Amsterdam: GreenpeaceInternational.URL: 2010]. Development. URL:http://www.ebrd.com/country/country/lith/econo.htm[consulted21May 2010]. Development. URLhttp://www.ebrd.com/country/country/belarus/econo.htm[consulted21May experiences andattitudes Centre. URL:http://www.ejc.net/media_landscape/article/belarus/[consulted8April2010]. URL: http://www.ebrd.com/country/country/belarus/[consulted21May2010]. 13 (3):373-399. Dijk. London:Sage. making. Sage. markets. for EnergyStudies. Dvidešimties met Astravets siteforconstructingtheNPP]. Sociologija sociological publicopinionpollsinLithuaniaonthe IgnalinaNuclearPowerPlant]. scares ofChernobyl,thefavouringcheapenergy orsomethingmore?Twentyyearsof Development http://www.greenpeace.org/international/about/our-mission [consulted8March2010]. Cambridge:UniversityofCambrigeElectricityPolicyResearchGroup. Journal ofEnvironmentalPolicyandPlanning 19(4):102-111. Nuclear safetyandinternationalgovernance:RussiaEasternEurope 20:783-803. Language inthenews:discourseandideologypress Critical discourseanalysis:thecriticalstudyoflanguage Country factsheet. Discourse andsocialchange ų visuomen č ius, L.2008. . London:EuropeanBankforReconstructionandDevelopment. Financing arrangementsandindustrialorganisationfornewnuclearbuildinelectricity Belarus.London:EuropeanBankforReconstructionandDevelopment. ė s nuomon Č ernobylio baim . Cambridge:PolityPress. Energeticheskaiastrategia ė s apieIgnalinosAEsociologiniaityrimaiLietuvoje[TThe Critical discourseanalysis 7(3):161-173. ė , pigiosenergijosnaudaarkaikasdaugiau? . London:Longman. . London:Routledge. Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus 2(8):15-18. Critical discourseanalysis Life intransition.Asurveyofpeople’s , ed.T.A.vanDijk.London: . Oxford:OxfordInstitute Journal ofInternational Science asCulture , ed.T.A.van Filosofija. 129

CEU eTD Collection Haiduk, K.,Rakova,E.,andSilitski,V.2009. Haggett, C.andToke,D.2006.Crossingthegreatdivide–usingmulti-methodanalysistounderstand Harré, R.,Brockmeier,J.,andMühlhäusler,P.1999. Hansen, A.1991.Themediaandthesocialconstructionofenvironment. Hajer, M.A.andVersteeg,W.2005.Adecadeofdiscourseanalysisenvironmentalpolitics: Hajer, M.A.1995. ______. 2009. International AtomicEnergyAgency(IAEA).2004.FromObninskbeyond:Nuclearpowerconference Holton, C.W.2005.Powersurge:Renewedinterestinnuclearenergy. Herman, E.andChomsky,N.1988. Hendriks, C.M.2006.Integrateddeliberation:reconcilingcivilsociety'sdualroleindeliberative Gudaitis, R.2009. International Organization forMigration(IMO).2009.Labourmigration.Short overview.Vilnius: International EnergyAgency (IEA).2009. ______. n.d.The“AtomsforPeace”agency.Vienna: InternationalAtomicEnergyAgency.URL: ______. 2010.Powerreactorinformationsystem.Vienna: InternationalAtomicEnergyAgency.URL: Gruževskis, B.,Lazutka,R.,Šileika,A.,Zabarauskait Vaida Pilibaityte 130

opposition towindfarms. Office oftheInspectorJournalisticEthics. 2008 and2007-2008analyticreview"Theguidelinesforthedemocraticpublicinformationculture"]. 443-458. Achievements, challenges,perspectives. Oxford UniversityPress. Institute forStrategicStudies. „Demokratin http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2004/obninsk.html [consulted3March2010]. looks tofuture.Vienna:InternationalAtomicEnergyAgencyURL: (11 November):743-49. Pantheon Books. democracy. Oaks, C.A.:Sage. European CommunitiesinLithuania. Development Programme,MinistryofSocialsecurityandLabour,OfficetheCommission assessment ofalong-termeffecteconomiccrisisonsocialexclusioninLithuania]. atskirties situacijaiLietuvojevertinimas[Fromanalysis-basedpoliticaldialoguetowardseffectivedecision-making.An activities/labour-migration/ [consulted21May2010]. International Organization forMigrationLithuania.URL:http://www.iom.lt/en/iom- http://www.iaea.org/About/index.html [consulted2March 2010]. http://www.iaea.or.at/programmes/a2/ [consulted2 March 2010]. http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Reports/ntr2009.pdf [consulted3March2010]. pagr į sto politikosdialogoikiveiksmingumosprendim ė Political Studies s visuomen The politicsofenvironmentaldiscourse:Ecologicalmodernizationandthepolicyprocess Nuclear technologyreview. 2008 metin ė s informavimokult 54(3):486-509. Public Administration ė žurnalist Manufacturing consent,thepoliticaleconomyofmassmedia World EnergyOutlook2009 ų etikosinspektoriausataskaitair2007-2008analitin ū Vienna:InternationalAtomicEnergyAgency. URL: Journal ofEnvironmentalPolicyandPlanning ros gair Social contractsincontemporaryBelarus ų 84 (1):103-120. pri ė ė Greenspeak. Astudyofenvironmentaldiscourse s“ [Theannualreportbytheinspectorofjournalisticethics, , R.,Pocius,A.,andRosinait ė mimo. Ekonomin . Paris:InternationalEnergy Agency. Environmental HealthPerspectives ė s kriz Media, CultureandSociety ė s ilgalaiki Vilnius:UnitedNations ė , V.2009. 7(3):175-184. . Minsk:Belarusian ų pasekmi Vilnius:The . Thousand Nuo analize . Chicago: ė . Oxford: ų apžvalga socialin 113 13: ė s CEU eTD Collection Kaunas UniversityofTechnology(KTU).2004. Jurait Kojo, M.andLitmanen,T., eds.2009. Kinley, D.,ed.2005. Killingsworth, J.M.andPalmer,J.S.1992. Juozapavi Jørgensen, M.W.2002. Johnson, G.2007.ThediscourseofdemocracyinCanadiannuclearwastemanagementpolicy. Johannesson, I.A.2005.IcelandicnationalismandtheKyotoprotocol:ananalysisofdiscourseon Jewell, J.2009.Capacitiesanddrivingforcesfornuclearpowerinnewcomercountries.Master'sthesis, Jenner, B.andTitscher,S.2000. Jäger, S.2001.Discourseandknowledge:Theoreticalmethodologicalaspectsofacriticaldiscourse Yergin, D.2006.Ensuringenergysecurity. Izadi, F.andSaghaye-Biria,H.2007.AdiscourseanalysisofeliteAmericannewspapereditorials:thecase ______. n.d.History.Geneva:IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChangeURL: Intergovernmental PanelonClimateChange(IPCC).2007. Independent InstituteofSocio-EconomicandPoliticalStudies(IISEPS).2006.Ukreplenie Ignalina NuclearPowerPlant(INPP).2010.IgnalinosAEistorija[HistoryoftheNPP]. Yarrow, G.andNewbery,D.1988.Thepriceofnuclearpower. ė Galutini International Lithuania. IAEA DivisionofPublicInformation. governments ofBelarus,theRussian FederationandUkraine Southern IllinoisUniversityPress. University ofTechnology. Sciences global environmentalchangeinIceland. Central EuropeanUniversity. London: Sage. and dispositiveanalysis.In of Iran’snuclearprogram. http://www.ipcc.ch/organization/organization.htm [consulted8March2010]. change” URL: http://www.iiseps.org/opros44.html[consulted22March2010]. Belarus. Nationalsurvey].Vilnius:IndependentInstituteofSocio-EconomicandPoliticalStudies. proevropeiskikh orientatsiivBelarusi.Natsionalnyiopros[Strengtheningpro-Europeanviewsin [consulted 23February2010]. Visaginas: gnalinaNuclearPowerPlant.URL:http://www.iae.lt/default.asp?lang=3&subsub=6 , K.2008.MediapowerintheLithuaniannewsmarket reconsidered. č ius, R.,ed.2007. . Geneva:IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange. 40:79-99. ų rezultat Chernobyl's legacy:Health,environmentalandsocio-economicimpacts andrecommendationstothe ų ataskaita[Astudyonthecontinueduseofnuclearenergyin Lithuania]. Discourse analysisastheoryandmethod Žiniasklaidos skaidrumas[Mediatransparency] Journal ofCommunicationInquiry Methods oftextanddiscourseanalysis Methods ofcriticaldiscourseanalysis The renewalofnuclearpowerin Finland Ecospeak: rhetoricsandenvironmentalpoliticsinAmerica Foreign Affairs Environmental Politics Branduolin 85(2):69-82. . London:Sage. ė s energetikosnaudojimoLietuvojet . TheChernobylForum2003-2005. Vienna: 31(2):140-165. Working groupIIIreport“Mitigationofclimate Economic Policy . London:Sage. 14(4):495-509. , eds.R.WodakandM.Meyer,33-62. Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus . Vilnius:Eugrimas,Transparency . NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan. Informacijos mokslai 3(6):82-132. Kaunas:Kaunas ę stinumo studija. . Carbondale: 47:121-132. Policy 131

CEU eTD Collection Korosteleva, E.A.,Lawson,C.W.,andMarsh,R.J.,eds.2003. Vaida Pilibaityte 132 Krasauskas, I.2009.Branduolin Kostyugova, V.2009.RussiangassubsidiesforBelarus:Mythsandreality.Minsk:BelarusianInstitute Lovell, H.2008.Discourseandinnovationjourneys:thecaseoflowenergyhousinginUK. Lehtonen, M.andMartiskainen,2010.Governanceofthe“nuclearrevival”inFinland,France ______. 2009b.Indicatorsasanappraisaltechnology:frameworkforanalysingpolicyinfluenceand Lehtonen, M.2009a.Deliberativedecision-makingonradioactivewastemanagementinFinland,France Law ontheNuclearPowerPlant. Latour, B.2004. Lasch, C.1996. Kurtz, T.,Donaghue,N.,Rapley,M.,andWalker,I.2005.Thewaysthatpeopletalkaboutnatural Krylovich, I.2010.Nichego,kromeotvetstvennosti[Nothingbutresponsibility]. Lukashenko, A.2007a.Ekonomiaiberezhlivost – glavnyefaktoryekonomisheskoibezopasnosti Lugar, R.G.2009.Energysecurityisnationalsecurity.TheLugarInitiative.URL: Lukashenko, A.2008.Razvitie atomnoienergetikiiavliaetsiavazhneishym faktorom obespechenia Lukashenko, A.2007b.SozdaniesobstvennoiAES iavliaetsiabezalternatibnymvariantomgaranii

Strategic Studies. dictatorship 13-32&catid=10%3Aenergy&Itemid=28&lang=en [consulted20May2010]. http://belinstitute.eu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=484%3A2010-02-15-18- Atgimimas research agendas?”,UniversityofSussex,Brighton,UnitedKingdom,25-26February. “Energy transitionsinaninterdependentworld:whatandwherearethefuturesocialscience UK –framings,actorstrategiesandpolicies.PaperpresentedatSussexEnergyGroupconference Conference oftheEuropeanSocietyforEcologicalEconomics,Ljubljana,Slovenia,29June-2July. early insightsintoindicatorroleintheUKenergysector.Paperpresentedat8thInternational Integrative EnvironmentalSciences and theUK:influenceofmixedformsdeliberationinmacrodiscursivecontext. Press. Social Psychology resources: discursivestrategiesasbarrierstoenvironmentallysustainablepractices. 7. Analysis andStrategicManagement [Directive No3.Economyandthrift–themainfactors ofeconomicsecurity], http://lugar.senate.gov/energy/security/ [consulted6 December2010]. of Belarus. ensuring energysecurityof the state],pressrelease,Januray15.Minsk:PressOffice ofthePresident energetichskoi bezopasnosti strany[Nuclearpowerdevelopmentisthemostimportant factorof Belarus. security thathasnoalternatives],pressrelease,March 5.Minsk:PressOfficeofthePresident natsionalnoi bezopasnostiBelarusi[Establishingown NPPisthewaytoguaranteenational Minsk: PresidentoftheRepublicBelarus. , October9-15. . Abingdon:RoutledgeCurzon. The revoltoftheelites:andbetrayaldemocracy Politics ofnature.Howtobringthesciencesintodemocracy 44:603-620. 2007. ė se varžybosetašk Valstyb (submitted). 20(5):613-632. ė s žinios: ų 76-3004. nepelnyta[Nuclearcompetitionendswithoutscore].

. NewYork:Norton. Contemporary Belarus:betweendemocracyand . Cambridge,M.A.:HarvardUniversity URL: Belorusy iRynok

Directive No3 British Journalof , March1- Technology Journal of . CEU eTD Collection Miškinis, V.,Galinis,A.,andKonstantinavi Ministry ofEnergytheRepublicLithuania.2010. Miškinis, V.,Galinis,A.,andVilemas,J.,eds.2008. Mills, C.W.1956. McKibben, B.1990. McArdle Kelleher,C.1983.WesternEurope:Cycles,crisis,andthenuclearrevolution. Massachusetts InstituteofTechnology(MIT).2009. Müller-Kraenner, S.2008. Molle, F.2008.Nirvanaconcepts,narrativesandpolicy models:insightsfromthewatersector. Myerson, G.andRydin,Y.1996. Mit Martewicz, M.andKozlowski,P.2010.Polandseeschancefor“Orlen”tokeepLithuanianrefiningunit. Marshall, E.2005.Isthefriendlyatompoisedforacomeback? Marples, D.R.2008.IstheRussia-BelarusUnionobsolete? ______. 2009.PerspektivyBelarusivusloviakhkrizisakonteksteusileniazavisimostiotrosiiskikh Mander, S.L.2007.Regionalrenewableenergypolicy:aprocessofcoalitionbuilding. Makarychev, A.2009.EnergyrelationsinRussia:administration,politicsandsecurity. Manenok, T.2007.Sosdaetsiaeshcheodna“vertikal”[Onemore“vertical”isbeingcreated]. ______. 2008.Theroleofdiscoursecoalitionsinplanningforrenewableenergy:acasestudywind- ė , V.2004.Lithuania:Gazprompurchaseprompts concern overRussianinfluence Republic ofLithuania. [Five companieswillbetakingpartinthestrategicinvestortender] Schneider andS.Thomas.Brentwood:MultiSciencePublishing. usage inLithuania.In Cambridge, M.A.:MassachusettsInstituteofTechnology. Alternatives March 2010]. Europe/Radio Liberty Institute, MinistryofEconomy. American AcademyofPoliticalandSocialScience Business Week Institute forStategicStudies,NasheMnenie,Minsk,Belarus,29October. energy resources].PaperpresentedatEnergyClub,OfficeforDeomocaticBelarus,Belarusian energoresursov [PerspectivesforBelarusintimesofacrisisandincreasingdependencyonRussian Science Journal Rynok energy deployment. Politics , September17-24. 7(2):45-63. 1(1):131-156. The powerelite 57(1):107-117. , February5. The endofnature , January13.http://www.rferl.org/content/article/1051159.html [consulted7 Environment andPlanningC:GovernmentPolicy Energy security:Re-measuringthe world International perspectivesonenergypolicyandtheroleofnuclearpower . London:OxfordUniversityPress. The languageoftheenvironment.Anewrhetoric . London:Viking. č i ū t ė 469(NuclearArmamentandDisarmament):91-103. , I.2009.Currentandfutureoptionsofnuclearpower National energystrategy Update ofthe“MIT2003Futurenuclearpower”. Strateginio investuotojokonkursedalyvaus5kompanijos Problems ofPost-Communism . London:Earthscan. Science . Vilnius:MinistryofEnergythe Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus 309(5738):1168-1169. 26:583-600. . London:UCLPress. . Kaunas:LithuanianEnergy 55(1):25-35. Global Environmental International Social , ed.L.Mez,M. Annals ofthe Radio Free Belorusy i Water 133

CEU eTD Collection Patton, M.Q.2002. Open.by. 2010.Reiting.Massmedia,izdatelstvo,reklama[Onlineratingofmedia,publishingand Nuttall, W.J.2005. Nugarait Nehring, H.2004.Coldwar,apocalypseandpeacefulatoms.Interpretationsofnuclearenergyinthe Nefedov, M.2009.Mobilelifehasitsownlaws. Naviny.by. 2010.Oproekte[Abouttheproject].Minsk:BerlaPAN.URL:http://naviny.by/other/about/ Vaida Pilibaityte 134 ______. 2009.Pressfreedom index.Paris:ReportersWithoutBorders.URL: http://en.rsf.org/press- Reporters WithoutBorders(RWB).2006.Fieldinvestigation: institutionalizedharassmentofthenews Renn, O.,Blättel-Mink,B.,andKastenholz,H.1997. Discursivemethodsinenvironmentaldecision Reich, R.B.1993. Raven, R.2010.Fromrichestorags:biofuels,mediadiscoursesandresistancesustainableenergy Proops, J.2001.The(non-)economicsofthenuclearfuelcycle:anhistoricalanddiscourseanalysis. Polskie Radio.2010.Polandchoosessiteforfirstnuclearpowerplant. Piano, A.andPuddington,2009. Phillips, N.andRavasi,D.1998.Analyzingsocialconstructioninorganizations:Discourseanalysisasa Phillips, N.andHardy,C.2002. Nuclear EnergyAgency(NEA).2008.

[consulted 17April2010]. advertising websites].Minsk:Otkrytiikontakt.URL:http://all.by/rating/rate_0700_m_sb_1.html Press. OECD Publications. British andWestGermananti-nuclearweaponsmovements. [consulted 17April2010]. freedom-index-2009,1001.html [consulted28January2010]. http://en.rsf.org/spip.php?page=article&id_article=16775 [consulted14April2010]. media. making. Schuster. Sussex, Brighton,UnitedKingdom,25-26February. interdependent world:whatandwherearethefuturesocialscienceresearchagendas?",Universityof technologies. PaperpresentedatSussexEnergyGroupconference"Energytransitionsinan Ecological Economics power-plant.html [consulted13May2010]. 16. URL:http://www.thenews.pl/business/artykul127548_poland-chooses-site-for-first-nuclear- D.C.: FreedomHouse. Organizational Discourse:Pretexts,SubtextsandContexts research methodinorganizationandmanagementtheory.In Open SocietyInstitute. ė , A.2004.Lithuania.In Business StrategyandtheEnvironment Qualitative evaluationandresearchmethods The workofnations:preparingourselvesfor21stcentury capitalism Nuclear renaissance:technologiesandpoliciesforthefutureofnuclearpower Reporters WithoutBorders 39(1):13-19. Discourse analysis Media ownershipanditsimpactonmediaindependencepluralism Worst oftheworst.Theworld’smostrepressivesocieties2009 Nuclear energyoutlook:Keymessages.Executivesummary 6:218-231. . London:Sage. The MinskTimes . London. . ThousandOaks:Sage. , March16.URL: , November12. Historical SocialResearch Poleskie RadioDlaZagranicy The 3rdInternationalConferenceon . London:Simonand . Cambridge:CRC 29(3):150-170. . NewMilford: . Washington, . Budapest: , March CEU eTD Collection Scrase, I.andOckwell,D.G. 2009b.Energyissues:Framingandpolicychange.In Scrase, I.andOckwell,D.2009a.Energyissues:Framing andpolicychange.In Scrase, I.andMacKerron,G.,eds.2009. Schneider, M.,Thomas,S.,Froggatt,A.,andKoplow, D.2009. Schmid, S.D.2004.Transformationdiscourse:nuclearriskasastrategictoolinlatesovietpoliticsof Seimas oftheRepublicLithuania.2007. Sarasini, S.2009.Constitutingleadershipviapolicy:Swedenasapioneerofclimatechangemitigation. Schiffrin, D.,Tannen,andHamilton,H.E.,eds.2001. ______. 2009.D.Grybauskait Ria Novosti.2010.RussiabreaksgroundforBalticnuclearpowerplant. ______. 2010.Newescalationofviolenceagainstjournalists. Rimait Samoškait Rüdig, W.1990. Rostoks, T.2009.“Energyproblem”intheBalticSeaRim:isregionpulledtogetherorapart? Romerio, F.1998.Therisksofthenuclearpolicies. Rydin, Y.1999.Canwetalkourselvesintosustainability?Theroleofdiscourseintheenvironmental Risbey, J.S.2008.Thenewclimatediscourse:Alarmistoralarming? new agenda agenda Conservation andReactorSafety. particular emphasisoneconomicissues expertise. Mitigation andAdaptationStrategiesforGlobalChange http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?id=23351575 [consulted30July2010]. Blackwell Publishers. the newnuclearplant]. Lietuvai [Grybauskait October 21.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?id=18958998[consulted2March2010]. April 2010]. http://en.rsf.org/belarus-new-escalation-of-violence-against-19-03-2010,36792.html [consulted14 government atpeacewithitselfonINPP,thenegotiatorfeelshehasfailed"slightly"]. http://en.rian.ru/papers/20100225/158004833.html [consulted13May2010]. Lithuanian ForeignPolicyReview policy process. 37. media] žiniasklaidoje [DiscourseformationconcerninggeneticallymodifiedorganismsinLithuanianmass ė , A.andRinkevi ė , E.2008.Valdžioss , ed.I.ScraseandG.MacKerron,35-53.NewYork:Palgarve Macmillan. Filosofija. Sociologija , eds.J.I.ScraseandG.MacKerron, 35-53.NewYork:PalgarveMacmillan. Science, Technology,andHumanValues Anti-nuclear movements:aworldsurveyofoppositiontonuclearenergy Environmental Values č ius, L.2008.Genetiškaimodifikuot ė approvedtheliquidationof“LEOLT”,raisesdoubtsaboutnecessity 19(4):93-101. ė palaimino„LeoLT“išformavim ą žin 22:143-151. ė d Energy forthefuture:Anewagenda ė 8: 467-484. . Berlin:GermanFederalMinistryofEnvironment, Nature l IAErami,derybininkasjau The nationalenergystrategy 29(3,Summer):353-376. Energy Policy 14(7):635–653. Delfi.lt ų organizm 26(3):239-246. The handbookofdiscourseanalysis Reporters WithoutBorders , January21.URL: ą . Vilnius:Seimoleidykla. World nuclearindustrystatusreport.With , abejojanaujosatomin Global EnvironmentalChange Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus č . NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan. ų iasi „šiektiek“pralaim diskursoformavimasisLietuvos Vedomosti . Harlow,EssexLongman. Energy forthefuture:Thenew Energy forthefuture:The , February25.URL: , March19.URL: ė s reikalingumu 18(1):26- . Oxford: ė j ę s [The Delfi.lt 135 ,

CEU eTD Collection Smil, V.2003. Statistics Lithuania.2009. Simon, J.2008.Belarusconsidersrestrictivemedialaw.NewYork:CommitteetoProtectJournalists. Silitski, V.2005.Preemptingdemocracy:ThecaseofBelarus. ______. 2009b.ThetransitionsstorylineinDutchenvironmentalpolicy. Smith, A.andKern,F.2009a.ThetransitionsstorylineinDutchenvironmentalpolicy. Shuster, S.2010.Energywars:Russia'sneighborsgeteven. Sergeichik, D.2010.Obogashchennyiuran-pobochnyieffectotnosheniiMinskaiMoskvy[Enriched Scrase, I.,Wang,T.,MacKerron,G.,McGowan,F.,andSorrell,S.2009.Introduction:Climatepolicyis Štreimikien Szarka, J.2004.Windpower,discoursecoalitionsand climatechange:breakingthestalemate? Sukhy, I.,Novikau,A.,andSliviak,V.2009. Smith, K.C.2008. ______. 2010.Theroleofdiscourseandlinguisticframingeffectsinsustaininghighcarbonenergy Vaida Pilibaityte 136 Stevenson, R.2009.Discourse,power,andenergy conflicts: understandingWelshrenewableenergy Spasiuk, E.2008.BelorusskuiuatomnuiustantsiupostroiatvOstrovtse[BelarusianNPPwillbe Sovacool, B.K.andBrossman,B.2010.Symbolicconvergencethehydrogeneconomy. Statistics Belarus.2010.

2010]. URL: http://cpj.org/2008/07/belarus-considers-restrictive-media-law.php[consulted13April Politics uranium –asideeffectofMinskandMoscowrelations]. York: ParlgarveMacmillan. http://naviny.by/rubrics/politic/2010/04/15/ic_articles_112_167456/ [consulted21April2010]. energy policy.In Environment “Ecodefence!”. build NPPinBelarus mitigation regimes. 78–98. policy –anaccessibleintroduction. planning policy. Belarus. constructed inAstravets]. Strategic andInternationalStudies. 38: 1999-2012. March 2010]. http://www.naviny.by/rubrics/economic/2008/12/19/ic_articles_113_160442/ [consulted6 ė 18(1):78-98 , D.2008.Theroleofnuclear energyinLithuaniaundervariouspost-Kyotoclimate change Energy atthecrossroads:Globalperspectivesanduncertainties 14(6):317-330. Russia andEuropeanenergysecurity.Dividedominate Environment andPlanningC:GovernmentPolicy Energy forthefuture:Thenewagenda Energy The RepublicofBelarusinfigures.Officialstatistics.Annualdata Statistical yearbookofLithuania(2009catalog) . Minsk:Citizensgroup“Ecohome”,Belarusian party of“Greens”, 33: 1005-1014. Energy Policy Position ofthepublicconcerningcoursediscussionon planso (inpress). , eds.I.ScraseandG.MacKerron,3-19.New Time Journal ofDemocracy Naviny.by , 25January. . Cambridge,Mass:MIT. . Vilnius:StatisticsLithuania. 27:512-526. , December19. . Washington,D.C.:Centerfor Naviny.by Environmental Politics 16(4):83-97. , April15.URL: . Minsk:Statistics Environmental Energy Policy European 18(1):

CEU eTD Collection Teather, D.2009.UK’snuclearfutureismappedoutasracetotackleclimatechangehotsup. Wilson, E.J.andStephens, J.C. 2009.WinddeploymentintheUnitedStates:states, resources,policyand Telešien TNS Gallup.2008.Nacionalinisskaitytoj ______. 2010.Lietuvostinklalapi Valstyb Usov, P.2008.Neo-authoritarianpoliticalregimeintheRepublicofBelarus. ______. n.d.AworldofdevelopmentexperienceUnitedNationsDevelopmentProgramme.URL: ______. 2004. United NationsDevelopmentProgramme(UNDP).2002. Umbach, F.2010.GlobalenergysecurityandtheimplicationsforEU. Tubalkain-Trell, M.2009.Balticstatesstillislandsinpowermarket. Westlén, D.2010.TheballgetsrollinginSweden. ______. 2008.Nuclearpowermaybeinearlystages ofarevival. ______. 2008.Lietuvosenergetikapo2009met Vilemas, J.1995.NuclearenergyinLithuania:Presentstatusandhopesforthefuture. Vaughan, A.2009.EdMilibandpaveswayformostambitiousfleetofnuclearreactorsinEurope. Wald, M.L.2010.U.S.supportsnewnuclearreactorsin Georgia. Vilemas, J.andGalinis,A.2000.Kod discourse. nuclear-news.org/The_ball_gets_rolling_in_Sweden_2510012.html [consulted26 January 2010]. change discourseandtheconstructionofmeaninginLithuanianmassmedia]. Guardian 20 (4):250–258. TNS Gallup. [National readershipsurvey.Thetop5ofthemostpopularoutletsinautumn2009].Vilnius: 21: 86-111. http://www.undp.org/about/ [consulted2March2010]. Programme, UnitedNationsDepartmentofEconomicandSocialAffairs,WorldEnergyCouncil. A strategyforrecovery 296d7ccdef3a [consulted6March2010]. http://live.balticbusinessnews.com/Default.aspx?PublicationId=3ceb5741-d1e0-42be-8e66- visitors oftheLithuanianwebsites].Vilnius:TNSGallup. Guardian remained]. 719-722. oligarchu-itaka-liko.d?id=31109011 [consulted16April2010]. intending tocloseINPP?Whatistherereplaceit]. ė ė . 2010.„LeoLT“žlugo,oligarch , A.2009.KlimatokaitosdiskursasLietuvoje:reikšmi , 10November , November9. Environmental ScienceandTechnology Valstyb World energyassessment:2004update . NewYork:UnitedNationsDevelopmentProgramme. ė , April16.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/news/economy/business/leo-lt-zlugo- ų ė savait l žadameuždarytiIgnalinosAE?Kuoj ų ų tyrimas.Populiariausi

ė į s unikali taka liko[“LeoLT”collapsed,theinfluenceofoligarchs 43:9063-9070. ų [Lithuanianenergyafter2009]. World NuclearNews ų lankytoj . NewYork:UnitedNationsDevelopment Human consequencesoftheChernobylnuclearaccident: Mokslas irgyvenimas The NewYorkTimes ų ų skai ų The NewYorkTimes konstravimasdienraš 2009m.rudensleidini Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus č ius [Anumberofweeklyunique , January25.http://www.world- Energy Policy Lithuanian ForeignPolicyReview 4. Baltic BusinessNews ą pakeisime[Whyarewe Valstyb , February16. Filosofija. Sociologija 38(3):1229-1240. , October23. Energy Policy ė č (November). iuose [Climate ų penketukai . URL: 23(8): The The 137 T

CEU eTD Collection Wodak, R.1996. Windisch, U.2008.Dailypoliticalcommunicationandargumentationindirectdemocracy:Advocates Wilson, E.J.,Stephens,J.C.,Peterson,T.R.,andFi Vaida Pilibaityte 138 World Bank(WB).2005. ______. n.d.WNA:Supportingafast-globalizingnuclearindustry.London:WorldNuclear ______. 2010.EarlySovietreactorsandEUaccession.London:WorldNuclearAssociation.URL: World NuclearAssociation(WNA).2009.Thenuclearrenaissance.London:Association. ______. 2010.AboutWEC.London:WorldEnergyCouncil.URL: World EnergyCouncil(WEC).2007. ______. 2009b. ______. 2009a.Lithuania.Countrybrief.WashingtonD.C.:WorldBank.URL:

opponents ofnuclearenergy. Energy Procedia context: theimportanceofstatepolicyanddiscourseindeployingemergingenergytechnologies. Association. URL:http://www.world-nuclear.org/about.html[consulted8March2010]. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf44.html [consulted22March2010]. URL: http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf104.html[consulted10March2010]. http://www.worldenergy.org/about_wec/ [consulted2March2010]. ,00.html [consulted21May2010]. N/0,,contentMDK:20630490~menuPK:304963~pagePK:141137~piPK:141127~theSitePK:304956 http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/ECAEXT/LITHUANIAEXT and EconomicManagementUnit,EuropeCentralAsiaRegion. country economicmemorandumfortheRepublicofBelarus Disorders ofdiscourse Running abusinessinBelarus.CountrynoteNo.2 1:4519-4528. Belarus: Windowofopportunitytoenhnacecompetitivenessandsustaineconomicgrowth.A Discourse andSociety . London:Longman. The roleofnuclearpowerinEurope schelein, M.2009.Carboncaptureandstoragein 19(1):85-98. . WashingtonDC:WorldBank.PovertyReduction . WashingtonD.C.:WorldBankGroup. . London:WorldEnergyCouncil. CEU eTD Collection Sukhy, Irina.LeaderoftheBelarusiancitizenassociation“Ekodom”,Minsk.Oneauthors Krylovich, I.Deputychiefeditoroftheanalyticalweekly“BelorusyiRynok”,Minsk.Email Donauskait PERSONAL COMMUNICATION public assessmentoftheBelarusianNPPproject.Informalinterview.Minsk,12April2010. correspondence. Vilnius,17April2010. Budapest, 28January2010. ė , D.Executiveeditoroftheanalyticalweekly“Atgimimas”,Vilnius.Onlinecorrespondence. Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus 139

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 140

CEU eTD Collection Table A.1Textsselectedfortheanalysisofglobalnuclearenergydiscourse APPENDIX 2. 1. No. 7. 6. 5. 4. 3.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf104.html [consulted10March2010] wg3.htm [consulted9March2010] Energy Council.URL:http://www.undp.org/ener United NationsDevelopmentProgramme, URL: http://www.worldenergy.org/documents/wec_nucle World EnergyCouncil(WEC).2007. Word NuclearAssociation(WNA).2009. United NationsDevelopmentProgramme(UNDP).2004. Milford: OECDPublications.URL:http://www.nea.fr/neo Nuclear EnergyAgency(NEA).2008. Atomic EnergyAgency.URL:http://www.iaea.org/Pub International AtomicEnergyAgency(IAEA).2009. change”. Intergovernmental PanelonClimateChange(IPCC).2007. Greenpeace. 2009. SOURCE [consulted 9March2010] http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/international Geneva:IntergovernmentalPanelonClimate Nuclear power:adangerouswasteoftime. The roleofnuclearpowerinEurope. Nuclear energyoutlook:Keymessages.Executivesummary. The nuclearrenaissance. gy/weaover2004.htm [consulted10March2010] Nuclear TechnologyReview2009. /press/reports/nuclear-power-a-dangerous-was.pdf lications/Reports/ntr2009.pdf [consulted9March] Change. URL:http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4- /summaries/english.pdf [consulted10March2010]. ar_full_report.pdf [consulted10March2010] World energyassessment:2004update. Department ofEconomicandSocialAffairs,World Working groupIIIreport“Mitigationofclimate Amsterdam:GreenpeaceInternationalURL: London:WordNuclearAssociation.URL: Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus London:WorldEnergyCouncil. Vienna:International NewYork: New 141

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 142 Table A.2TextsselectedfortheanalysisofLithuaniannuclearenergydiscourse

4. 3. 2. 1. No. 19. 18. 17. 16. 15. 14. 13. 12. 11. 10. 9. 8. 7. 6. 5.

NPP project]. 28. Valstie http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?id=15569141 [consulted30April2010]. but Navickassaysitisurgent]. construction]. fraud]. April 2010]. 2010]. Ū sketching upanewenergygiant]. April 2010]. Č laikraštis, Č Č BNS. 2009c.D.Grybauskait http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?id=23692306 [consulted30April2010]. BNS. 2009b.A.Kubilius:atomin Kaliningrad isforreal]. BNS. 2009a.SeimonariaiabejojaAEstatyb BNS. 2008b.Simboliupasirinkogerv BNS. 2008a.Amžiaussandoris–jauužbaigtas[The Bartasevi shield forthestate]. Bartasevi Aleksandravi SOURCE http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?id=15941503 [consulted30April2010]. a greenlight–Adamkushassigned lawamendments]. Damulyt Damulyt 27. Dambrauskas, A.2009.Sapnuose–atominisKaunas[Dreamsabout nuclearKaunas]. Damauskas, Ž.2007d.Atomin interested inaNPPproject]. Damauskas, Ž.2007c.Elektrin Damauskas, Ž.2007b.Parlamentaraivakarnubraiž June 12. Damauskas, Ž.2007a.Kapinynas–Stabatišk Č Lithuania canbecompletedby2018-2019]. April 302010]. May 28. Lietuvos rytas kininko patar ekutis, R.2007.Darvienanaujosatomin ekuolis, A.2008.Radiacija:mitai,siaubaiirtikrov aplikas, A.2007.Arnaujaatomin erkauskas, M.2009.Elektrin č Lietuvos rytas, i ė ė ų č č , J.2008b.„LeoLT“uždegtažalia šviesa–V.Adamkuspasiraš , J.2008a.Kritikaiužpyl laikraštis, April 9.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/archive/articl ius. 2008.Ignalinaturisuvienytivis ius, V.2007.Savarankiškaenergetika–valstyb

č Delfi.lt, , September25. Lietuvos rytas ius, A.2009.Žemdirbiai–priešbranduolin ė jas, September29.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/archi July 30.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/archive/a Lietuvos rytas December7.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/arc December 30. Delfi.lt, ė , October19. Lietuvos rytas teigiatikintib July24.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?id=23260929[consulted ė ė ė s laidotuv ę s elektrin s projektaskaimynusdominanevienodai elektrin ė Lietuvos rytas , October6. „LeoLT“kritika,V.Navickasvistiekraginaskub ė Delfi.lt, elektrin ę [Acraneforasymbol]. ė ę ė January10.URL: s statyb Lietuvojepastatytirealu2018-2019m.[Kubilius:anuclearplantin se sklandoafer ė ū , July26 s dilemma[AnotherforanewNPP]. simos atomin ė Delfi.lt, ų iškilssaugiojevietoje?[IsthelocationforanewNPPsafe?] ą Kaliningraderealumu[ParliamentariansdoubtthatteNPPin ė Lietuv s kaime[RepositorytobebuiltinStabatiskes]. , June29. ą ė August22.URL: galifinansuotiirES[TheEUmightalsofinanceaNPP ė [Radiation:myths,horrorsandreality]. dealofthecenturyhasbeencompleted]. energetikosmilžinokont ą e.php?id=16611840 [consulted30April2010]. [LithuaniashouldstandunitedfortheIgnalinaNPP]. Delfi.lt, ę ė ų energetik ė s elektrin tvaikas[ThefuneraloftheNPPwitasmell s skydas[Independedenergysystemservesasa rticle.php?id=23336214 [consultedApril30 Lietuvos rytas, hive/article.php?id=26582937 [consulted30 February12.URL: ve/article.php?id=14551232 [consulted30 ė ą s projektu[Grybauskaitebelievesina [Farmersagainstnuclearenergy]. ė [Notalloftheneighboursareequally AE August30. ū į statymo pataisas[“LeoLT”gets rus [Parliamentariansare ė ti [“LeoLT”iscriticized, Lietuvos rytas, Atgimimas, Valstie Lietuvos rytas Lietuvos rytas, č i ų

June 22- June , CEU eTD Collection 24. 23. 22. 21. 20. 41. 40. 39. 38. 37. 36. 35. 34. 33. 32. 31. 30. 29. 28. 27. 26. 25.

from thenuclearplant:celebratewithoutus]. April 18.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/archive/articl http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?id=12680436 [consulted30April2010]. debate onanewNPPconstruction]. Lietuvos rytas, URL: http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?i speaks upabouttheresponsibilityfordelaysinIgnalinaNPPdecommissioning]. http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?id=19914231 [consulted30April2010]. workers: Wearecullingthegoldenegglayer]. Lietuvos rytas Atgimimas, Atgimimas, Ivašauskas, M.2008. Lietuvos rytas, Ignatavi Gurevi Gintalait Kelias, Giedra, A.2008.Atominiskuras:baubasarLietuvosatei Eigirdas, E.2007.Naujaatomin Dumalakas, A.2008.Baltarusi Digryt Delfi.lt. 2009b.Prezident Delfi.lt. 2009a.Energetikosministerijajaukvie Delfi.lt I.2007.SEB:atomin Deksnys, V.2009.Atomineielektrineiieškos Deksnys, V.2008.Lietuviamspag Lukaityt Lietuvos rytas.2009.Savokiemas–svarbes Lietuvos rytas.2008b.Laikoženklai[Signsofthetime]. Lietuvos rytas.2008a.Energetikosli Lietuvos rytas.2007.Laikoženklai[Signsofthetime]. Krasauskas, I.2009.Branduolin Kontrimavi [consulted 30April2010]. and afriendofhumanity]. Kimtys, L.andRemeikis,V.2008.Atomobranduolys:žm Lietuvos rytas, Kauzanas, D.2008.IgnalinosAE:pabaisagalivirstigražuo 2010]. any price]. August 8. Delfi.lt, in anewNPP]. December 27. April 2010]. ė č August28.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/archive/arti , E.2009.DarbuotojaiapieIAEuždarym June 15.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/archive/arti ius, A.2009.Lietuvoje–darvienasRusijos ė č ė , R.2007.Reikalaujamaviešosdiskusijos d ius, T.2008.Panikuotojai–ambicij , L.2008.Buldozeriu–perenergetikosalternatyv č Delfi.lt, October 9-15. June 6-12. ius, T.2009.Nelinksmilink , April22. August 27. February 6. February 6. Delfi.lt, December11.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/archiv Į December4.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/arc gr ė ė prakalboapieatsakomyb

Spectrum, smes –prodidinam ė reikalinga,ta ų užma ė ė j se varžybosetašk ė ą gain sdinti –žvalgybinisš ū November2.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?id=19106123 Delfi.lt, tas bunda[Energylionwaking]. č ė ios s ė jimai išatomin –Vyriausyb č iau nebetkokiakaina[SEB:nuclearplantisnecessary,butnotat d=26621725 [consulted30April2010]. March29.URL: ė ų Lietuvosrytas, ja nerim nis [Moreconcernedabouttheirownbackyard]. e.php?id=12906290 [consulted30April2010]. investuotojo [Insearchforaninvestor]. nelaisv č ą Delfi.lt, ia investuoti ą j į stikl : pjaunamaauksiniuskiaušiniusdedantivišta[IgnalinaNPP cle.php?id=17401859 [consulted30April2010]. ų ę č ė nepelnyta[Nucleargameendswithnoscore]. iuptuvas? [OnemoreRussiantentacleinLithuania] ė užIgnalinosAEuždarymovilkinim ą ą January5.URL: ė cle.php?id=23772458 [consulted30April2010]. l naujosatomin je [Picnickersimprisonedbytheirownambitions]. [FearsaboutBelarusiangames]. ė [Lookingatrisksthroughthemagnifyingglass]. Lietuvos rytas s ramstis[Newnuclearplantasastatepillar]. s elektrin Lietuvos rytas ū tis? [Nuclearfuel:amonsterorLithuania’sfuture?] onijos priešasirdraugas[Atomicnucleus:anenemy vis [ReconnaissanceshottoscareLithuanians]. as [Bulldozeringovertheenergyalternatives]. le [IgnalinaNPP:thebeastmayturnintoabeauty]. į nauj December 29. e/article.php?id=15283312 [consulted30April hive/article.php?id=26472825 [consulted30 ė ą s: šv AE[TheMinistryofEnergyinvitestoinvest , March29. ė Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus Lietuvos rytas , May28. s j ę skite bem ė gain ė s statybos[Demandingpublic ū s , April30. ų Delfi.lt, Lietuvos rytas, [Nohappygreetings ą Lietuvos rytas [ThePresident December8. Lietuvos rytas October 1. Valstyb , , ė , 143

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 144

48. 47. 46. 45. 44. 43. 42. 65. 64. 63. 62. 61. 60. 59. 58. 57. 56. 55. 54. 53. 52. 51. 50. 49.

Lietuvos rytas, http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?id=27330677 [consulted30April2010]. November 27–December4. October 9-15. Atgimimas, March 6-12. new nuclearpowerplant]. Lietuvos žinios, http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?id=18297601 [consulted30April2010]. “castles intheair”,butastructuralreform]. our ownoligarchs]. the IgnalinaNPPshutdownonly rytas, March 27–April3. to Russiaorliberates?] Atgimimas, [consulted 30April2010]. October 1. Paulauskas, S.2008.Reikalingosnepragaroenergetik Nastaravi Makaraityt Makaraityt Makaraityt Makaraityt Makaraityt Makaraityt Makaraityt Makaraityt Makaraityt Makaraityt Makaraityt Makaraityt Lukaityt Samoškait Samoškait Saladžius, E.2009.Švarienergijadarstringa Rainyt Prunskien Pocien Atgimimas, Plunksnis, V.2009.„LeoLT“niekonenuveik Plunksnis, V.2008.Atomin Pilibaityt Atgimimas, Februrary 27–March6. September 1. ė ė -Bodard, O.2009.B ė , A.2009.Ekologiškiprojektaimirštadarnegim ė , R.2009.A.Brazauskas:poIAEuždarymorimtasir č , V.2009.Atomin ė ė ė ė ė ė ė ė ė ė ė ė ė ė ė ius, M.2008.„Li , K.2009.Sveik , I.2009f.Atominei–maišaspinig , I.2009e.Rusaikišakiaul , I.2009d.Energetikakaipežiukasr , I.2009c.Afera,kurikainuosdarvien , I.2009b.Argreitaiatsirasžodis„atomin , I.2009a.Arklys,kurisnejudanei , I.2008c.ReikiabijotineRusijos,osav , I.2008b.BeviltiškoSeimosimbolis[Ahopelessparliamentsymbol]. , I.2008a.Referendumasakimsmuilinti[Acover-upreferendum]. , I.2007c.NaujaAE:„pririša“prieRusijosargarantuojanepriklausomyb , I.2007b.Trigalvioapatiniai[Underwearofthethree-headeddragon]. , I.2007a.Trigalvisslibinasryjairsavovaikus March 27–April3. March 30–April6. May 21-28. September 19-25. , E.2009b.HamletiškaLietuvos abejon , E.2009a.A.Sekmokasabejoja, arbuspastatytanaujaelektrin August 27. October,6.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/archive/a Atgimimas, Atgimimas, Delfi.lt, ū ė ė ą ū t s statytoj : neišvari,saugi[Nuclear:notcleanorsafe]. prot ą ti arneb “ pasiryž October 24-30. ą January27.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?id=20298429 nuolatužgožiapolitin December 7-13. long-termpartnerremainsRussia]. ų ū ę ę apetitas–berib ti atomineielektrinei[Tobeornottoforanuclearpowerplant]. , omes–dži stabdyti[Determinedtostopthe“lion”]. Delfi.lt, ė [Stillnobreakthroughforthecleanenergy]. . Artikrai?[“LeoLT”achievednothing,butisthatso?] ų į priek bedugno[AbottomlessmoneybagforaNPP]. ū ke [Energysystemlikehedgehoginthefog]. ą August25.URL: milijard ė ų ū į : statytiatomin ė , neiatgal[Ahorsethatismovingnowhere]. oligarch gaujame [HappyaboutRussiansfoolingus]. “? [Howsoonwewillhearaboutnuclear?] ų ų ę ė [Anunlimitedappetiteofthenuclearplantbuilders]. „oropilys“,ostrukt [Environmentalprojectsaredeadinwater]. erzelyn [Three-headeddragoneatingupitsownchildren]. ą ? [Afraudthatwillcostanotherbillion?] rticle.php?id=24397065 [consulted30April2010]. ilgalaikis partnerisliekaRusija[Brazauskas:after ų [WeshouldbewearynotaboutRussian,but ė [Thepoliticalfussmessingwithoursanity]. ę elektrin Delfi.lt, ė ū ę [Sekmokashasdoubtsabout rin Atgimimas, arnestatyti[Hamlet’sdilemma: Atgimimas, ė Atgimimas, December 31.URL: reforma[Weneednohellish Atgimimas, Atgimimas, ę ? [ThenewNPP:ties-up September 4-10. July 18-24. Lietuvos rytas, April 25–May2. October 3-9. Atgimimas, October 5-11. Atgimimas Atgimimas, Atgimimas, Atgimimas, Lietuvos ,

CEU eTD Collection

70. 69. 68. 67. 66. 78. 77. 76. 75. 74. 73. 72. 71.

March 6.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/archive/articl http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?id=15428850 [consulted30April2010]. Lietuvos rytas. suspicion]. times ofpromises,chaosandrisingprices]. 2010]. a lion]. May 15-21. Lietuvos žinios, November 16.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/archive/ar http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?id=20573391 [consulted30April2010]. Russia]. workforce]. April 2010]. http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?id=23399597 [consulted30April2010]. Vilemas, J.2008.Lietuvosenergetikapo2009met Varanavi Vagnorius, G.2009.Lietuvav Tvirbutas, S.andPaukštyt Tracevi Tilindis, A.2009.Geležin Sotvarien Sotvarien Sotvarien Skinulyt Skinulyt Siurbis, V.2009.Pajud To buildornottoanewnuclearplant]. Žvirblyt into Russia’shands]. Kauno diena, ė Lietuvos rytas č ė ė , J.2009Energetikosišš i Lietuvos rytas, č ū , J.andNavickait , J.2007.Pigioselektrosdienossuskai ė ė ė ius, D.2009.Atominiaisp t , R.2008a.Amžiausprojekt , R.2007b.Išpasak , R.2007a.Trigalvisslibinas–priešRusijosgalyb ė Lietuvos rytas Lietuvos žinios, , R.2007.Atomineielektrineigresiaspecialist July 19.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/archive/articl May 26. February 12. , December20. Lietuvos rytas, ė March23. ti išmirtiestaškon ė , February2. magnolija–turting ė ė July 12.URL:http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?id=13764710[consulted30 , L.2007.Nuomon , K.2008.Atominisišš

URL: http://www.delfi.lt/archive/articl ė ų l energingaistumiama atskrid ū kiai virstagalimyb ą August27. stai Lietuvai[AnucleartrapforLithuania]. ą ę plak s trigalvisslibinasvirstarealiuli ė Kauno diena, ra sud Delfi.lt, ė ų e.php?id=16218460 [consulted30April2010]. pavydasir ė draug s: pažad č ticle.php?id=19289174 [consulted30April2010]. iuotos [Countingthelastdaysofcheapelectricity]. ū ė ų kis verslui[Anuclearchallengeforthebusiness]. August3.URL: tinga [It’snothardtocomeoutofstandstill]. [Lithuanianenergysystemafter2009]. ė ų mis [Energychallengesareturningintoopportunities]. į gl Rusijosgl ų ė December27.URL: , chaosoirkylan į ų tarimai [Theprojectofthecenturyfacedenvyand byje [Theironmagnoliaamongherwealthyfriends]. e.php?id=13825570 [consulted30April2010]. stygius[Thenuclearplantisfacingashortageof ę [Three-headeddragonagainstthemighty ė e.php?id=20532513 [consulted30April b į [Lithuaniaissystematicallybeingpushed Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus ū tu [Three-headeddragonturninginto č i ų kain Valstyb ų metas[Opinions:inthe ė , February 14.URL: Valstyb Atgimimas, ė , Klaip ė da, 145

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 146 Table A.3TextsselectedfortheanalysisofBelarusiannuclearenergydiscourse

4. 3. 2. 1. No. 17. 16. 15. 14. 13. 12. 11. 10. 9. 8. 7. 6. 5.

http://naviny.by/rubrics/economic/2008/01/17/i [Organizational committeeoftheinitiative“Ost Georgii Lepin:aNPPprojectinBelaru http://naviny.by/rubrics/politic/2008/04/26/ collecting signaturesagainstaNPPconstruction]. http://naviny.by/rubrics/economic/2008/02/08/i no specialiststoconstructitsownNPP]. alternatives]. alternative [RepresentativeofBNF:decisionrega http://naviny.by/rubrics/society/2007/06/25/i [Belarus doesnothaveacapacitytodevelopnuclearenergyindependently]. http://naviny.by/rubrics/society/2006/12/04/i Greenpeace willsupportanti-nuclearprotestersinBelarus]. and nothingwillhappen]. URL: http://naviny.by/rubrics/economic/2008/11/1 BelaPAN. 2008e.Sozdanorgkomitetoshchestvennoiinitsi http://naviny.by/rubrics/society/2008/10/10/i BelaPAN. 2008d.ProfessorGeorgiiLepin:storitelstvo BelaPAN. 2008c.“Zasvobodu”nachinaetsborpodpiseipr BelaPAN. 2008b.VBelarusinetspetsialistovdliastroit BelaPAN. 2008a.PredstavitelpartiiBNF:reshenieos BelaPAN. 2007.Belarusnevsilakhsamostoiatelnorazv BelaPAN. 2006.Rossiiskii“Grinpis”okazhetpodderzhkupr Avimova, K.2008.Denegdolzhnokhvatit[Moneyshouldsuffice]. Avimova, K.2006.Samoletupadet–inichegonesluchits SOURCE [Ostrovets sitewillbeselectedfor theNPPconstruction]. BELTA. 2009b.Ostrovetskaiaploshchadka budetvybrana nuclear fuelfromRussia]. BELTA. 2009a.Belarusplaniruet zakupatiadernoetop [consulted 11April2010] region]. [Ministry ofEconomy:constructiontheNPPwillhave BELTA. 2008.Minekonomiki:stroitelstvoAESokazhetpol not mindBelarusbuildingitsownNPP]. BELTA. 2008.Evrosojuzneimeetnikakikhvozrazhenii Energy: constructionoftheBelarusian BELTA. 2006.Minenergo:voprosstroitelstvavBelarusi stipends]. stipendii [Studentswhowillstudyintheareasofexpe BelaPAN. 2009.Studentam,kotoryeobuchaiutsiaspetsialnos URL: http://naviny.by/rubrics/society/2009/10/10 BelaPAN. 2009.AESvBelarusi:bytilinebyt?[ANPPinBelarus:tobeornotbe?] scenario oftheBelarusianenergysystemdevelopmentwaspresentedinMinsk]. BelaPAN. 2008f.VMinskepredstavlenalternativnyist 2010] November 6.URL:http://naviny.by/rubrics/societ URL: http://naviny.by/rubrics/economic/2008/11/1 Naviny.by, Sovetskaia Belorussia, Naviny.by, December 22.URL:http://naviny.by/rubr January 17. Belorusy iRynok, Sovetskaia Belorussia, July 29.

URL: s isgoingtocausemanytroubles]. NPP requiresseriouspreparatorywork]. Sovetskaia Belorussia, Naviny.by, ic_news_112_289829/ [consulted11April2010] c_news_116_272837/ [consulted9March2010] c_news_116_263246/ [consulted9March2010] c_news_116_299647/ [consulted11April2010] December 11-18. c_news_113_284037/ [consulted11April2010] c_news_113_285321/ [consulted11April2010] rovets NPPisacrime”hasbeenestablished]. /ic_articles_116_164901/ [consulted11April2010] y/2008/11/06/ic_news_116_301140/ [consulted11April rding aNPPhasbeenmadewithoutconsidering 1/ic_news_113_301362/ [consulted11April2010] 1/ic_news_113_301362/ [consulted11April2010] August 31. Naviny.by, February 8.URL: rtise neededfortheBelarusianNPPwillreceivehigher troitelstve AESbylopriniatobezrassmontrenia senarii razvitiabelorusskoienergetiki[Analternative AES vBelarusichrevatomnozhestvombed[Professor elstva AES,schitaetuchenii[ScientistssayBelarushas livo dliaAESvRossii[Belarusis planningtobuy AEStrebuetochensereznoiprorabotki[Ministryof positive impactforthedevelopmentofOstrovets otnositelno stroitelstvaAESvBelarusi[TheEUdoes ivat atomnuiuenergetiku,zaiavliaetglavaNANB Sovetskaia Belorussia, ia ssovremennoiatomnoistantsiei[Theplaincanhit ozhitelnoe vlianienarasvitieOstrovetskogoraiona dliastroitelstvaAES,schitaetV.Semashko ativy “Ostrovetskaiaatomnaia–etoprestuplenie” otiv stroitelstvaAES[“Forthefreedom”arestarting otivnikam stroitelstvaAESvBelarusi[Russian ics/economic/2008/12/22/ic_news_113_303518/ Naviny.by April 26.URL: tiam dliarabotynabelorusskoiAES,uveliachat November 24. Belorusy iRynok, , December4.URL: Naviny.by, Naviny.by Naviny.by July 26. Naviny.by, January 8-15. October 10.URL: Naviny.by, , June25.URL: , December14. November 11. Naviny.by, October 10.

CEU eTD Collection 23. 22. 21. 20. 19. 18. 40. 39. 38. 37. 36. 35. 34. 33. 32. 31. 30. 29. 28. 27. 26. 25. 24.

11 April2010] Naviny.by http://naviny.by/rubrics/economic/2008/02/02/ic_ dependence onRussia]. will beprofitablefromthestartofoperationfirstunit]. May 5. going togetsomuchmoneyforconstructingaNPP?] Kozhemiakin, A.2009a.GdeBelarusvozmettakuiuku want toprotectBelarusfromthe“HellofChernobyl”and“nuclearparadise”]. Korotkaia, N.2008.UchenyekhotiatzashchititBelarus Kolchenko, I.andVolianiuk,V.2008.Energiamira[Energyoftheworld]. Kolchenko, I.2007.Atomnoechvstvo[Atomicfeeling]. Kirillov, P.2006.BelorusskuiuAESpostoiatk2013 ITAR-TASS. 2006.“Atomstroyexport”gotovpriniatuchas Ianushevskaia, A.2008.SobstvennaiaAESusilitzavisi Ermak, V.D.2008.AleksandrMikhalevich:uzhepervien Ermak, D.2008.PochemustraneneobhodimaAES Sovetskaia Belorussia, Energobezopastnost. 2007.Nauka:razgovorvrezhymereal April 14-21. Bykovski, P.2008.AESvBelarusi:pliusyiminusy[ANPPinBelarus:plusesandminuses]. 8-14. Bulatetskaia, E.2008.Ocherednaialozhka Bibkov, V.2006.Silaenergii[Thepowerofenergy]. Krylovich, I.2009a.Pokatolkopo televizoru[Onlyontelevisionsofar]. – October6. Krylovich, I.2008f.Zabludilisvtrekh ploshchadkak[Lostamongthreesites]. Krylovich, I.2008e.Namnamekaiut[Implications]. September 1. Krylovich, I.2008d.Blizhetot,ktoblizhe[Closertheonethatiscloser]. Krylovich, I.2008c.Rossiaskazala“da”[Russiasaid“yes”]. Krylovich, I.2008b.Priglashenie“k Krylovich, I.2008a.Ostorozhno:defitsitargumentov![Beware:lack ofarguments!] Belorusy iRynok, Krylovich, I.2007.Gazovyventilmeniaemnaknopkureak Sovetskaia Belorussia, Kriat, D.2008.Ktokhochetvernutbelorusovkluchin three unitsinsteadoftwoinBelarus?] Kozhemiakin, A.2009b.RossiapostroitvBelarusitriatom http://naviny.by/rubrics/economic/2009/03/05/ic_ http://naviny.by/rubrics/economic/2006/12/05/i [“Atomstryexport” isreadytotakepartintheBelarusianNPPtender]. Belorussia http://naviny.by/rubrics/economic/2008/07/01/ic_ http://naviny.by/rubrics/society/2008/03/10/i http://naviny.by/rubrics/economic/2009/04/02/ic_ , December6.URL:http://naviny.by/rubrics/so . July9. November 26–December3. November 1. Januray 18. Naviny.by, tantsu” [Invitation“foradance”]. February 2.URL: Naviny.by, faktov[Onemorespoonfuloffacts]. c_articles_116_155957/ [consulted11April2010] c_news_113_263328/ [consulted11April2010] articles_113_155325/ [consulted11April2010] articles_113_161517/ [consulted13April2010] articles_113_157842/ [consulted11April2010] articles_113_161975/ [consulted11April2010] April 2.URL: Belorusy iRynok, ? [WhyaNPPisnecessaryforthecountry?] godu [TheBelarusianNPPwillbebuiltby2013]. Sovetskaia Belorussia, e? [WhowantsBelarustoreturnbacksplinter?] Naviny.by, chu denegnastroitelstvoAES?[WhereBelarusis Sovetskaia Belorussia. most BelarusiotRossii[AnownNPPwillincrease ot “Chernobylskogoada”i“iadernogoraia”[Scientists ciety/2006/12/01/ic_articles_116_148854/ [consulted ergoblok AESdastBelarusipribyl[Mikhalevich:NPP tie vtenderenastroitelstvoAESBelarusi nykh blokavmestodvukh?[IsRussiagoingtobuild tora [Switchingfromgastaptoanuclearswitch]. Naviny.by, Belorusy iRynok, nogo vremeni[Science:conversationinrealtime]. March 5.URL: Belorusy iRynok, July28–August4. Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus Naviny.by July 1.URL: Belorusy iRynok, Belorusy iRynok, Sovetskaia Belorussia, December 2. Naviny.by, Belorusy iRynok, July 20. July 14-21. , December5.URL: Belorusy iRynok, Belorusy iRynok, June 2-9. March 10.URL: August25– February 16-22. Belorusy iRynok, September 29

July 1. Sovetskaia December April 28– 147

CEU eTD Collection Vaida Pilibaityte 148

46. 45. 44. 43. 42. 41. 65. 64. 63. 62. 61. 60. 59. 58. 57. 56. 55. 54. 53. 52. 51. 50. 49. 48. 47.

September 10-17. http://naviny.by/rubrics/economic/2008/12/19/ic_ foreigners?] 5. Manenok, T.2007f.Podnapriazheniem[Underpressure]. Manenok, T.2007e.Pribaltiiskiiaktsent[TheBalticaccent]. Manenok, T.2007d.Tsenaenergetichskoibezo September 17-24. Manenok, T.2007c.Sozdaetsiaeshcheodna“v Manenok, T.2007b.Energobezopasnostvrangepr Manenok, T.2007a.AESnachashevesov[WeightinganNPP]. determined nation.PartII] tseleustremlennost natsii.Chast2.[Thehealthofthe Lukashenko, A.2008.Zdoroviegosudarstva–eto Lukashenko, A.2007.Strategiabudushchego[Strategyforthefuture]. Levshina, I.2008.OtdastliBelarussvoiuAESinostrant [consulted 11April2010] Naviny.by, Levshina, I.2007.Belaruspritsenivaetsiakatomnoi Lepeshko, B.2008.Chetyremgnoveniaianvaria[FourmomentsofJanuary]. February 8. Legkaia, E.andKirilenko,I.2007.Razshcheplenieiadra[Breakingdownanucleus]. Kuvshynov, V.2008.Piatsobytii[Fiveevents]. Krylovich, I.2009c.Eshchenevseresheno[Noteverythingresolvedyet]. Belorusy iRynok, Krylovich, I.2009b.Kontroliruemyivybrosatomnoidemokra 27. URL:http://naviny.by/rubrics/economic/2007/09/2 Novozhilova, E.2007.SpasutliBelarus dr Novitskii, G.2008.Piatsobytii[Five events]. Nezvanov, A.andKirilenko,I.2008.Vatomnykhorbitakh[Atomic orbits]. Belorussia, Nezvanov, A.2008.Liudiimeiutpravoznatvse[Peoplehavethe righttoknoweverything]. October 11. Nezvanov, A.2007c.Atomvmashtabeodinkodnomu[Anatom atthescale1:1]. September 21. Nezvanov, A.2007b.AES:vzgliadsovsekhstoron[NPP:acomprehensive view]. Nezvanov, A.2007a.Naatomyimo Ostrovets]. Naviny.by. 2008.Belorusskuiuatomnuiustantsiiupostr http://naviny.by/rubrics/economic/2007/12/11/ic_articles_113_154412/ [consulted6March2010] right behindthebackofRussia]. Naviny.by. 2007.BelorusskuiuAESmogutpostroitpo Minchenko, P.2008.Energiasoznakomplius[Apositiveenergy]. http://naviny.by/rubrics/economic/2008/08/22/ic_ September 17-24. February 19.URL:http://naviny.by/rubri Naviny.by August 29. Naviny.by, October 5-11. , December19.URL: August 22.URL: Sovetskaia Belorussia Naviny.by lekuly [Inoatomsandmolecules]. ova iAES?[PlanksoraNPPwill saveus?] , December11.URL: Sovetskaia Belorussia, Sovetskaia Belorussia, pasnosti [Thepriceofenergysecurity]. ertikal” [Onemore“vertical”underway]. articles_113_160442/ [consulted11April2010] articles_113_158610/ [consulted11April2010] , April30. blagopoluchnie cheloveka,soglasievobshchestve, cs/economic/2007/02/19/ic_articles_113_149752/ ioriteta [Energysecurityasapriority]. stantsii [Belarusisconsideringanuclearplant]. 7/ic_articles_113_153030/ [consulted 12April2010] state consistsofahumanwellbeing,unitedsocietyand d samymbokomuRossii[BelarusianNPPmightbebuilt oiat vOstrovtse[BelarusianNPPwillbebuiltin sam? [WillBelarusgiveawayitsnuclearplantto Belorusy iRynok, tii [Acontrolledreleaseofnucleardemocracy]. Belorusy iRynok, Belorusy iRynok, Belraus Segodnia, January 12. Januray 19. Sovetskaia Belorussia Sovetskaia Belorussia, Sovetskaia Belorussia, Belorusy iRynok, October 15-22. Sovetskaia Belorussia, October 8-15. Sovetskaia Belorussia, Sovetskaia Belorussia September 3-10. Sovetskaia Belorussia, August 1. Naviny.by Belorusy iRynok, Belorusy iRynok, Belorusy iRynok, Sovetskaia October 19-25. , November3. February 10. , September July 24. February , CEU eTD Collection

71. 70. 69. 68. 67. 66. 79. 78. 77. 76. 75. 74. 73. 72.

http://naviny.by/rubrics/society/2008/01/16/i [consulted 9March2010] October 10. April 2010] http://naviny.by/rubrics/zdorovie/2007/08/06/ic nuclear threats]. http://naviny.by/rubrics/society/2007/02/27/i worked inChernobylareapproachingYushchenko]. gunpowder barrel]. http://naviny.by/rubrics/society/2008/03/03/i the regionofGrodno]. pieces]. Volianiuk, V.2007.Vporiadkechastitsprochnosttselogo[Devilisinthedetail]. Vetrova, T.2008.Borbasvetrinamimelnitsami[Fightingthewindmills]. Sovetskaia Belorussia, Strazhev, V.2007.PiatsobytiiglazamiVasiliaS Naviny.by, Spasiuk, E.2009.KrizisstroitelstvuAESnepomekh Spasiuk, E.2007b.Vrachimiragovoriat“net”iadernoi Spasiuk, E.2007a.Belorusskie“chernobyltsy”prosia Siulzhina, A.2008.Prestizhnaiaprofessia[Prestigiousprofession]. Sergeichik, D.2008.Belorusinekhotiatzhytnaporok Semashko, V.2008.BelorusskuiuAESmogutpostroitvGr Semashko, V.2007.PervuiubelorusskuiuAESrazrezali Romanova, I.2008.Yes,AES![Yes,NPP!] Popko, I.2009.Slushali.Uslyshali[Welistened.Wehaveheard]. construction ofthenewNPP]. ONT. 2008.NovyelaboratoriiNANBelarusizaimutsiastroitelstvomAES[Newlabswillbetakingpartinthe Volianiuk, V.2008.Ekonomikaiadra[Economicsofnucleus]. http://naviny.by/rubrics/economic/2008/02/05/i Naviny.by

April 8.URL:http://naviny.by/rubrics/society/ Naviny.by , November21.URL:http://naviny.by/rub Naviny.by, Naviny.by, September 1. , August6.URL: January16.URL: Naviny.by March 3.URL: , February5.URL: c_articles_116_155019/ [consulted9March2010] c_articles_116_149887/ [consulted13April2010] c_articles_116_155846/ [consulted11April2010] Sovetskaia Belorussia _articles_292_152152/ [consulted11April2010] c_news_113_285109/ [consulted11April2010] trazheva [FiveeventsaccordingtoVasiliiStrazhev]. a? [CrisisisnotaconstrainttotheNPPproject?] Naviny.by t uYushchenkozasstupnishestva[Belarusianswho hovoi bochke[Belarusiansdonotwanttoliveona opasnosti [Doctorsoftheworldaresaying“no”to 2009/04/08/ic_articles_116_162064/ [consulted13 avtogenom [ThefirstBelarusianNPPwascutinto odnenskoi oblasti[Belarusianplantmaybebuiltin rics/society/2007/11/21/ic_articles_116_154055/ Sovetskaia Belorussia, , February27.URL: Sovetskaia Belorussia, , January,23. Sovetskaia Belorussia, Nuclear EnergyDiscoursesinLithuaniaandBelarus Sovetskaia Belorussia, Sovetskaia Belorussia, July 22. October 13. August 19 January, 23.

149