• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

JANUARY 12, 2007 | No. 651 NUCLEAR BELGIUM, PRESENT AND FUTURE At the end of the 1960s, Belgium decided to start producing a NUCLEAR BELGIUM, large share of its electricity with nuclear. Between 1975 and PRESENT AND FUTURE 1 1985 a total of 7 reactors were put online. Today nuclear is AUSTRALIA'S RE-OPENED responsible for 55,6% of total power production, making NUCLEAR DEBATE 4 Belgium the fourth most nuclear country worldwide, after SEVEN REACTORS CLOSED 5 France, Lithuania and Slovakia. With the Green party in government, in 2003 a phase-out law was passed, deciding to U.S. COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR POWER'S "GOLDEN stop the nuclear reactors after a 40 years lifetime. Today the ANNIVERSARY": FIFTY YEARS nuclear phase-out law is under heavy attack, and the elections OF FALSE CONFIDENCE AND of May or June 2007 will be decisive on the future of nuclear MASSIVE GIVEAWAYS 6 energy in Belgium. REVIVAL OF ANTI NUCLEAR POWER MOVEMENT IN LATIN (651.5777) BBL - The decision to order share of 650 MW, and SPE a share of nuclear reactors was taken without any 100 MW in the French nuclear reactor AMERICA 7 form of public debate in 1968. The first Chooz B, just across the Belgian border. GERMAN DEBATE ON three commercial nuclear reactors were In return EDF has a share of 500 MW of NUCLEAR HEATS UP 8 then put online in 1975: two in Doel, Tihange 1. close to Antwerp, and one in Tihange, EUROPEAN COMMISSION close to Liège. The oil crisis of the The original idea was to give the nuclear LAYS OUT GOOD INTENTIONS seventies was an extra push for taking reactors a lifetime of 30 years. They had BUT POOR PLANS. nuclear energy further. As a to be paid off in 20 years - leading to LANGUAGE ON NUCLEAR consequence between 1982 and 1985 some of the highest electricity tariffs in REMAINS FLUFFY 9 there were another two reactors added Europe - and after 30 years enough to both Doel and Tihange. Making the provisions had to be accumulated to be IN BRIEF 10 total of seven in Belgium. All are able to dismantle the reactors. The Pressurised Water Reactors. There were operational permits however are not very concrete plans for a fifth reactor in limited to a given date, but are re- Doel. These plans were met with a lot of evaluated every 10 years. Since protest in the early eighties, and after Electrabel argued that there was no the Chernobyl disaster in 1986 the actual maximum lifetime of a nuclear Belgian government put a moratorium power plant, the 30 years period got on new nuclear reactors. The existing under pressure. After a very heated and reactors were and are being upgraded lengthy parliamentary discussion - the however, still increasing the nuclear end report of the parliamentary capacity in Belgium. commission is 229 pages - the previous government then decided to limit the The nuclear reactors are owned and lifetime of the reactors to 40 years. This operated by Electrabel, the Belgian means that the first three reactors are to historical monopolist producer (90% of be closed in 2015, the last four should production). The second Belgian close between 2022 and 2025. producer SPE (8% of production), has a The nuclear phase-out was put down in small share of 4% in the reactors Doel 3 a law, that was finally approved in 2003. and 4 and Tihange 2 and 3. To It stipulates the dates for the closure of complete the picture: Electrabel has a each reactor. And it states that only in case of unforeseen external events, replacement or import capacity to liberal politicians took clear anti-nuclear such as international crises, and in case guarantee the power supply. Which of positions at the time. of severe energy security problems, the course depends on the political phase-out can be turned back. Not affirmation of the nuclear phase-out law, The opposition, Christian-democrats surprisingly, it is this point that the combined with the international market and the extreme right Vlaams Blok, supporters of nuclear energy are now situation: price and availability of fossil were fiercely against the phase-out. using to re-open the debate about the and renewable energy, price of CO2… phase-out. Three years later the positions haven't The arguments changed fundamentally, but they are Table 1. Belgian nuclear reactors, and Late spring or early summer of this year getting sharper. The communication of their foreseen closure. there will be federal elections in the pro-nuclear is on how difficult it will Belgium. The be to achieve drastic CO2 emission cuts Capacity Date exact date will without nuclear, on how much electricity (MWe) be decided end prices will increase without nuclear, and Name Type Net Gross Foreseen closure of January. on the insecurity of the supply of fossil BR-3 PWR 11 12 closed These elections, fuels. The quarrels between Russia and and the its neighbours do of course help in this DOEL-1 PWR 392 412 15 February 2015 government last argument. TIHANGE-1 PWR 962 1009 1 October 2015 negotiations that DOEL-2 PWR 433 454 1 December 2015 will follow, are At the start of the discussion the focus DOEL-3 PWR 1006 1056 1 October 2022 crucial for the was on lifetime extension. Those in TIHANGE-2 PWR 1008 1055 1 February 2023 first phase of the favour of nuclear were professing to nuclear phase- extend the lifetime of the reactors to 60 DOEL-4 PWR 985 1041 1 July 2025 out. If the phase- years. In order to have more time to TIHANGE-3 PWR 1015 1065 1 September 2025 out law is not develop the better alternative of abandoned in renewable energy. A very attractive the government declaration of this bonus of this scenario would be that in Table 2. Belgian power production summer, that means that the law will the meantime the nuclear reactors almost certainly could generate cheap electricity - even Annual Electrical Power Production for 2005 stand until the combined with a potential income for Total Power Production Nuclear Power Production next elections, in the government from an extra tax on (including nuclear) 2011. Now, that the nuclear electricity. This tax revenue would be too late can then partly be used for funding of 81500 GWh(e) 45335.443 GWh(e) to revise the renewables and efficiency. This is often closure date for referred to as the "Borssele scenario", The energy savings potential, the the first reactors that are to be closed in because of the similar approach the potential for large- and small scale 2015. Because in order to be able to Dutch government took in extending the combined heat and power, the potential keep them open - and for example lifetime of the Borssele reactor. (See: In for renewable energy in Belgium is more order fuel - the decision to keep them Briefs, Nuclear Monitor 634, 16 than big enough to cover the nuclear open has to be taken 7 years in September 2005) phase-out. Emissions of CO2 can still be advance. substantially reduced and our The experience in Finland with the EPR, dependence of natural gas do not have This is probably the main reason why shows however that one should be very to increase significantly. Provided that over the last year the pressure of the weary about promises to simultaneously the political conditions are set right. At pro-nuclear lobby has been intensifying support nuclear and renewables. It just the moment this is not sufficiently the dramatically in Belgium. It is of course doesn't happen. And more importantly, case. Especially the energy reduction surfing on the general revival of pro- it slams the door shut to really create a potential in the buildings and in nuclear spin on the European and competitive renewables sector. As long transport is almost left alone. international scene, that uses the drive as nuclear continues to dominate the for climate policies and energy security production market, it will be very The question if the nuclear phase-out measures as a way to put nuclear at the difficult for any newcomer, and will actually take place as foreseen in forefront again. But the Belgian renewables especially, to get a the law, therefore depends on three campaign is clearly building up to the significant market share. Finally, the uncertainties. The first uncertainty is elections. increasing risks of accidents associated technical. Nothing guarantees that all with lifetime extension make such a the reactors will be able to function for After the decision of the phase-out law choice unacceptable. 40 years. Or rather, that it will stay in 2003, the debate on nuclear energy profitable enough for Electrabel to keep was silent for a while. But at the time of Now also new nuclear is coming on the investing in the reactors, to keep them the decision it was clear that not all table. Some are defending that Belgium running. The second uncertainty is government parties were equally should build a EPR before 2030. Others political. No political decision - not even enthusiastic about it. In short, it was the are claiming that we should invest in a a law - is irreversible. Between the date green parties, and to a somewhat lesser fourth generation reactor, and that the of the decision and the first shutdown extent the socialist parties that were in existing plants should therefore get a lies 12 years, until the last it's 22 years. favour of the phase-out. The liberal lifetime extension. Since the fourth And a lot depends on the energy party, leading the government, was generation is only expected in 2040 at policies the coming years.

Load more

  12

Copy Link