Russian nuclear power plant

foca · Post by **foca** » Thu Sep 18, 2014 10:57 pm

The Finnish government has approved the earlier license issued in 2010 to Fennovoima for a new nuclear power plant to be built on Russian design in Oulu region. The greens voted no and are leaving the government. Is it the beginning of the end? Kekkoslovakia is back? Or is it just a sound business decision?

**Sponsor:**

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Fri Sep 19, 2014 3:33 am

It does sound strange. I think it is perfectly possible the idea is to "buy" better relationship with the Russia for at least for a short while, while I'm not even dismissing as impossible the speculations that it is a plot to keep the greens out of the government for a while (= fennovoima project will fall through anyway because insufficient domestic support, "forcing" the reconsideration of the earlier refusals not to give a permit first to Fortum, and when Olkiluoto III is finally running, to TVO.)

AldenG · Post by **AldenG** » Fri Sep 19, 2014 4:46 am

Is it a pebble bed or other supposed "passive safety" design?

Or is it the design used at Chernobyl?

Upphew · Post by **Upphew** » Fri Sep 19, 2014 8:28 am

AldenG wrote:Is it a pebble bed or other supposed "passive safety" design?

Or is it the design used at Chernobyl?

You do know that we already have 2 plants with 4 reactors from Russia? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loviisa_Nu ... ower_Plant and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olkiluoto_ ... ower_Plant
Now we are getting a French one, which is a tad over the budget and a little late... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olkiluoto_ ... ant#Unit_3

AldenG · Post by **AldenG** » Fri Sep 19, 2014 4:32 pm

Well I hadn't heard of Eastinghouse before.

foca · Post by **foca** » Fri Sep 19, 2014 8:24 pm

Upphew wrote:
AldenG wrote:Is it a pebble bed or other supposed "passive safety" design?

Or is it the design used at Chernobyl?
You do know that we already have 2 plants with 4 reactors from Russia? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loviisa_Nu ... ower_Plant and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olkiluoto_ ... ower_Plant
Now we are getting a French one, which is a tad over the budget and a little late... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olkiluoto_ ... ant#Unit_3

Only the Loviisa plant has Russian reactors , the ones at olkiluoto are Swedish.
The reactor which Rosatom is to build is very different from Chernobyl . Besides there are 3 similar reactors close to St .Petersburg and the fourth is being built - so if something happens , God forbid, everyone in the Baltic region will be affected.

Honest · Post by **Honest** » Fri Sep 19, 2014 9:52 pm

Atomic energy is the most green and safest source of energy but greens don't like it.

By the way by reading news I noticed that there is at least one Niinistö in every party.

Nimi · Post by **Nimi** » Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:14 pm

By the way by reading news I noticed that there is at least one Niinistö in every party.[/quote]

The beauty of democracy, it has given every individual the legitimate right to express their opinion.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:31 pm

Honest wrote:Atomic energy is the most green and safest source of energy but greens don't like it.

True that greens don't like nuclear in any form or wrapping, but this particular power plant is more questionable than most.

By the way by reading news I noticed that there is at least one Niinistö in every party.

Sauli actually being uncle of Ville (neither being related to Jussi). A couple of times I've seen a screwed up headline because of that.

Pursuivant · Post by **Pursuivant** » Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:35 pm

The Loviisa reactor was "Finlandized" after the comrades left. Problem is, these days you have EU rules and the result is like with the AREVA fiasco. The Russians are the only country where they actually have built reactors all the time, so I actually trust their technology on this, like rockets and if you need a car to drive through a tundra or taiga with two mud tracks.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Fri Sep 19, 2014 11:20 pm

The French have been pretty consistent in building nuclear too, but firstly this Finnish government permit system makes companies try build as large reactors as possible and with Olikiluoto 3 it was unfortunately considered a good idea to buy a prototype.

(With the Fennovoima I'm more against the Russian state than Russian engineers - and the fact that the whole idea to give the building permit to a new yet non-existing company (instead of Fortum) was Center party regional politics in action, nothing to do with sound economics or engineering.

foca · Post by **foca** » Fri Sep 19, 2014 11:45 pm

Honest wrote:Atomic energy is the most green and safest source of energy but greens don't like it.

By the way by reading news I noticed that there is at least one Niinistö in every party.

I just wonder where the term nepotism comes from

. Finnish politics seems to have a knack for it.

foca · Post by **foca** » Fri Sep 19, 2014 11:56 pm

Rip wrote:
(With the Fennovoima I'm more against the Russian state than Russian engineers - and the fact that the whole idea to give the building permit to a new yet non-existing company (instead of Fortum) was Center party regional politics in action, nothing to do with sound economics or engineering.

Fennvoima is not your "conventional " company, it is more like an instrument created to accumulate money and streamline diverse interests. Its shareholders are mostly major energy suppliers and consumers in Finland , thus they know what they do.
As for the Russian state- first reactors in Loviisa were built by the Soviet Union. That country does not exists , but the electricity is still produced . I think that connecting a project with a 50-60 years life span to current political situation is a bit stupid.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Sat Sep 20, 2014 12:22 am

foca wrote: Fennvoima is not your "conventional " company, it is more like an instrument created to accumulate money and streamline diverse interests. Its shareholders are mostly major energy suppliers and consumers in Finland , thus they know what they do.

The problems they have had with their owners kinda underlines they have not known that well what they were doing.

As for the Russian state- first reactors in Loviisa were built by the Soviet Union. That country does not exists , but the electricity is still produced. I think that connecting a project with a 50-60 years life span to current political situation is a bit stupid.

Loviisa plant became operational about the same time as Putin became a KGB officer and both have continued on their paths. Regarding our eastern neighbor we're probably in a more difficult situation as we were then. Also, the Soviets never owned a part of the Loviisa plant.

foca · Post by **foca** » Sat Sep 20, 2014 10:56 pm

Rip wrote:
Loviisa plant became operational about the same time as Putin became a KGB officer and both have continued on their paths. Regarding our eastern neighbor we're probably in a more difficult situation as we were then. Also, the Soviets never owned a part of the Loviisa plant.

That is true that the Soviets never owned the Loviisa plant, but dependency still existed - the fuel only could come from the Soviet Union, thus ownership is and was not that important. The new reactor will bring same co- dependency. The ownership itself will probably play the positive role - Russians will finance the biggest portion of the construction costs and will be interested in supporting the project over the life span to get the investment back.

Finland Forum

Find information about moving to, living in and life in Finland