The government of Hungary has signed an agreement with Belarus to aid in the construction of the Hungarian nuclear power plant (NPP) “Paks-2,” which is being erected by the Russian state corporation “Rosatom.”
“The signed agreement on cooperation in the field of nuclear energy, which allows us to utilise the experience of Belarus gained in the construction of reactors with similar technology, is of great significance,” Szijjártó was quoted by the Reuters agency.
The Hungarian politician did not provide details on how Belarus would assist. Instead, Szijjártó chose to comment on the readiness of certain NATO European countries to send their soldiers to Ukraine to train Ukrainian military personnel.
“I find statements that EU and NATO countries are sending soldiers to Ukraine disgusting,” he said.
Hungary’s Cooperation with Russia in NPP Construction
The Paks plant, built in the 1980s, operates on Russian nuclear fuel, providing one-third of the electricity consumed in Hungary. Currently, the NPP has four energy blocks with VVER-440 reactors.
As early as 2014, Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán reached an agreement with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin to build new energy blocks. Russia provided a credit of over €10 billion, covering over 80% of the construction costs.
The €12.5 billion project faced prolonged delays, despite nuclear energy not being subject to European Union sanctions against Russia imposed due to the war in Ukraine.
The Hungarian government hopes that the two new blocks will be operational by the early 2030s.
Why the EU Hasn’t Sanctioned Russia’s Nuclear Industry
Western policymakers have found it politically unacceptable to sanction Russia’s civilian nuclear industry.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has urged the EU to at least sanction Rosatom, which is closely linked to Russia’s military apparatus and controls the Russian-occupied Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine.
The EU’s hesitation is largely due to the extensive influence of Russia’s nuclear sector. Russia accounts for over 45% of the world’s uranium enrichment capacity. It supplies nuclear fuel to power plants in various countries, including the United States, which, despite its stringent sanctions regime against Russia, continues to pay $1 billion annually for nuclear fuel supplied by Rosatom.
According to the European Supply Agency (Euratom), nearly 20% of the natural uranium imported to the EU comes from Russia, while another 23% is sourced from Kazakhstan, where Rosatom plays a significant role. Additionally, Russia supplies a substantial portion of the fuel rods used in European nuclear power plants.
“Rosatom is one of the few companies in the world that has mastered the entire nuclear fuel cycle, including enrichment, fuel production, and reprocessing,” according to Sonja Schmid, a professor of science and technology studies at Virginia Tech and author of “Producing Power: The Pre-Chernobyl History of the Soviet Nuclear Industry.”
Dependence in Central and Eastern Europe
Countries in Central and Eastern Europe are particularly dependent on Russian fuel. Slovakia, Bulgaria, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Finland collectively have 18 Russian-designed nuclear reactors that currently rely on Russian technology and operate exclusively on Russian fuel.
Despite the EU’s attempts to diversify energy sources, these countries face significant challenges in transitioning away from Russian nuclear fuel. This dependency is further complicated by long-standing partnerships and technical considerations.
Rosatom’s collaboration with French company EDF exemplifies the intricate ties within the industry.
In 2021, they signed a “long-term cooperation agreement” aimed at strengthening their partnership. In Lingen, Germany, Rosatom plans to produce nuclear fuel rods for Eastern European reactors in partnership with Framatome, an EDF subsidiary.
This venture has sparked protests, highlighting the contentious nature of continued cooperation with Russia in the nuclear sector.
Framatome declined to comment on the situation. In a written statement to DW, a Rosatom representative emphasized that the company “does not accept unjustified restrictions” that hinder its business operations in Europe.
Niklas Poitiers from the Bruegel think tank highlighted the technical and safety challenges involved in replacing Russian nuclear fuel.
“If a year ago I would have said that the EU would find it hardest to get rid of Russian gas, now it seems the hardest thing is to get rid of Russian nuclear fuel,” he told DW.
“There are too many technical issues. And then there are all these standards and safety concerns.”
The Lack of Alternatives to Russia’s Nuclear Industry
Despite the challenges, several EU countries, including the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, and Slovakia, are making efforts to diversify their sources of nuclear fuel away from Russia.
American competitor Westinghouse, which already supplies nuclear fuel for Russian-designed reactors in Ukraine, has shown interest in expanding its market to other European countries.
In May last year, Finnish firm Fennovoima took a significant step by unilaterally ending its contract with Rosatom for the construction of a nuclear power plant.
This bold move marked a clear pivot towards diminishing dependence on Russian nuclear services.
However, experts caution that while sourcing uranium from alternative countries may present a viable short-term solution, replacing Russia’s advanced fuel enrichment capabilities could be a prolonged process spanning several years.
“There simply aren’t sufficient capacities elsewhere in the world to quickly sever these ties,” says Sonja Schmid.
“This is not secret technology, but it involves significant capital investments.”
In the context of uncertainty surrounding the future of the nuclear industry, selling these technologies to private businesses remains challenging, she notes.
Challenges in Transition
Transitioning away from Russian nuclear fuel involves more than just sourcing raw materials. The infrastructure, technology, and expertise required for uranium enrichment are not easily replicated.
The enrichment process is a critical step in making uranium suitable for use in nuclear reactors, and Russia’s dominance in this area means that alternatives must be developed and scaled up, a process that requires time and investment.
Additionally, the existing reactors in many Central and Eastern European countries are specifically designed to use Russian fuel. Switching to a different supplier often involves modifications to reactor designs and regulatory approvals, adding another layer of complexity to the transition.
Long-Term Prospects
The dependency on Russian nuclear fuel highlights the broader issue of energy security within the EU.
Diversifying away from Russian energy sources is a strategic goal, but it also underscores the need for a coordinated approach to developing alternative suppliers and technologies. This may involve international collaborations and investments in new enrichment facilities and technological advancements.
The European Union’s Green Deal and its commitment to reducing carbon emissions also play a role in the future of nuclear energy in the region.
As nuclear power is seen as a low-carbon energy source, ensuring a stable and secure supply of nuclear fuel is essential for meeting the EU’s climate goals.
Read also:
EU Today Conference: Navigating Nuclear Diplomacy: Challenges and Priorities for Europe
Click here for more News & Current Affairs at EU Today
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Follow EU Today on social media:
Twitter: @EU_today
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/EUtoday.net/
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@eutoday1049
