A French watchdog on Tuesday called for the country's nuclear plants to beef up safety following the Fukushima disaster under a programme it estimated would cost tens of billions of euros.

"/> A French watchdog on Tuesday called for the country's nuclear plants to beef up safety following the Fukushima disaster under a programme it estimated would cost tens of billions of euros.

" />
SHARE
COPY LINK

NUCLEAR

Nuclear watchdog urges safety boost

A French watchdog on Tuesday called for the country's nuclear plants to beef up safety following the Fukushima disaster under a programme it estimated would cost tens of billions of euros.

But no reactor faced any immediate shutdown, it said.

It also called for a “rapid reaction force” to be operational by the end of 2014 that could intervene in a nuclear accident in less than 24 hours.

The recommendations, handed to Prime Minister François Fillon, were drafted by the Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) as part of an inspection of France’s nuclear industry in the light of the March 11th nuclear catastrophe in Japan.

“The ASN believes that the installations that have been assessed have a sufficient level of safety to warrant it not to request any immediate shutdown,” the agency said.

“At the same time, the ASN believes that continuing operations require existing safety margins to be strengthened as swiftly as possible.”

It gave operators until June 30th to spell out measures to strengthen safety in response to floods and earthquakes, providing for instance backup systems for power, coolant and plant operations, and their procedures for handling an emergency.

The measures should aim at “preventing a serious accident or limiting its spread” and “limiting massive releases (of radioactivity) in an accident scenario,” the ASN said.

The measures will require “tens of billions of euros in investment,” the ASN’s president, André-Claude Lacoste, told a press conference.

He noted that a single emergency diesel generator, designed to be protected against floods, costs “tens of millions” of euros. Another major expense would be building “bunkers” to serve as emergency backup for plant controllers.

“I don’t see how this cannot have an impact on (electricity) prices,” he warned.

A senior executive with the state-owned electricity provider Electricite de France (EDF) said the recommendations would lead to additional costs for the corporation of up to €10 billion ($13 billion).

“We had scheduled investment of around €40 billion (over 30 years) in our 58 reactors on the basis of plant operational life of up to 60 years,” said Jean-Marc Miraucourt, head of engineering for nuclear facilities.

“Our preliminary estimates are that we will be in the range of €40 to €50 billion,” he told AFP.

Pre-Fukushima, EDF estimated the overall cost of nuclear-generated electricity at €46 per megawatt-hour. This is now likely to be revised to €46-50 per megawatt-hour, he said.

Fillon’s office said the government would ensure that ASN’s requests would be carried out “in their entirety (and) on time.”

An anti-nuclear group, the Nuclear Observatory, dismissed the ASN report as a whitewash and Greenpeace said the billions of euros should be spent on alternative energy sources.

France is the most nuclear-dependent country in the world, deriving 75 percent of its electricity needs from 58 reactors, most of which were built in response to the oil shocks of the 1970s.

The programme gave birth to a massive state industry, with giants such as the nuclear plant builder Areva and operator EDF as well as the Atomic Energy Commission (CEA), which carries out civilian and military research.

But a decades-long “nuclear consensus” gathering all the major parties was badly shaken by the March 11th earthquake that ravaged the Fukushima Daiichi plant in northeastern Japan.

The issue is rising up the political agenda ahead of key elections this year.

In November, the opposition Socialist Party joined with the Greens to campaign for France to scale back its reliance on nuclear to 50 percent by 2025 by shutting 24 reactors and boosting production from wind, solar and other renewable sources.

France will vote in the first round of a presidential election in April and potentially a second round in May, followed by a two-round parliamentary election in June.

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.

ENERGY

Why Germany’s nuclear exit is posing tough questions about its energy future

The Bavarian village of Gundremmingen is so proud of its nuclear power station that its coat of arms is graced with a giant golden atom.

Why Germany's nuclear exit is posing tough questions about its energy future
Gundremmingen nuclear power plant. Photo: DPA

But change is coming to the village, with the plant facing imminent closure under Germany’s energy transition policy.

Former village mayor Wolfgang Mayer’s house has direct views of the imposing complex with its two 160-metre cooling towers — taller than the spires of Cologne Cathedral.

The plant still produces 10 billion kWh of power per year, though parts of it have already been shut down — enough to provide the entire Munich metropolitan region with electricity.

The power station will be decommissioned on December 31, 2021, along with two other facilities in northern Germany.

By the end of 2022, Germany will have achieved its goal of completely phasing out nuclear power, set by Chancellor Angela Merkel on May 30, 2011, in the wake of the Fukushima disaster.

SEE ALSO: Berlin agrees to compensate power firms for nuclear phase out

The plan represented a dramatic change of course by Merkel’s ruling conservatives, who just a few months earlier had agreed to extend the lifespan of Germany’s oldest power stations.

But it was met with widespread public support in a country with a powerful anti-nuclear movement, fuelled first by fears of a Cold War conflict and then by disasters such as Chernobyl.

Village church

In Gundremmingen, however, the decision has been a tough pill to swallow.

The nuclear power station has been “as much a part of the village as the church” and it feels as though “something is dying”, said Gerlinde Hutter, owner of a local guest house.

According to Meyer, it will take at least 50 years to remove all radioactive material from the site after the plant has been decommissioned.
The German government is still looking for a long-term storage site for the country’s residual nuclear waste.

Gundremmingen is not the only German village facing big changes as the country strives to implement its energy transition strategy.

Renewables have seen a spectacular rise since 2011 and in 2020 made up more than 50 percent of Germany’s energy mix for the first time, according to the Fraunhofer research institute — compared with less than 25 percent ten years ago.

The declining importance of nuclear power (12.5 percent in 2020) “has been compensated for by the expansion of renewable energies”, Claudia Kemfert, an energy expert at the DIW economic research institute, told AFP.

Nuclear power stations have therefore not been replaced by coal, though the fossil fuel does still represent almost a quarter of the electricity mix.

The gas dilemma

In fact, the phase-out of nuclear energy has been joined by another plan, announced in 2019, to close all of Germany’s coal-fired power stations by 2038.

This presents a particular challenge for Germany, which remains the world’s leading producer of lignite.

Mining for the brown coal, which is highly polluting, continues to lead to the destruction of villages in the west of the country in order to expand huge open-cast mines.

If Germany is to free itself from lignite, renewables such as wind, solar, biomass and hydropower will have to make up 65 percent of the energy mix by 2030.

Yet the country, which has long been at the forefront of wind energy in Europe, installed only 1.65 gigawatts (GW) of wind farms last year — the lowest level in a decade, according to the WindEurope advocacy group.

To meet the government’s targets, Germany would have to add 9.8 GW of solar and 5.9 GW of onshore wind annually, according to Kemfert.

But the development of new areas for wind or photovoltaic energy production is complex, with plans often coming up against resistance from local residents and the risk of damage to the landscape.

And unless storage and distribution can be improved via so-called virtual power plants, these new forms of energy do not have the same stability as thermal or nuclear power.

To secure its supply, Germany could therefore be tempted to build more gas-fired power stations.

But this would risk reinforcing its dependence on Russia, as illustrated by the controversy surrounding the construction of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline.

A gas-fired power station is already in the works for the town of Leipheim, just around the corner from Gundremmingen.

SHOW COMMENTS