Energy of the Future? Nuclear energy in Central and Eastern Europe Editors: Karel Polanecký, Jan Haverkamp HEINRICH-BÖLL-STIFTUNG Energy of the Future? Nuclear energy in Central and Eastern Europe Nuclear energy in Central and Eastern in Central Europe energy Nuclear Energy of the Future? Energy Editors: Karel Polanecký, Jan Haverkamp Concept and Project Coordination: Eva van de Rakt, Erik Siegl English translation: Petra and Evan Mellander Photographs: Jan Haverkamp and Eastern in Central Europe energy Nuclear Typesetting: Tomáš Barčík Printing: H.R.G. spol. s r.o., Svitavská 120 , 570 01 Litomyšl Published by Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung Praha in February 2011 ISBN 978-80-254-8928-4 Energy of the Future? Energy 4 CONTENTS Preface 6 Summary 7 Part I: Political Support for Nuclear Energy 9 • Czech Republic – ČEZ, Nuclear Power and Political Elites (Karel Polanecký) 9 • Slovakia – Political Pressure to Develop Nuclear Energy (Pavol Široký) 14 • Poland – Nuclear Plans (Zbigniew M. Karaczun) 20 • Hungary – Traces of the Soviet Nuclear Industry (András Perger) 24 • Bulgaria – Energy Policy and Politics (Petko Kovachev, Jan Haverkamp) 28 Part II: Financing the Construction of Nuclear Reactors and Forms of State Support 37 Part III: Basic Data on the Significance of Nuclear Energy in Five States in the Region 47 About the Authors 54 Nuclear energy in Central and Eastern in Central Europe energy Nuclear Energy of the Future? Energy 5 PREFACE Looking at International Atomic Energy Agency statistics, it is not immediately evident that the coun- tries of Central and Eastern Europe would constitute a promised land for nuclear energy. In the Euro- pean states of the former Eastern Bloc only two reactors are actually being built – in Mochovce, Slo- vakia. However, no one who follows the public debate, the legislative process or political parties’ pre- election programmes would doubt that nuclear energy occupies an exceptionally strong position in the region. In most of the Central European countries examined, politicians from across the political spectrum support this industrial sector and are working actively to create the conditions for building new nuclear power plants. Public opinion polls show that this does not detract from their popularity; to the contrary. While in Germany the government’s decision to extend operations of nuclear power plants triggered mass protests, plans to construct new units in the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary are either passively accepted or considered beneficial – even essential – by a majority of the population. Journalists and pundits in the mainstream media mostly restrict their reporting to actions taken by governments and energy companies in preparing to build new units, without investigating this issue crit- ically. The debate on the negative aspects and risks of nuclear energy is being supplanted by one-sided assertions about its advantages from the perspective of energy security and the prognosis for electricity prices, which of course do not reflect hidden economic costs and subsidies. While no one knows yet what to do with nuclear waste, this problem is not considered an acute one, and in debates on constructing nuclear power plants this issue is generally set aside on the assumption that the future will bring a solu- tion. The critical view, pointing out the risks of a large-scale accident and the resulting destruction, is often characterised as groundless dissemination of alarmist reports. An expert debate on whether, when and to what extent nuclear power plants can actually contribute to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions is supplanted by the assertion that nuclear power is emis- sions-free. Unlike their colleagues in Western Europe, energy strategists in the Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria and Slovakia do not address the fundamental question of whether connecting new nuclear power plants to the grid may limit options for developing renewable sources. The Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung, in cooperation with Hnutí DUHA and the Czech branch of the interna- tional organisation WISE, has attempted to describe in greater detail the causes and manifestations of nuclear energy’s exceptional position in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. The result is this publication, which contains contributions by experts from five countries in the region: the Czech Repub- lic, Slovakia, Poland, Hungary and Bulgaria. We leave it to the reader to assess the commonalities and differences in the individual countries, but probably everyone who reads the text attentively will reach one conclusion – nuclear energy’s firm position is a historical consequence of the communist era and is currently bolstered by a close interconnection between energy companies and political elites. We believe the following pages will support the critical view which is presently missing in the debate over Nuclear energy in Central and Eastern Europe and initiate the discussion which its supporters often reject as unnecessary. Petr Machálek, director of Hnutí DUHA Eva van de Rakt, director of the Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung Praha Jan Haverkamp, WISE Czech Republic Nuclear energy in Central and Eastern in Central Europe energy Nuclear Energy of the Future? Energy 6 SUmmARY The Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, Hungary and Bulgaria have much in common. In the second half of the 20th century they were part of the Socialist Bloc dominated by the Soviet Union and, as members of the Comecon (Council for Mutual Economic Assistance), also a distribution market for Soviet industrial production. In all of these countries – with the exception of Poland – nuclear power plants were built during the 1970s and 1980s using the Soviet technology of the time. Specialists were also trained in the Soviet Union, and upon their return these individuals formed the basis of the nuclear intelligentsia. In all five countries the electricity sectors were controlled by state monopolies. After the collapse of the socialist system these monopolies were transformed into companies of various kinds, but the govern- ments kept their majority stakes in them. The Czech Republic’s ČEZ, Poland’s PGE, Hungary’s MVM, Bulgaria’s NEK and Slovakia’s Slovenské elektrárne had no difficulty maintaining their dominant posi- tions, which were not even threatened by the market liberalisation which followed EU accession. Com- petition could not challenge the transformed monopolies due to their exceptional starting position, and proponents of nuclear energy have maintained significant influence at all of these companies. Only in Slovakia was the successor company to the socialist monopoly privatised. A majority stake in Slovenské elektrárne was sold to the Enel concern in 2006. However, the Slovak government privatised the company on condition that participants in the tender would continue with nuclear projects. In all the countries, dominant energy companies were able to establish close cooperation with the ministries responsible for developing the sector. These companies do not adapt their plans to governmen- tal conceptual programmes; to the contrary, ministries often create the conditions for projects proposed by company managers. Thus, in the name of energy security, state officials are actively implement- ing construction of nuclear power plants based on plans which – in most cases – date from the 1980s. In constructing nuclear power plants, officials of the individual dominant energy companies see an opportunity to maintain their privileged position on national markets. Coal-fired power plants will face increased costs in the coming years due to the need to purchase emissions allowances, and coal extrac- tion in the region is declining. Not one of these companies has attempted to base a significant portion of its business on decentralised production using renewable energy sources. Building nuclear power plants is the last theoretical possibility for the former monopolies to maintain their predominance over the competition and control of the market. Nuclear plants over energy plans In none of the five countries investigated was the decision to build a nuclear power plant made based on an energy plan evaluating the expediency of various alternatives, including non-nuclear ones. In Poland, the government decided to construct a nuclear power plant even though the energy plan did not recommend it. In Bulgaria, the state energy plan is supplanted by an overview of projects proposed by large investors. In Hungary, parliament approved a change to the energy plan which conditioned the construction of new reactors on shutting down old ones, but without requesting that various alterna- tives be presented and without evaluating the economic aspects of such a plan. The Slovak government adopted a strategic plan to develop the energy sector without a broader expert debate or an assessment of alternatives; rather, it approved the only proposal based on further nuclear development. While in the past the Czech government has included a comparison of various scenarios in the preparation of its Nuclear energy in Central and Eastern in Central Europe energy Nuclear energy plan, an elaborated non-nuclear alternative based on energy efficiency and renewable sources was not taken into consideration in its most recent such plan. The nuclear zeal of political elites In all the countries of Central and Eastern Europe we find high-level politicians vigorously promoting the development of nuclear energy. The countries differ only in their respective nuclear industries’ moti- Energy of the Future?