Andrei Ozharovsky: No proofs of Astravets NPP projet’s operational capability

In addition to economic unprofitability and obvious corruption schemes, nuclear power plant construction turns Belarus into a potential hostage of nuclear terrorism.

Such an opinion was expressed by a Russian nuclear physicist Andrei Ozharovsky in an interview to charter97.org.

- In 2012 you said that Astravets nuclear power plant is a façade project, and most likely it would not be finished. Has something changed over the three years?

- From the point of view of an engineer, there are no new facts that could have changed by critical attitude to this project. Analogous projects, construction of which was to be completed and which were to be brought into operation in Russia by that time, are on the stage of construction still. That is, Astravets nuclear power plant is a purely “paper” project, and its safety and functional ability justification are remaining purely ink on paper. But over the three years some other factors appeared, and they put in question viability of this “construction.” First of all, it is slump in hydrocarbon energy sources’ prices. While previously one of the main reasons was a fear of accidents and the problem of radioactive waste material utilization, now any nuclear project, no matter who is building it, Russia or France, for example, becomes economically unviable. Secondly, transit of Russian gas via Belarus is decreasing. The Nord Stream bypassing Belarus has been constructed, and alongside with general reducing of European purchases, there is gas surplus. While one of the justifications of construction was: let’s build a nuclear power plant in Belarus and sell more gas to Europe. And now this argument does not work. And the most unpleasant thing is a threat of nuclear terrorism. Three years ago no one could be thinking of a war next to us, that we would seriously discuss it. No matter how terrorists could be named: separatists, rebels or subversive groups of the neighbouring state – nuclear power plants are extremely attractive object, which is not defended from attack in any way. Even convenient armaments, not heavy artillery systems, are enough to turn a nuclear power plant into what it potentially is – a nuclear bomb, which had been deployed on its territory by the state itself.

All these factors – economic unprofitability, changed structure of deliveries of Russian gas to Europe, the increased threat of terrorism – are exactly making arguments of nuclear power opponents stronger. I am following the events in Belarus, though I am banned entry to your country, and I am glad that this year Chernobyl Way was held under slogan “No to Russian nuclear threat!” And I am fully supportive of this slogan.

- However, the construction is continued…

- There are examples, which are not far to seek: let’s take Kaliningrad nuclear power plant, which was constructed for a long time, and as a result more than a billion of dollars was “buried” into the ground. The situation is the same here: the outward show continues. And it’s getting more and more expensive, both for Russia and Belarus. And in case the nuclear power station would not be built, it is not clear who is to cover expenses. But unfortunately, the project has become more real, there is more danger now. And the chances of the nuclear power plant to be finally constructed and even filled with radioactive fuel, thus making another hazardous facility, have grown.

- Even without regard to the abovementioned factor of the terrorist threat, how more angerous Astravets NPP could become as compared to analogous facilities worldwide and why?

- There are no engineer proofs that this project is functional, properly functioning. I am not speaking of it being dangerous or safe, or its economic feasibility. Without a development model, an experimental model, it is impossible to say whether such a complex facility as a nuclear power plant, would be working. It is the basics of engineering. But as it is known, Russian analogues have not been put in operation yet. In 20013 the very first facility of the kind, Voronezh nuclear power plant, was to be finished. It had not been put into operation, there is extensive delay there. It shows that as usual, “something went wrong”. There are delays at Leningrad NPP also, it is built under the same project, AES-2006 (NPP-2006), and besides, a fall of 1,200 tons of steel structures took place there.

These observations confirm my point of view that beginning of construction does not mean it would be finished.

- Who is to gain from this project at all then?

- Unfortunately, it has been proved that my country has a rather high level of corruption. And very often it is profitable exactly to be building, not to build up. If Astravets nuclear power plant would be dropped halfway, as Kaliningrad one, who could be able to check how much money had been spent there in reality? I have seen an interview with builders recently, and they speak about theft at the construction site – and it is no surprise for me.

We remind that a Russian nuclear physicist and engineer Andrei Ozharovsky is known by his resolute opposition to construction of Astravets (Ostrovets) nuclear power plant. In July 2012 he was detained by Belarusian police in Astravets, and was sentenced to 10 days of administrative arrest for alleged “hooliganism” by Astravets court. On June 28, 2012, after release, Andrei Ozharovsky was deported from Belarus and banned entry to our country for 10 years.