Wind generators vs nuclear energy
Belarus’s dependency on the Russian gas and the reduction of the energy production cost are named as the main arguments in favor of constructing a nuclear power plant. The European Radio for Belarus has learned this is not a fact that energy will become cheaper after the nuclear reactors are built.
Belarus’s Energy Minister Aliaksandr Azyarets said earlier that the energy production cost at the country’s biggest power station in Lukoml in 2008 amounts to slightly more than 5 cents. But the energy produced by wind generators and hydropower stations is cheaper than the nuclear energy.
“To produce 1kW/hour by a wind generator costs 3.5 cents”, says Ph.D. Mikalai Laurentsyeu, a fellow member of the International Academy of Ecology. For example, one kW hour produced by the Volgodonsk nuclear power plant in Russia costs up to 4 cents. Belarus plans to build a similar reactor as at the Russian nuclear station. The difference of 0.5 cents is to the advantage of wind generators.
Besides, the phasing out of a nuclear station remains a big question. Yahor Fyadzyushyn, the director of the Institute of Humanitarian and Ecological Technologies at the International Academy of Information Technologies, is concerned precisely about it.
“In principle, we can do with the local energy sources. In fact, phasing out is not taken into account. Deactivation costs approximately the same as construction”.
Usevalad Pyakelis, the head of research at the Belenergosetkoproekt, says it is worth switching to renewable energy sources. Estimates suggest that wind generators could provide Belarusians with 7 percent of the energy needs.
“The output of one wind generator is 1,5MW. In the Minsk region, one can easily accumulate 700MW. It is a huge capacity. Wind generators can pay back not more than after two years. This is their greatest advantage against nuclear power plants. The total energy consumption in the Minsk region is 10,000MW, it means that 700MW account for 7 percent”.
According to the preliminary estimates, the future nuclear power plant will save up to 14-15 percent of the country’s energy budget. Therefore, wind generators could replace the output of the future nuclear plant at half. Besides, we could get the effect much faster. But, according to the expert, the government does not wish to allocate land for the construction of wind generators.
Experts estimate that the total output capacity of Belarusian rivers is 520MW. Currently, hydropower plants produce around 28MW. If we build more hydropower projects, one could save another quarter of the nuclear station’s effect.
Stanislau Bahdankevich, the former chairman of the Belarusian Central Bank, is confident that the assumed saving with the help of the nuclear energy could be achieved by simply reducing the energy consumption of the economy.
“I do not object to using the nuclear energy. But I think that it is not necessary for Belarus. Our energy consumption is 2.5-3 times higher than the energy consumption of the domestic product in Europe. Our task is to change technologies and reduce the energy demands of our economy”, he said.
It is estimated that a nuclear station would save up to 20 percent of the gas consumed by this country. Stanislau Bahdankevich believes that one could achieve better saving by chancing technologies.
“Presently, we consume 20 billion cubic meters of gas. We can save at least 5 billion cubic meters. We need to reduce energy demands”, Bahdankevich said.
Why do officials talk about gas saving when they mention a nuclear power plant?
“The natural gas will be replaced with the similar amount of the nuclear fuel”, specifies nuclear expert Aliaksandr Mikhalevich from the Belarusian National Academy of Sciences.
“It will be replaced, not saved. Nuclear stations produce electrical energy using the nuclear fuel. It means that a similar quantity of the natural gas will be replaced. In addition, one of the tasks of the energy security concept is to avoid dependency on the natural gas (95 percent when producing the electrical energy). This is bad when all the electricity is produced only using one type of fuel. In this case, we are talking about diversification”, he said.
But since nuclear fuel seems to be Russian anyway, the diversification will be a fake.
Apparently, the reduction of utilities tariffs for households could become the government’s main argument in favor of the nuclear energy. According to Uladzimir Babrou from the Energy Research Institute, the tariffs would drop 10-15 percent. But this will happen not earlier than by 2020.
