LITHUANIA. Technical Meeting on the Country Nuclear Power Profiles (CNPP) IAEA, Vienna

Transcription

1 LITHUANIA Technical Meeting on the Country Nuclear Power Profiles (CNPP) IAEA, Vienna

2 Lithuania: Facts & Figures 2

3 Nuclear installations: Ignalina NPP Light-water, graphite-moderated type reactors, similar to those at Chernobyl in the Ukraine Construction started in 1978 Unit Unit Design life 30 years Lithuania assumed ownership of them in 1991 after the collapse of the Soviet Union. 3

4 Gross electricity generation mix

5 The shutdown of Ignalina NPP at the end of 2009 Dependency on electricity import 5

6 Gas over nuclear 6

7 5D - five dimensional approach to energy security Diversification of oil supply and control of oil infrastructure Diversification of gas supply and control of gas infrastructure Diversification of electricity supply and power generation Drivers (Instruments) Development of the liberalized energy market (electricity, gas, biomass) 7

8 The energy policy of 2012 Visaginas NPP LNG import terminal Power interconnections with the EU Energy reliance on single supplier to drop from 80% in 2012 to 55% by 2016 and 35% in 2020 The elimination of energy islands in the EU 8

9 The energy policy of 2012 Visaginas NPP LNG import terminal Power interconnections with the EU Energy reliance on single supplier to drop from 80% in 2012 to 55% by 2016 and 35% in 2020 The elimination of energy islands in the EU 9

10 Bridges for energy OIL infrastructure Butinge Oil Import Terminal (1999) The CUT OFF of Druzhba oil pipeline (2006) GAS infrastructure The start of the implementation of the 3rd Energy Package (2011) Unbundling of vertically integrated monopoly AB Lietuvos dujos (2014) Klaipeda LNG terminal (2015) 10

11 Klaipėda LNG terminal the bridge to the global gas market 11

12 LNG regasification markets LNG ship reloading markets LNG auto-trailer markets Baltic-connector GIPL to Ukraine Markets accessible from the 1 st of January, 2015 Markets accessible after regional interconnections are finished Markets accessible after on-shore LNG reloading station is finished LNG terminals ( m3) in development 12

13 Fair price

14 Natural gas out of the game?

15 BEMIP and the Bridge to the EU power markets The main goal of the BEMIP is to create a unified market of the Baltic Sea region The plan also embraces the establishment of power interconnections with Poland LitPol Link (1000 MWe), with Sweden NordBalt (700 MWe) and with Finland Estlink-2 The new Visaginas power plant project constitutes an integral part of the BEMIP

16 2015 the breakthrough 16

17 Next step - Synchronization with European Continental Network (ECN) Goal: fully-fledged integration of the three Baltic States electricity markets with the ECN based on synchronous operation of electricity systems. Progress: National strategy towards synchronization (laws, action plan) in place; PCI status granted; Feasibility study completed in Next steps: Three Baltic States to agree on concrete scenario; Apply to ENTSO-E for further procedures;

18 Electricity systems are like the tandem bike perform

19 Visaginas Nuclear Power Plant Visaginas NPP rationale Diversification of region s energy mix and market competitiveness Remove dependence on Russian electricity supply Green Agenda and region s environmental goals Project progress Strategic Investor selected (Hitachi) Pre-development works completed (incl. site evaluation, EIA, spatial planning) Economic competitiveness of the project improved (Japanese export credit agencies proposals) Resolution of outstanding issues in progress (BCM Senior Officials Committee, investors joint meetings agreed) Visaginas NPP capacity: MW, 10,5 TW/y Total price of the project, EUR: ~ 5 billion (Lithuanian share, EUR ~ 1,9 billion) Estimated service life: 60 years

20 Systematic Diversification of Energy Portfolio Energy portfolio mix 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% Bio and other (renew ables) Electricity Gas import Bio and other (renew ables) Electricity import Electricity import Gas import Local production EU/Global markets Russian imports Bio and other (renew ables) Electricity import LNG Gas import 20% 10% Oil Oil Oil Key highlights Butinge Oil Import Terminal (1999) Closing of Ignalina Nuclear Pow er Plant (2009) Klaipeda LNG terminal (2014) Closing of Druzhba oil pipeline (2006) Start of 3rd Energy Package implementation (2011) NordBalt (2015) LitPol Link (2015) 20

21 Proposals for the CNPP

22 This year we commemorate the 30 th anniversary of the nuclear disaster at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant (NPP) one of the worst disasters in the history of nuclear energy. More than seven million people and some 63,000 square miles (163,000 square kilometers) of land in Europe have been affected by the nuclear contamination from Chernobyl NPP. More than seven thousand Lithuanians were involved in the emergency response actions. As Chernobyl disaster has clearly demonstrated, nuclear accidents and radiological emergencies have no boundaries. Looking into the future, we must make sure such accidents don t repeat. 22

23 After the devastating accidents in Chernobyl (1986) and Fukushima (2011) the world has changed. The reputation of the nuclear power as an energy source has been damaged. In this regard Lithuania is working actively in the region and internationally to strengthen the global safety regime and is participating in transboundary environmental impact assessment (EIA) procedures concerning projects of nuclear facilities located in the territories of neighboring countries, if the transboundary impacts of the project could potentially affect Lithuania. Currently, Lithuania is participating in transboundary EIA procedures with Belarus, Russia, Poland, Finland. 23

24 Suggestions to discuss The ability to report on: Involvement in nuclear safety related activities regarding nuclear power infrastructures with potential impact to State population; Findings (results) of above mentioned activities; Public Acceptance of nuclear power developments in close vicinity to densely populated areas of State territory. 24

25 Object of Lithuanian submission Belarus NPP project Belarus NPP: Distance from: Lithuanian Capital Vilnius 50 km; Lithuanian border 20 km; Belarus Capital Minsk 140 km; River Neris (Vilija) (cooling source) km. In Lithuania within the radius of 100 km: Capital city Vilnius ( residents, major business and governmental institutions); 14 administrative districts ( residents); A total of residents. Danger zones: 30 km evacuation needed; 100 km sheltering and stable iodine intakes 1/3 of Lithuanian population might be affected by Belarus NPP!

26 Lithuania is seriously concerned about the NPP project in Belarus and its potential negative transboundary impact to Lithuanian environment and residents. Although international organizations (the Espoo and Aarhus Conventions) stated that Belarus infringes international conventions in the process of development of the NPP project (violations of procedural and substantial nature), Belarus does not pay serious attention to implement the recommendations of the mentioned Conventions. On the contrary, it quickly advances with construction works [commissioning of 1 st Unit of NPP in 2018].

27 We are deeply concerned Main point of Lithuanian concern is safety of the Ostrovets site for the construction of NPP (situated 40 km from capital Vilnius). The site was chosen well before the start of the transboundary assessment. No proper researches made and no international missions engaged in order to assess the suitability of the site for the construction of NPP, in spite of available data on seismic activity. For Lithuania Ostrovets site is unacceptable threat, as transboundary effects can affect 1/3 of our population (100 km range), using waters of the river Neris (one of two major rivers in LT) for cooling purposes may contaminate drinking water and Nemunas River basin, which covers 72 percent of Lithuanian territory. It is a question of national security of the country.

28 Formal submission of the EIA documentation does not mean documentation compliance with the Espoo Convention. The EIA report presented to Lithuania in 2013: was dated as of July 2010 (old report); did not contain substance; was google-translated into Lithuanian-like language. EIA report - lost in translation: nuclear power plant = nuclear herb as the word plant translated into Lithuanian as herb rather than factory or enterprise ; reactor plant = Republic of Uzbekistan as the Russian abbreviation «РУ» translated into Lithuanian as Republic of Uzbekistan instead of reactor plant (in Russian is «реакторная установка»); Lithuania = Uzbekistan - as the description of the transboundary EIA named Uzbekistan instead of Lithuania; meaningless sentences. Would you trust such a document? EIA report lost in translation

29 Belarus NPP is NOT an example of good practice Lithuania highly values the attention the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) pays to Belarus NPP project and appreciates the most recent visit (18-20 April, 2016) of the Director General of IAEA Yukiya Amano to Belarus. International scrutiny is the most effective way to encourage countries that develop nuclear energy to implement the highest international nuclear safety standards. During the Y.Amano visit to Belarus, it was stressed that in the years to come Belarus will engage IAEA missions for peer review of Belarus NPP. However, we hear a lot of declarations, but see little actions and no results. For several years we call on Belarus to engage IAEA SEED (Site and External Events Design) Mission for the Ostrovets site safety and selection evaluation, but up until now it has not been done.

30 The accident in Ostrovets nuclear power plant the accident in Ostrovets NPP occurred in mid-april 2016 the information from Belarus side was received only after intense actions of protest from Lithuanian side according to the Ministry of Energy of Belarus, the load bearing structures were damaged when casting the lap of the hull that was under construction between the two reactors on 8 April 2016

31 Unfortunately, Belarus is looking for political solutions to technical issues. Instead of engaging international experts for evaluation of NPP project, Belarus seeks for political support and approval for the project. Lithuania hears a lot of promises and declarations (e.g. IAEA SEED mission, stress-tests), but no constructive actions and results. We appreciate IAEA rising attention to Belarus NPP project, but we believe that appropriate IAEA missions should visit the NPP site, instead of IAEA top officials, diplomats and politicians.

32