Eastern Europe clings to atomic energy as symbol of independence

Date: 14/01/1999

By Simon Taylor

DESPITE the clear but gradual move away from nuclear power in the EU, eastern Europe looks set to continue relying on atomic energy for the foreseeable future.

While Germany and even France are taking the first tentative steps towards phasing out nuclear power stations, new facilities are being completed in eastern Europe and moves to close the more dangerous reactors in Lithuania, Slovakia and Bulgaria have run into the sand.

The issue is taking on more urgency as the prospect of new countries joining the EU draws closer. In theory at least, by the middle of the next decade ten former Soviet bloc countries could be members of the Union, adding some ten new nuclear plants to the EU's stable, including at least three high-risk installations.

Union foreign ministers highlighted the growing importance of the issue last month when they warned that applicant countries could only join the EU if their nuclear power stations met Union safety standards - tacitly recognising that there was no realistic prospect of the region stepping back from atomic energy in the near future. Concern was provoked in part by the fact that one of the riskiest reactors, Slovakia's Mochovce plant, is only 80 kilometres from the EU's border.

There are many reasons for eastern Europe's reluctance to give up nuclear power. As staff at the European nuclear industry association FORATOM point out, it represents independence after 40 years of reliance on Russia for their energy needs, especially gas. Nuclear energy also offers a cheap way of generating electricity which can be exported to earn much-needed foreign currency.

European Commission sources admit privately they are relieved that none of the problem reactors are in the six leading applicants for EU membership, which are expected to join the Union in the early part of the next decade. Nevertheless, the Commission has stressed the need for improvements in the handling of nuclear waste, singling out in particular the Dukovany plant in the Czech Republic.

The big problems are to be found in Lithuania, Slovakia and Bulgaria where the first generation of Soviet-designed reactors is still operating despite alerts about their safety and commitments to close them. Governments in these countries have been able to delay closure plans by warning of job losses and the lack of alternative energy sources to replace the generating capacity which would be lost if atomic plants were shut down.

The Union is attempting to keep pressure on applicant states to close these facilities. Lithuania, for example, received a very clear message from the Commission in November that its failure to close the Ignalina nuclear plant was a major reason for not inviting Vilnius to start membership negotiations yet.

But environmental groups such as EU Enlargement Watch, which cooperates with a wide range of non-governmental organisations across the applicant countries, have also raised concern about safety standards at the second generation of eastern European reactors, including the new plant under construction at Temelin in the Czech Republic.

Member state governments have tried to bring safety standards into line with their own, but again there are major problems: not least the lack of common standards within the EU for applicant countries to work towards.

In addition, the Union has a bad track record in promoting better safety standards beyond its borders. Last year, the European Court of Auditors published a damning report on EU activity on nuclear safety in the former Soviet Union states covered by the Tacis programme. The Union's spending watchdog revealed that in seven years, the Commission had only spent €355 million of its €850 million budget on projects designed to raise technical standards.

Enlargement Watch campaigners argue that EU funds should be linked to precise closure dates for plants while setting clearly defined safety standards.

Nevertheless, while such solutions sound appealingly simple, in practice the necessary decisions are wound up in a complex web of issues ranging from the lack of coherent energy policies in the applicant countries to the national attachment to nuclear energy as a symbol of economic and political independence.

It used to be said that only two things would be with us forever: death and taxes. But in eastern Europe, nuclear energy looks like being around for a long time to come.