nuclear-news

 

The EU Commission has subjected Europe’s nuclear power plants to a stress test. The results of the inspection have not been made public but are suspected to be sobering.

When he was premier of Baden-Württemberg, Günther Oettinger must have been convinced the nuclear power plants in his state were safe – otherwise, he would have had to pull their operating licenses. As Europe’s energy commissioner, Oettinger must now present a report on the current state of safety in nuclear power plants across the bloc.

According to the German daily “Die Welt,” the report – expected for months and finally scheduled for publication on Wednesday (03.10.2012) – will paint a devastating picture of the safety measures in the EU’s nuclear power plants. Two days before the presentation date, a spokeswoman for the commissioner made the surprise announcement the report was not yet finished and would now be submitted on October 18.

After the nuclear reactor disaster in Fukushima, Japan, the EU Commission started an investigation into whether such a worst-case scenario could occur in Europe and, if so, what was being done to prevent it. There are 68 nuclear power plants with a total of 134 reactors in operation in the EU, situated in 14 of the 27 member states.

No protection against a plane crash

Jochen Stay, press spokesman for the anti-nuclear organization “Ausgestrahlt,” is skeptical about the report because the plant operators themselves provided the underlying data. “They were sent a questionnaire they were expected to fill in concerning safety issues,” he told DW. “External auditors only inspected about one in three plants.”

The consequences of an airplane crash – intentional or otherwise – at a nuclear plant were completely left out of the investigation, Stay said. Nuclear commissioners in Germany, however, have already ascertained “that none of the nuclear power plants in Germany are protected against such a crash.”

If plant operators were forced to prove their facilities could withstand a plane crash, it would mean the end of atomic energy in Europe, Stay said.

“It couldn’t be financed. It just wouldn’t be profitable,” he said.

Oversights

Flooding is another underestimated threat, Stay said. A deluge like the one that caused the catastrophe in Fukushima cannot be ruled out in Germany, he said.

It’s very unlikely that German coasts would be hit by a tsunami. But critics of nuclear energy point to a different example – that of the Brokdorf Nuclear Power Plant in northern Germany. It lies below the flood mark of the nearby North Sea. Levees protect the region from flooding, but Stay believes that if they were to fail, it could result in a mini-tsunami within German borders.

25 billion euros could be insufficient

“Die Welt” reports that the EU Commission estimates Europe’s nuclear power plant operators would have to pay about 25 billion euros ($32.3 billion) to right the problems on site. But since precautions against plane crashes weren’t part of the stress tests, the costs associated with these measures are not included in the sum named by the EU. As such, the true cost of safety could be much higher.

One line in the report on the stress tests makes it clear that European nuclear power plants have long been seen as problematic. The EU officials complain that knowledge gleaned from the Chernobyl disaster in 1986 has not been put into practice in many EU member states. “Die Welt” cites the report as saying: “Even decades later, the implementation of urgent safety measures has not been performed.”

Stay believes it’s of little consequence whether the EU commission’s report ends up containing disastrous predictions or not. He sees the stress test as a propagandistic flourish.

“The public gets the impression that we’re undertaking a stress test, performing safety inspections, doing things to reduce the risks. But in reality, nothing will be done,” he said.