Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend

Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites (# of views)   2 comments
Exclusive to OpEdNews:
General News

Bulgarian nuclear future and the U.S. intrigues

By       Message Igor Alexeev     Permalink
      (Page 1 of 2 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; ; , Add Tags  (less...) Add to My Group(s)

News 1   Interesting 1  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com

Author 85532
- Advertisement -

Bulgaria is facing the wave of the largest mass protests in the last 16 years, being provoked by price hikes. So the resignation of Boyko Borisov's government has been expected. It was this very government and big time players from Washington who made the events unfold this way.

There have been two intertwined events taking place in the country. The electricity has gone up almost twice for ultimate consumers. On October, 2 2008, Nancy E. McEldowney, United States Ambassador to Bulgaria, sent a secret cable to C. Boyden Gray, then U.S. Ambassador to the EU, and a Special Envoy for Eurasian Energy. The cable said: "With few hydrocarbons of its own, Bulgaria relies on Russia for seventy percent of its total energy needs and over ninety percent of its gas." The vulgar imagination of Ambassador made her see "Bulgaria in bed with the muscle bound duo of Gazprom and Lukoil is only partially true -- it is a tryst driven less by passion and more by a perceived lack of options."

A copy of the cable was sent from Sofia to the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Department of Commerce, the National Security Council, and the Central Intelligence Agency. She wrote: "With the price of energy at near record highs, Russia's hydrocarbon-generated wealth is increasingly circulating through the Bulgarian economy, making Bulgaria all the more susceptible to Russian leverage. An energy strategy that focuses on renewables and efficiency is one tool Bulgaria can use to put a noticeable dent in negative Russian influence." The Ambassador made the following remarkable revelation: "Though previously a net exporter of electricity, the EU's decision to force closure of blocks 3 and 4 of the communist-era nuclear plant Kozluduy cost the Bulgarian economy over USD 1.4 billion and put a squeeze on Serbia, Macedonia and Greece, who had purchased the bulk of the exports." 

She recommended to "diversify" the energy supply sources as a means to fight the energy deficit (that is, to curb the Russian supplies), and to rely on US technologies offered by Chevron and Westinghouse.

Since then, the Bulgarian media launched a campaign against Russian gas suppliers (Gasprom), potential energy pipelines (the Burgas-Alexandroupolis project), and nuclear facilities (the Belene nuclear plant that was to be built by Russia's state energy company Rosatom).

KozloduyNPP
by
http://www.kznpp.org/

In February 2012, some of the Bulgarian mass media spread information supposedly about the use of "uncertified steel at manufacturing of high pressure heaters for units No.5 and No.6 of [the] Kozloduy nuclear power plant." Under the agreement for high pressure heaters manufacturing concluded in 2008. Closed Joint-Stock Company ZiO-Podolsk has manufactured and supplied 8 devices to the Customer (Atomtoploproekt, Bulgaria) for power units at the Kozloduy facility, in particular the ZIO - Podolsk is a part of Rosatom - Atomenergomash machine building division.

The slander didn't live long. Valentin Nikolov, Director of Kozloduy NPP, confirmed that "During the examination in the institute of Bulgarian Academy of Science, the compliance of hardness and chemical composition with 22К steel has been proved." The concocted story ended there, but the anti-Russian libel campaign was just gaining momentum.

- Advertisement -

On March 28, 2012, the Bulgarian People's Assembly supported the government's decision to abandon the Belene power plant construction plans, with 120 "yes" votes to 41 "no" votes. In Autumn 2006, Atomstroyexport was awarded the tender for construction of the Belene 2000 MW nuclear power plant by Bulgarian National Electric Company NEK. Somehow, nobody remembers that in the recent past, the European Commission said that Belene complied with the standards of power plants safety in Europe. Moreover, it was one of three best projects referred to as examples of Generation III reactors - the Belene plant, along with Olkiluoto (Finland), and Flamanville (France). The European Union's experts recommended building reactors with the same level of safety and reliability standards.

Over 30 Bulgarian national companies involved in the project were to operate at full capacity and guarantee employment. The nuclear plant also had an advantage of profitability; one kilowatt-hour was one and a half times cheaper in comparison with renewable energy sources, and five and a half times less compared to a kilowatt-hour generated by Bulgarian thermal stations.

What made the government of Boyko Borisov abandon the core energy project? The answer is obvious: the pressure exerted by the United States.

In 2011 the US companies AES and Contour Global acquired two Bulgarian thermal plants, Maritsa Iztok 1 and Maritsa Iztok 3, investing $1.2 billion and $230 million, respectively, into the facilities to make them operate at full capacity. The investments were to pay off. For this purpose, the Americans lobbied for a contract duration of 15 years. During this period of time, the Bulgarians were to pay ever growing prices for the energy produced. The US did its best to avoid competition. The former Bulgarian Energy Minister said (incorrectly) that if the Belene plant were built, there would be no need for US thermal plants in ten years. To the contrary: the withdrawal from the Belene project guarantees them a stable consumer demand.

Hillary Clinton gave a warm welcome to the Belene abandonment decision, a decision that actually means that Bulgaria won't get cheap energy generated by Russian plants. She emphasized the reliability of the United States as a partner. According to her, the oil and gas supplies are to be diversified (read: no Russian exports), and that a number of American firms are well-positioned to help. Still, many Bulgarian energy experts perceived the refusal to build Belene as a threat to national security. 

- Advertisement -

Former Minister of Economy and Energy Petar Dimitrov, a member of the Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP), has come up with a warning that the myopic following of outside recommendations didn't meet the national interests. According to him, the country would have to begin importing energy in 15 years. Dimitrov insisted that Bulgarian consumers would pay the price for this  "...irresponsible decision, because the country would face the need to import electricity at tariffs that a majority of Bulgarians would find unbearable." 

The energy crisis would set in over the next dozen years. Bulgaria was doomed to be a victim of energy dependence, and have a deficit that would diminish the population by one third by 2050. That is, by the end of this time period, the population would be at 3.5 million, like it was at the end of the era of the Turkish yoke that lasted five centuries. 

Nora Stoichkova, a Bulgarian journalist, revealed the essence of the harmful decision. According to her, Bulgaria pulled out of the Belene project as a result of unprecedented pressure from the United States and the European Union: "The US Ambassador to the country did not shy away from making media appearances even more often than the exclusively vigorous Prime Minister of Bulgaria, and outright lobbying of US Chevron and Westinghouse energy giants interests." Kolyo Kolev, director of the Mediana Polling Agency, delicately noticed that many Bulgarians realize the country may lose many economic opportunities following the imposition of US geopolitical interests.

Next Page  1  |  2

 

- Advertisement -

News 1   Interesting 1  
View Ratings | Rate It

Russian web journalist and researcher in the fields of global economy and energy policy. Route Magazine (routemag.com) editor and columnist.

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon



Go To Commenting
/* The Petition Site */
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Geopolitical and economic impacts of ESPO-2 pipeline

Gas Exporting Countries to Gather in Moscow for Influential Forum

Nuclear Industry Re-Energizing after Fukushima

Eurocrats have ruined Cyprus's economy: who's next?

Russia Draws Up Business Plan To Revive The Northern Sea Route

South Stream Shapes European Energy Security, Nabucco Falls Behind