LITHUANIA

Technical Meeting on the Country Nuclear Power Profiles (CNPP)

IAEA, Vienna

2016 05 11

2

Lithuania: Facts & Figures

3

Nuclear installations: Ignalina NPP

Light-water, graphite-moderated type reactors, similar to those at Chernobyl in the Ukraine Construction started in 1978 Unit 1 – 1983 Unit 2 – 1987 Design life – 30 years Lithuania assumed ownership of them in 1991 after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

4

Gross electricity generation mix 2008 – 2011

5

Dependency on electricity import

The shutdown of Ignalina NPP at the end of 2009

6

Gas over nuclear

7

5D - five dimensional approach to energy security

Diversification of oil supply and

control of oil infrastructure

Diversification of gas supply and

control of gas infrastructure

Development of the liberalized

energy market (electricity, gas, biomass)

Diversification of electricity supply

and power generation

Drivers (Instruments)

8

• Visaginas NPP

• LNG import terminal

• Power interconnections with the EU

Energy reliance on single supplier to drop from

80% in 2012 to 55% by 2016 and 35% in 2020

The elimination of “energy islands” in the EU

The energy policy of 2012

9

• Visaginas NPP

• LNG import terminal

• Power interconnections with the EU

Energy reliance on single supplier to drop from

80% in 2012 to 55% by 2016 and 35% in 2020

The elimination of “energy islands” in the EU

The energy policy of 2012

10

OIL infrastructure

Butinge Oil Import Terminal (1999)

The CUT OFF of Druzhba oil pipeline (2006)

GAS infrastructure

The start of the implementation of the 3rd Energy Package (2011)

Unbundling of vertically integrated monopoly AB “Lietuvos dujos”(2014)

Klaipeda LNG terminal (2015)

Bridges for energy

11

Klaipėda LNG terminal – the bridge to the global gas market

12

LNG regasification markets

Baltic-connector

GIPL

LNG ship reloading markets LNG auto-trailer markets

Markets accessible from the 1st of January, 2015

Markets accessible after regional interconnections are finished

Markets accessible after on-shore LNG reloading station is finished

LNG terminals (5.000-30.000m3) in development

to Ukraine

Fair price

Natural gas – out of the game?

BEMIP and the Bridge to the EU power markets

The main goal of the BEMIP is to create a unified market of

the Baltic Sea region

The plan also embraces the establishment of power

interconnections with Poland “LitPol Link” (1000 MWe), with

Sweden “NordBalt” (700 MWe) and with Finland “Estlink-2”

The new Visaginas power plant project constitutes an

integral part of the BEMIP

16 16

2015 – the breakthrough

Goal: fully-fledged integration of the three Baltic States electricity markets with the ECN based on synchronous operation of electricity systems.

Progress:

• National strategy towards synchronization (laws, action plan) in place;

• PCI status granted; • Feasibility study completed in

2013. Next steps:

• Three Baltic States to agree on concrete scenario;

• Apply to ENTSO-E for further procedures;

Next step - Synchronization with European

Continental Network (ECN)

•

Electricity systems are like the tandem bike perform

Visaginas NPP capacity: 1 350 MW, 10,5

TW/y

Total price of the project, EUR: ~ 5 billion

(Lithuanian share, EUR ~ 1,9 billion)

Estimated service life: 60 years

Visaginas Nuclear Power Plant

• Diversification of region’s energy mix and market

competitiveness

• Remove dependence on Russian electricity supply

• “Green Agenda” and region’s environmental goals

Visaginas NPP rationale

19/19

• Strategic Investor selected (Hitachi)

• Pre-development works completed (incl. site evaluation,

EIA, spatial planning)

• Economic competitiveness of the project improved

(Japanese export credit agencies proposals)

• Resolution of outstanding issues in progress (BCM

Senior Officials Committee, investors joint meetings

agreed)

Project progress

20

Systematic Diversification of Energy

Portfolio

Local production

EU/Global markets

Russian imports

Energy portfolio mix

Butinge Oil Import Terminal (1999)

Closing of Ignalina Nuclear

Pow er Plant (2009) Klaipeda LNG terminal (2014)

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1998 2010 2015

Oil

Gas import

Electricity

Bio and other

(renew ables)

Oil

Gas import

Electricity import

Bio and other

(renew ables)

Oil

LNG

Electricity import

Bio and other

(renew ables)

Electricity import

Gas import

Key highlights

Closing of Druzhba oil pipeline (2006)

Start of 3rd Energy Package

implementation (2011)

NordBalt (2015)

LitPol Link (2015)

20/19

Proposals for the CNPP

22

This year we commemorate the 30th anniversary of the nuclear disaster at

the Chernobyl nuclear power plant (NPP) – one of the worst disasters in the

history of nuclear energy.

More than seven million people and some 63,000 square miles (163,000

square kilometers) of land in Europe have been affected by the nuclear

contamination from Chernobyl NPP. More than seven thousand Lithuanians

were involved in the emergency response actions.

As Chernobyl disaster has clearly demonstrated, nuclear accidents and

radiological emergencies have no boundaries. Looking into the future, we

must make sure such accidents don’t repeat.

23

After the devastating accidents in Chernobyl (1986) and Fukushima (2011) the

world has changed. The reputation of the nuclear power as an energy source

has been damaged.

In this regard Lithuania is working actively in the region and internationally to

strengthen the global safety regime and is participating in transboundary

environmental impact assessment (EIA) procedures concerning projects of

nuclear facilities located in the territories of neighboring countries, if the

transboundary impacts of the project could potentially affect Lithuania.

Currently, Lithuania is participating in transboundary EIA procedures with

Belarus, Russia, Poland, Finland.

24

The ability to report on:

•Involvement in nuclear safety related activities

regarding nuclear power infrastructures with

potential impact to State population;

•Findings (results) of above mentioned

activities;

•Public Acceptance of nuclear power

developments in close vicinity to densely

populated areas of State territory.

Suggestions to discuss

Object of Lithuanian submission – Belarus NPP

project

25

Belarus NPP:

Distance from:

•Lithuanian Capital Vilnius – 50 km;

•Lithuanian border – 20 km;

•Belarus Capital Minsk – 140 km;

•River Neris (Vilija) (cooling source) – 11-13 km.

In Lithuania within the radius of 100 km:

•Capital city Vilnius (542 664 residents, major

business and governmental institutions);

•14 administrative districts (276 516 residents);

•A total of 919 180 residents.

Danger zones:

30 km – evacuation needed;

100 km – sheltering and stable iodine

intakes

1/3 of Lithuanian population might be affected by Belarus NPP!

• Lithuania is seriously concerned about the NPP project in Belarus and its

potential negative transboundary impact to Lithuanian environment and

residents.

• Although international organizations (the Espoo and Aarhus Conventions)

stated that Belarus infringes international conventions in the process of

development of the NPP project (violations of procedural and substantial

nature), Belarus does not pay serious attention to implement the

recommendations of the mentioned Conventions.

• On the contrary, it quickly advances with construction works [commissioning

of 1st Unit of NPP in 2018].

We are deeply concerned

• Main point of Lithuanian concern is safety of the Ostrovets site for the

construction of NPP (situated 40 km from capital Vilnius). The site was

chosen well before the start of the transboundary assessment. No proper

researches made and no international missions engaged in order to

assess the suitability of the site for the construction of NPP, in spite of

available data on seismic activity.

• For Lithuania Ostrovets site is unacceptable threat, as transboundary

effects can affect 1/3 of our population (100 km range), using waters of the

river Neris (one of two major rivers in LT) for cooling purposes may

contaminate drinking water and Nemunas River basin, which covers 72

percent of Lithuanian territory. It is a question of national security of the

country.

Formal submission of the EIA documentation does not mean documentation compliance with the Espoo Convention.

The EIA report presented to Lithuania in 2013:

•was dated as of July 2010 (old report);

•did not contain substance;

•was google-translated into Lithuanian-like language.

EIA report - lost in translation:

•“nuclear power plant” = “nuclear herb” – as the word “plant” translated into Lithuanian as “herb” rather than “factory” or “enterprise”;

•“reactor plant” = “Republic of Uzbekistan’’ – as the Russian abbreviation «РУ» translated into Lithuanian as Republic of Uzbekistan instead of “reactor plant” (in Russian is «реакторная установка»);

•“Lithuania’’ = “Uzbekistan’’ - as the description of the transboundary EIA named Uzbekistan instead of Lithuania;

•meaningless sentences.

•Would you trust such a document?

EIA report – lost in translation

28

Belarus NPP is NOT an example of good practice

• Lithuania highly values the attention the International Atomic Energy Agency

(IAEA) pays to Belarus NPP project and appreciates the most recent visit

(18-20 April, 2016) of the Director General of IAEA Yukiya Amano to Belarus.

International scrutiny is the most effective way to encourage countries

that develop nuclear energy to implement the highest international

nuclear safety standards.

• During the Y.Amano visit to Belarus, it was stressed that in the years to come

Belarus will engage IAEA missions for peer review of Belarus NPP. However,

we hear a lot of declarations, but see little actions and no results. For

several years we call on Belarus to engage IAEA SEED (Site and

External Events Design) Mission for the Ostrovets site safety and

selection evaluation, but up until now it has not been done.

The accident in Ostrovets nuclear power plant

• the accident in Ostrovets NPP occurred in mid-April 2016

• the information from Belarus side was received only after intense actions of

protest from Lithuanian side

• according to the Ministry of Energy of Belarus, the load bearing structures were damaged when casting the lap of the hull that was under construction

between the two reactors on 8 April 2016

• Unfortunately, Belarus is looking for political solutions to technical issues.

• Instead of engaging international experts for evaluation of NPP project, Belarus

seeks for political support and approval for the project.

• Lithuania hears a lot of promises and declarations (e.g. IAEA SEED mission,

stress-tests), but no constructive actions and results.

• We appreciate IAEA rising attention to Belarus NPP project, but we believe that

appropriate IAEA missions should visit the NPP site, instead of IAEA top

officials, diplomats and politicians.