Stop European Union from funding Cernavoda nuke plant in Romania

Cernavoda Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2

Dear Active Bankwatcher,

The European Commission is proposing to lend money to the government of Romania to build a new reactor at Romania's only nuclear power plant. The proposed expansion of the Cernavoda nuclear power plant, however, is in violation of the international Espoo treaty. Since Romania has more energy than it needs, the government plans to export the energy. Also, due to the country's outdated energy network, 20% of electricity is lost in transmission - why doesn't the EU help Romania fix its broken system before plugging more nuke energy into it?
Please copy the letter below into a fresh email, sign it, and send it to: pedro.solbes-mira@cec.eu.int, justina.bermudez@cec.eu.int
For more information on this subject, please see www.bankwatch.org/issues/mnuclear.html

Justina Bermudez
Energy Advisor
Commissioner for Economics and Finance
justina.bermudez@cec.eu.int

SUBJECT: Cernavoda 2 NPP project, Romania

Dear Commissioner Solbes and Commissioner Bermudez,

I am writing to you regarding the European Commission's proposal to use Euratom funding to support the completion of reactor unit 2 at the Cernavoda nuclear power plant (C2). I would like to share my concerns regarding such a project.

Besides environmental and safety concerns associated with any nuclear project, please allow me to bring to your attention a few economic and legal concerns associated with the C2 project:

* Since 1990, electricity demand has dropped to such an extent that the country has an enormous energy surplus (installed capacity is more than twice as large as operational capacity). Furthermore, government forecasts regarding energy consumption in Romania in the medium term count on an annual increase of end use demand of about 2.5 per cent, which is not a dramatic growth. So why the need for further power plants?

* Romania loses over 20% of its electricity during transmission and distribution. Any upswing in demand could be covered by the existing surplus and by simple investments into modern distribution facilities.

* The Romanian government plans to export most of the electricity produced at C2, but is there even any foreign demand? Moldova has failed to pay for Romanian electricity over the last few years, and there is no significant demand from other countries.

* The Romanian government has not fulfilled the requirements of the Espoo convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context. Only Bulgaria was the only neighboring to receive notification and summary documentation from the Romanian government, in December 2002 -- a year after public consultations were held in Romania. However, Espoo requires countries to notify concerned parties „as early as possible and no later than when informing its own public about that proposed activity" (article 3.1). Also, the EIA document provided to Bulgaria is different from the one presented in Romania and does not contain all required information.

Considering these circumstances and legal violations, I ask you not to approve a Euratom loan for the completion of Cernavoda unit 2 until the Romanian government can meet all requirements on public consultations. This means meeting Espoo requirements by providing EIA documentation to all potentially effected countries -- Bulgaria, Moldova and Ukraine.

I also am calling on you to make public the economic assessment study for the Cernavoda unit 2 completion project prepared by the EIB, as there are strong doubts as to whether this project even makes sense from an economic point of view.

Sincerely,