2 nuclear power plants approved by Finland

www.nytimes.com
July 1, 2010

The Finnish Parliament approved the construction of two nuclear power plants on Thursday, the latest victory for proponents of atomic energy in Europe. Just two weeks ago, the Swedish Parliament narrowly voted to allow the reactors at 10 nuclear power plants to be replaced when the old ones are shut down -- a reversal from a 1980 referendum that called for them to be phased out entirely. nuclear power fell out of favor in much of Europe after the 1979 accident at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania and the 1986 disaster at Chernobyl, Ukraine.

But in an era of concern about dependence on foreign supplies of fossil fuels and increases in atmospheric carbon, there is renewed interest in electricity generated by nuclear fission. "Over all, opinions are firming and more positive," Ian Hore-Lacy, a spokesman for the World Nuclear Association, said of the European mood. "People are less concerned about waste because they've seen it's not a drama, and it's been well managed."

With protesters in Helsinki gathered outside, the Finnish Parliament voted 120 to 72 to back a nuclear power plant application from a consortium called Teollisuuden Voima, and 121 to 71 to approve a new plant built by Fennovoima. The companies, which have five years to submit construction license applications, hope to begin operating the plants by 2020.

The vote will allow the Finns to build their sixth and seventh nuclear plants. The country's four existing nuclear plants provide about 28% of Finland's total electricity needs, according to the World Nuclear Association. Finland imports electricity, coal and gas from Russia for much of its remaining needs, and officials have expressed unease about dependence on a sometimes-difficult neighbour.

The two light-water reactors, which will generate a combined 3,200MWs, are estimated to cost as much as 10 billion euros ($12.5 billion). Neither group has decided on a reactor design yet. Fennovoima, a Finnish consortium in which the German utility E.ON holds a 34% stake, must first decide where to build its plant. Two possible sites, at Simo and Pyhajoki, have been identified. Teollisuuden Voima, known as TVO, is building a new-generation EPR-model plant with Areva, the French engineering company, at Olkiluoto, in the southwest.

That project is running well over budget and behind schedule. Areva said on June 23 that it would book a charge of 400 million euros in the first half of the year against cost overruns, bringing its total write-downs on the plant to 2.7 billion euros. In 2005, it estimated the cost of the job at 3 billion euros. The plant had been scheduled to go online in 2009, but officials are now aiming for a 2013 start. Construction of a similar reactor in Flamanville, France, is also experiencing delays and cost overruns, leading skeptics to question whether the industry can operate without significant government aid.

Nuclear power proponents argue that the technology is more environmentally sound than burning fossil fuels because no greenhouse gases are emitted to split atoms. Opponents cite concerns about the danger of accidents and long-term waste disposal. Tomas Kaberger, director general of the Swedish Energy Agency, said there was no certainty that any of the plants would be built, despite talk of a nuclear renaissance. "Historically, the industry has not been able to reduce costs with increased experience," Mr. Kaberger said. "New reactors have not been cheaper than previous models."

Mauri Pekkarinen, the Finnish minister of economic affairs, said he was confident the plants would be built without public financing. "The companies don't need any subsidies," he said in an interview. "The government has nothing to do with the financing." Most of the nuclear plants under construction today are in China. In Europe, France has long been the main nuclear proponent, generating most of its electricity from its fleet of nuclear plants, and championing its technology on the world stage. Britain is eager to build new nuclear capacity, but at a time of austerity budgets, the government has suggested that it might have to resort to a tax on carbon pollution to finance construction.