Civil G8 2006

Civil G8 — is your opportunity
to discuss global problems!

earth

News

Caught between global warming and an energy crisis, Blair looks north for answers


Can UK be persuaded to follow the Finns and learn to love nuclear energy?

Luke Harding in Olkiluoto
Friday April 14, 2006
The Guardian


It is an unlikely spot for a nuclear power station. In the bay, sea eagles patrol the sky. There is even the odd moose. But this rugged west coast of Finland, surrounded by forests and lichen-encrusted boulders, is to be home to Europe's biggest and newest nuclear reactor.
The Olkiluoto 3 (OL3) project is the first nuclear plant to be constructed in the EU since the Chernobyl disaster 20 years ago, and its progress is being followed by British ministers and environmentalists as Tony Blair seeks solutions to the looming energy crisis.


Article continues

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This weekend the cross-party environmental audit committee is due to publish a long-awaited report on how the UK can meet future energy demands, and senior members are likely to express reservations about replacing the country's ageing nuclear power plants, citing security as a concern.
But Downing Street is said to favour investing in a new generation of reactors, a division which mirrors the debate in Finland three years ago. Environmentalists there now admit they made fundamental errors in their campaign.

Finland was traditionally not much of a nuclear enthusiast, and for much of the post-Chernobyl 80s and 90s nuclear energy was a virtual taboo. But in 2002 MPs voted by 107 votes to 92 to construct the country's fifth reactor.

Those in favour said the state-of-the-art plant at Olkiluoto, three hours from the capital Helsinki, would combine the latest nuclear technology with the world's biggest turbine, at a cost of €3bn (£2bn). Finland had been struggling to meet its 2008-12 commitments to reduce greenhouse gases, and in the end, the MPs concluded that nuclear power was their least worst option. Work on the facility began last year.

Since then opposition has fizzled out.

"Public opinion is still split ... but for the moment the pros are winning. We were a miserable failure," said Meri Pukarinen, the head of Finland's Friends of the Earth. She said only 100 protesters had tried to disrupt the reactor's sod-turning ceremony last year.

The debate pitted idealism against pragmatism. Teollisuuden Voima Oy, the company building the reactor, said it would cut C02 emissions by 10m tonnes a year. In terms of greenhouse gases, nuclear energy is much cleaner than gas or coal-fuelled power - an argument Downing Street appears to find compelling. "It's very difficult for the Greens to fight against more nuclear power," Mikko Elo, the MP for Olkiluoto, told the Guardian. "It's environmentally very friendly." Should Britain build a similar plant? "Absolutely. It's the best solution for a lot of environmental reasons ... But it shouldn't be the only solution."

Pertti Simola, the chief executive of Teollisuuden Voima Oy, said economic factors had also helped to clinch the vote. The plant would generate cheap, reliable electricity for 60 years, he said.

The most vociferous opponent of nuclear energy is Satu Hassi, Finland's former environment minister. In 2002 her Green party left the Social Democrat-led coalition in protest against the Olkiluoto decision; the party now sits in opposition. Before the vote, sections of the Finnish media accused Ms Hassi, of being a Russian stooge. "It got pretty nasty," she said. Once the decision had been made, the country lost interest in alternative energy sources. "The government said we would invest in renewable energy. It didn't happen," she said.

If Mr Blair is to persuade a sceptical public that Britain needs a new generation of nuclear reactors he will have to confront the biggest public relations problem of all - nuclear waste. The Finns are to bury their highly radioactive spent uranium fuel. Jorma Aurela, a senior adviser to the Finnish government on nuclear energy, said being honest about the problem was crucial.

The Finns appear to have reluctantly concluded that OL3, due to open in 2009, is the only way to reconcile growing energy needs with environmental commitments. Another public debate is beginning on whether Finland should build a sixth nuclear reactor.

Finland's minister for trade and industry, Mauri Pekkarinen, said the government had agreed to increase investment in renewable energy sources, but this would not be enough to meet Kyoto targets. Like Mr Blair, he faces tough choices. "I'm against [a sixth reactor]. But if the EU makes a decision that we all have to reduce our CO2 emissions very rapidly we have to take this into account. We will have to make a decision. I hope I can still be against," he said.

Expert opinion

Halter Marek

02.12.06

Halter Marek
Le College de France
Olivier Giscard d’Estaing

02.12.06

Olivier Giscard d’Estaing
COPAM, France
Mika Ohbayashi

02.12.06

Mika Ohbayashi
Institute for Sustainable Energy Poliñy
Bill Pace

02.12.06

Bill Pace
World Federalist Movement - Institute for Global Policy
Peter I. Hajnal

01.12.06

Peter I. Hajnal
Toronto University, G8 Research Group


Contact us |  De | Rus |