6/5/2002: LUKASHENKA ON
BELARUSIAN NUCLEAR ENERGY EXPERTISE ITAR-TASS reported on 5 June 2002 thatBelarusian President Alyaksandr
Lukashenka visited the United Institute of Energy and
Nuclear Research in Sosny and named Russia as Belarus' main partner in the
area of energy and nuclear research. Lukashenka said that Belarus had managed to
preserve Soviet-era expertise in nuclear power engineering, and voiced the hope that
Belarusian and Russian scientists would collaborate with Western countries.
According to Lukashenka, although Belarusian scientists have a bright future,
they also have to adapt themselves to new circumstances, a phrase that suggests
serious financial problems in the Belarusian nuclear research field. [ITAR-TASS, 5 June 2002; in "Belarus: Lukashenka says Russia
main partner in energy-nuclear research," FBIS Document CEP20020605000321.]
{Entered 10/18/2002 MJ}
5/2/2002: LUKASHENKA AGAINST NPP CONSTRUCTION IN BELARUS
Belarusian television reported on 2 May 2002 that Belarusian President Alyaksandr
Lukashenka said that Belarus would not construct a nuclear power plant (NPP)
on its territory. However, according to Lukashenka, Belarus was interested
in purchasing electricity generated by NPPs
in Russia if the price was sufficiently low, and even in the possibility of
constructing a Belarusian-owned reactor
at the Smolensk NPP
in Russia.[1] Lukashenka's statement followed the rumors that Belarus was
negotiating to purchase the
Ignalina NPP, which was denied by Lithuanian officials, who said that Lithuania
had not
received any official proposals from Belarus.[2] Sources:
[1] Belarusian Television, 2 May 2002; in "President rules out nuclear plant
construction in Belarus," FBIS
Document CEP20020502000226.
[2] BNS,
25 April 2002; in "Lithuania casts doubt on proposals to sell nuclear plant to
Belarus," FBIS
Document CEP20020425000293. {Entered 10/18/2002 MJ}
3/26/98: BELARUS INDICATES
THREE POSSIBLE SITES FOR NEW POWER PLANT Representatives of the Belarusian
Energy Institute told Interfax that the Dubrov district (Vitebsk region),
the Shklov district (Mogilyov region), or the Bykhov district (Mogilyov
region) are possible sites for the construction of a new nuclear power
plant in Belarus. The experts chose these areas because they are
sparsely populated and have access to water. Although 17 percent
of Belarusians do not oppose a new power plant, Director of the Sociology
Institute Yevgeniy Babosov stated that only 5.7 percent of the population
would "calmly" accept a nuclear plant in their area.[1] Speaking
at the Institute of Power Engineering Problems in Sosny on 3 February 1998,
President Alyaksandr Lukashenka stated that the government will allow the
people to vote by popular referendum whether a new nuclear power plant
should be constructed. The president did not give a date for the
proposed referendum.[2]
Sources: [1] Interfax, "Three Sites Singled
Out For Nuclear Power Plant In Belarus," no. 2, 26 March 1998. [2] Belapan Radio, 4 February
1998; in "Lukashenka Says People Will Decide on Nuclear Power Plant," FBIS-SOV-98-035.]
{entered 4/22/98 djw}
2/17/98: POLL SHOWS
FEW BELARUSIANS FAVOR NEW NUCLEAR PLANT In a poll by the Zerkalo sociological
service, 58 percent of 500 Minsk residents stated that they oppose the
construction of a nuclear power plant in Belarus. Only ten percent
supported the plant, while 15 percent stated their support depended on
where the new nuclear plant would be located.
[Belapan Radio, 17 February 1998; in
"Belarus: Minsk Residents Oppose Building New Nuclear Plant," FBIS-SOV-98-050,
19 February 1998.] {entered 2/26/98 djw}
10/23/97: SCIENTISTS HOLD
ANTI-NUCLEAR CONFERENCE IN MINSK The Belarusian Association of Independent
Scientists and Inventors, the Belarusian Republican Association "Chornobyl
Union," the Belarusian Social and Ecological Union "Chornobyl," the Belarusian
Engineering Academy, and other public organizations held a conference in
Minsk opposing plans to construct a nuclear power plant early in the next
century. About 100 people participated in the conference. Among
the topics discussed at the conference were: requesting a 15 or 20-year
moratorium on constructing a nuclear plant in Belarus; upgrading current
thermal power plants and technologies; criticizing the IAEA for concealing
information on the amount of damage caused by the Chornobyl accident; and
quickening the selection process for the commission of experts who will
decide whether Belarus actually needs a new nuclear plant. The conference
participants felt that a new nuclear plant would deepen Belarus' economic
crisis, create radioactive waste problems, and perpetuate the country's
wasteful level of energy consumption.
[Belapan Radio, 6 November 1997; in
"Conference Proposes Moratorium on Building Nuclear Plants," FBIS-SOV-97-310.]
{entered 2/9/98 djw}
10/16/97: CHAIRMAN OPPOSES
PLANT CONSTRUCTION Chairman of the Subcommission on Science
and Technological Progress of the Belarusian House of Representatives Ruslan
Ignatishchev stated in an editorial in Narodnaya gazeta that proponents
of constructing a nuclear power plant in Belarus are deliberately misleading
the public to support the project. Ignatishchev's editorial is a
response to a May 1997 appearance of Minister of Fuel and Energy Valentin
Gerasimov in the House of Representatives in which Gerasimov stated that
nuclear energy is the only energy alternative for Belarus. Among
Ignatishchev's arguments against construction is the fact that the new
nuclear plant would supply only 4.5 percent of Belarus' energy needs, it
could not begin operation until about 2012, and estimated costs for construction
range from $4 to $9 billion (Belarus has an annual budget of $1.5 billion).
Costs for constructing a spent fuel storage facility would also be a major
issue since neither Russia nor Ukraine permit the import of radioactive
waste. As alternatives to a new nuclear plant, Ignatishchev suggests
purchasing energy from already-existing nuclear plants (Ignalina in Lithuania,
Smolensk in Russia, or Chornobyl and Rivne in Ukraine) and using Belarus'
own natural gas deposits, which should last for another 80 years.
["Yesli zadayut vopros, stroit li v
Belarusi AES, ya otvechayu--ni v koyem sluchaye!" Narodnaya gazeta,
No. 215, 16 October 1997, p. 1.] {entered 2/10/98 djw}
5/14/97: GERASIMOV: "NO ALTERNATIVE"
TO NUCLEAR POWER During a 14 May 1997 parliamentary question-and-answer session,
Belarusian Energy Minister Valentin Gerasimov recently stated, "There is
no alternative to the development of nuclear power engineering in the Republic."[1]
The four nuclear reactors Gerasimov proposes would cost almost $5 billion,
but Belarusian experts say they would save the country $264 million annually
on electricity and fuel imports.[2] Possible sites for a power plant are
in Bykhaw or Shklow districts, Mahilow Region; and in Dubrowna district,
Vitsiebsk Region.[1] Swedish International Project Director Jan Nistad
indicated that the power plant "would have to be Russian," and that if
it were, Belarus would probably pay for it by exporting electricity to
Russia.[2] On 12 May 1997, Belarusian Deputy Prime Minister Gennady Novitsky
had refuted reports that the Belarusian government was planning to build
a nuclear power plant and had chosen a site for it. Novitsky acknowledged
that the government was considering the option, but stated that no decisions
had been made.[3]
[1] Belapan, 15 May 1997; in "Belarus
Searching for Site for New Nuclear Power Plant," FBIS-SOV-97-135. [2] Ariane Sains, "Energy Minister
Says New Nuclear Plant is Best Choice for Belarus," Nucleonics Week, 22
May 1997, p. 4. [3] Andrey Fomin, ITAR-TASS, 12 May
1997; in "Official Dismisses Reported Plan for Nuclear Power Plant," FBIS-SOV-97-132
{Entered 8/4/97 LBN}
3/26/97: GREEN PARTY REQUESTS STATEMENT
OF MINISTRY'S POSITION ON NPP The Belarusian Green Party sent a letter to the Ministry
of Fuel and Energy, requesting a detailed explanation of the Ministry's
position concerning the construction of a nuclear power plant on Belarusian
territory. In the letter, the Green Party noted that if the explanation
they receive is not "exhaustive," the Party will file an inquiry with the
president, and should that fail, they will create a campaign demanding
a national referendum on the issue.
[Belapan, 26 March 1997; in "Green
Party Queries Government Stand on Nuclear Plant," FBIS-TEN-97-005.] {Entered
8/5/97 LBN}
3/97: DISTRICT VOLUNTEERS TO BE
NPP SITE The Dubrovno (Dubrowna) district in northeast Belarus has
proposed that it be the site of the nuclear power plant the government
plans to build. While Dubrovno is one of the sites under consideration,
the decision depends on the results of geological studies and final design
of the plant.[1] Minister of Fuel and Energy Valentin Gerasimov added that
agreements with international energy organizations are also necessary.[2]
[1] "Belarus considers sites," Financial
Times: East European Energy Report, March 1997, p. 28. [2] Tereza Khayutina, "Ploshadka
dlya AES poka ne vybrana," Narodnaya Volya, 13 March 1997; in Ekoinform,
no. 3, March 1997.{Entered 8/5/97 LBN}
12/96: MINISTER CALLS FOR AID TO BUILD NPP Belarusian Energy Minister Valentin Gerasimov said that Belarus
is seeking $3.5 to $4 billion in aid to build a nuclear power facility,
which is to be operational by 2005. The location has not yet been determined,
but three possible sites have been chosen near the Russian border.[1]
A new nuclear power plant would create more energy independence for Belarus;
it currently must import nearly 90 percent of its energy from abroad.
Belarus currently has one unfinished nuclear plant near Minsk, but construction
stopped following the 1986 Chornobyl accident.[2]
[1] "Belarus expresses interest in nuclear power plants,"
Nuclear News, February 1997, p. 43. [2] "Belarus Seeks Funds to Develop Nuclear Power Plant,"
Post-Soviet Nuclear and Defense Monitor, 20 January 1997, p. 6.
{Updated 2/9/98 djw}
3/14/96:LITHUANIA NOT INFORMED OF BELARUSIAN NUCLEAR
PLANS The Lithuanian state nuclear safey inspection organ, VATESI,
reported that Belarus had not informed it of its plans to build a nuclear
power station, but had been under no obligation to do so.
[THE BALTIC OBSERVER, 3/14-20/96, p. 3.]
11/1/95: RUSSIAN REACTOR MAY BE BUILT NEAR BORDER WITH
BELARUS There is a possibility that Russia may build reactors in Smolensk (in Russia
close to the Belarusian border), which will help with Belarusian energy
deficits.
[CISNP Discussions with Belarusian official, 10/95.]
4/6/95: BELARUS 1995 ENERGY DEBT This year Belarus is expected to owe approximately $3 billion
for imported energy.
[Ann MacLachan, "Belarus could decide in 1996 on Building
New Nuclear Plant," NUCLEONICS WEEK, 4/6/95, p. 13.]
10/94:BELARUSIAN MEETINGS WITH NUCLEAR POWER PLANT
BUILDERS Belarus continued with plans to construct a nuclear power
plant. To date, Belarusian officials have held meetings with Minatom in
Russia to discuss an advanced VVER-600 reactor and a VVER 1000 reactor,
with Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. to discuss a CANDU-type reactor, and
General Atomics Corporation of the U.S. to discuss an advanced gas-cooled
reactor. According to Aleksandr Mikhalevich, Belarus has had minimal contact
with Westinghouse Electric, Siemens AG, Electricite de France, and Asea
Brown Boveri ABB. Mikhalevichwas quoted in Nucleonics Week as saying
that Belarus would try to obtain blended-down LEU fuel from Russian weapons'
stockpiles to fuel its future reactors. He later noted this had been the
position of the previous government administration. He did not know the
position of the Lukashenka administration on this issue.
Sources: [1] Mark Hibbs, "Belarus Widens Sphere Of Contacts In
Bid To Get Nuclear Reactors," NUCLEONICS WEEK, 10/13/94, p. 11. [2] CISNP discussions with Belarusian official, 4/95.
To return to the main
nuclear power entry, see the