Difference between revisions of "Environmental Impact Assessment on new reactor in Finland"

From Nuclear Heritage
Jump to navigationJump to search
m
(updated)
Line 25: Line 25:
 
:Finland
 
:Finland
  
The '''deadline''' for complaints of German citizens is '''May 20th, 2014'''.
+
The '''deadline''' for complaints of German citizens is '''May 20th, 2014'''. The Lower Saxony Ministry of Environment provides [http://www.umwelt.niedersachsen.de/aktuelles/uvp-verfahren-zum-bau-eines-kernkraftwerks-in-finnland-123048.html some information in German] on the procedure.
  
  
 
== History of Fennovoima's second EIA procedure ==
 
== History of Fennovoima's second EIA procedure ==
On February 13th, 2014 the Finnish Ministry of Employment and Economy [http://www.tem.fi/en/energy/nuclear_energy/eia_procedures_for_new_nuclear_power_projects/eias_by_fennovoima/eia_report_by_fennovoima_2014 announced] the Fennovoima environmental report is finished and ready to be published for public evaluation and comments. This 264 page report was prepared by Pöyry company, which has been previously [http://thediplomat.com/2013/07/trouble-on-the-mekong/ criticized] for breaking the European rules of corporate social responsibility. The Ministry is the body responsible one for the EIA process, international EIA (according to the Espoo Convention) is handled through the Ministry of Environment.
+
On February 13th, 2014 the Finnish Ministry of Employment and Economy [http://www.tem.fi/en/energy/nuclear_energy/eia_procedures_for_new_nuclear_power_projects/eias_by_fennovoima/eia_report_by_fennovoima_2014 announced] the [http://www.fennovoima.fi/userData/fennovoima/doc/yva/yva2013/EIAreport2014.pdf Fennovoima environmental report] is finished and ready to be published for public evaluation and comments. This 264 page report was prepared by Pöyry company, which has been previously [http://thediplomat.com/2013/07/trouble-on-the-mekong/ criticized] for breaking the European rules of corporate social responsibility. The Ministry is the body responsible one for the EIA process, international EIA (according to the Espoo Convention) is handled through the Ministry of Environment.
  
 
So far, there seems to be several additions to the EIA programme, suggested by Swedish organizations. The most important seems to be adding the INES-7 scenario to the EIA. Another one is the [[Pack ice and bad engineering|effect of pack ice]] which is said to be included, but it's actually a description of the pack ice itself, no analysis on the reactor behaviour if pack ice prevents cooling etc.<ref>[[NukeNews No. 13 - ENGLISH|NukeNews #13]] as of April 16, 2014</ref>
 
So far, there seems to be several additions to the EIA programme, suggested by Swedish organizations. The most important seems to be adding the INES-7 scenario to the EIA. Another one is the [[Pack ice and bad engineering|effect of pack ice]] which is said to be included, but it's actually a description of the pack ice itself, no analysis on the reactor behaviour if pack ice prevents cooling etc.<ref>[[NukeNews No. 13 - ENGLISH|NukeNews #13]] as of April 16, 2014</ref>

Revision as of 20:31, 7 May 2014

Due to Rosatom taking over e.on's shares in Fennovoima, and thus owning the biggest share of this "Finnish" company, politicians and authorities in Finland required the company to do a new Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the proposed new reactor in Pyhäjoki. The significant changes in the ownership of Fennovoima as well as the massively changed size of the reactor and the different model to be used make it necessary to submit a completely new application, says the responsible Ministry of Employment and Economy, while the Ministries of Environment and of Foreign Affairs agree with this stance.

Currently, Fennovoima holds a Decision in Principle of the Finnish government and parliament politically supporting the new NPP in Pyhäjoki issued in July 2010. This statement required by Finnish law will remain valid only if the construction of the nuclear power station will be started by July 2015. Otherwise, Fennovoima would have to apply for a new Decision in Principle, too. However, there is a debate in the Finnish public whether Fennovoima anyway needs to apply for a new Decision in Principle due to the massive changes in their concept.

A strategy to overthrow this reactor construction attempt is to insist on the qualitative examination of the current concept and plans. Objections, comments and criticism on the EIA can help to reach this approach, if public pressure leads to serious consideration of Fennovoima's application. It is questionable if Fennovoima would try to get a second decision in principle, due to their weak economical situation. Thus, sending your statements on Fennovoima's latest EIA will be valuable to prevent another dangerous atomic plant to be built.


key facts:

  • the EIA procedure is open for complaints from February 24th - April 24th, 2014
  • the international deadline for statements in the EIA procedure is May 8th, 2014
  • some countries have other dates, deadline for objections from Germany is May 20th, 2014


Critical aspects of the proposed NPP in Pyhäjoki

A key argument is the Rosatom technology, that poses new additional dangers.


What you can do

Best impact in the Environmental Impact Assessment have individual letters. Thus we will provide no prepared text for copy/pasting, but some relevant arguments that can be used in objections, comments and statements on the EIA.

Citizens from Germany and other affected countries should send their statements to:

Ministry of the Environment
PO Box 35
FIN-00023 Government
Finland

The deadline for complaints of German citizens is May 20th, 2014. The Lower Saxony Ministry of Environment provides some information in German on the procedure.


History of Fennovoima's second EIA procedure

On February 13th, 2014 the Finnish Ministry of Employment and Economy announced the Fennovoima environmental report is finished and ready to be published for public evaluation and comments. This 264 page report was prepared by Pöyry company, which has been previously criticized for breaking the European rules of corporate social responsibility. The Ministry is the body responsible one for the EIA process, international EIA (according to the Espoo Convention) is handled through the Ministry of Environment.

So far, there seems to be several additions to the EIA programme, suggested by Swedish organizations. The most important seems to be adding the INES-7 scenario to the EIA. Another one is the effect of pack ice which is said to be included, but it's actually a description of the pack ice itself, no analysis on the reactor behaviour if pack ice prevents cooling etc.[1]


  1. NukeNews #13 as of April 16, 2014