Organised by “Za Zemiata” on June 27 | Summary by Todor Todorov, Climate and Energy team | Live of the full discussion can be seen below the main text.
Media silence and repeated mistakes
For several years, the topic of the new nuclear units 7 and 8 at the Kozloduy NPP with Westinghouse technology and contractor Hyundai has remained almost without media coverage and critical analysis. This sadly resembles the mistakes of the corruption project “Belene NPP”, in which over 3.5 billion leva were stolen from the state budget without any economic analysis. Regardless of whether it is a question of Russian or American reactors, the leading one should be the economic interest of Bulgaria, not foreign influences.
The decision to build the Westinghouse AP1000 reactors is being prepared in the shadows, without following elementary legal procedures and without a real public debate. That is why we gathered scientists, journalists, civil society experts, representatives of the Ministry of Energy and citizens to openly discuss the risks and consequences of this project. Our goal was clear: to break through the information blockade and provide the public with a complete and unfiltered picture of what is actually being prepared behind the closed doors of power. Because when it comes to an investment of tens of billions of leva that will weigh on generations of Bulgarian taxpayers, silence is not an option.
The contradictions with the Law on the Safe Use of Nuclear Energy are a fact, and the chosen Westinghouse AP1000 technology and the construction contractor Hyundai are only part of the problems. The real threat lies in the expected cost of the project — over 30 billion dollars. The process is taking place without public discussion and accountability to the public. Instead, we observe constant trips of high-ranking officials and energy experts to the United States, as well as worrying meetings with representatives of American and South Korean financial institutions.
The most outrageous thing is that successive energy ministers continue to maintain the thesis of an “affordable” project. In media appearances, they try to impose an absurdly low price of $12-14 billion for the two reactors, while the real figures from already operating facilities in the US indicate costs in excess of $35 billion. This is not just a discrepancy in estimates – it is a deliberate manipulation of the data, aimed at concealing the true scale of the financial blow that awaits the country.
Participants in the discussion and their main theses:
1. Prof. Georgi Kaschiev – nuclear physicist with world experience.
He has over 50 years of experience in nuclear energy, 19 years of work at the Kozloduy NPP and is the scientific leader of the launch of unit 5. Professor of nuclear reactors at the Tokyo Institute of Technology and senior researcher at the University of Vienna.
Key arguments:
Debunking the myth of the “nuclear renaissance”:
The share of nuclear energy in global production has decreased from 17.4% (1996) to 9% (2024)
Problems with AP1000 reactors:
Incompatibility with European standards – in the USA the alternating voltage is 60 Hz, and in Europe it is 50 Hz. Different voltage standards create the need for at least two additional elements before the relevant consumers – a transformer and a frequency converter. Of course, these additional elements increase the price.
Need for additional transformers and frequency converters. Significant increase in costs due to technical inconsistencies
Unreliable financial forecasts:
Official forecasts: $70/MWh
Real cost at Vogtle NPP (USA): $170-180/MWh
Demonstrates significant underestimation of costs by the authorities
Presentation: State of nuclear energy and main risks
2. Prof. Dimo Stoilov – Energy Planning Expert
One of the leading experts in strategic energy planning in Bulgaria, author of a critical analysis against new nuclear capacity (2024). His analysis was presented as an open letter to Bulgarian institutions. So far, no institution has responded. But there are still consequences: at the beginning of this year he was dismissed as an associate of the Institute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences.
Key arguments:
Criticism of the National Energy and Climate Plan:
Use of outdated and unreliable data – the main mistake in the plan is the incorrect approach to economic assessment, as well as the use of data from outdated and unreliable sources. Through unreliable data and inaccurate calculations, the economic acceptability of new nuclear capacity is suggested, but according to the valuation of a leading financial institution such as Lazard Ltd, the electricity produced by the two Westinghouse AP 1000 reactors will be between $ 142-222 MWh.
Market mismatches:
Lack of real buyers for expensive nuclear energy and unfounded claims of export opportunities.
Demographic and energy realities:
Unrealistic forecasts of consumption until 2050.
Ignoring demographic decline and increased energy efficiency – planned electricity consumption for 2050 is increased by 43% compared to planned consumption in the reference scenario of 2020, which suggests increased needs to justify the expensive and unnecessary project for Kozloduy 7-8.
Artificially inflated needs to justify the project. The authors of the plan explain the introduction of the seventh and eighth units with their desire to export electricity, but do not indicate forecasts for future buyers and contracts.
Presentation: Faults of the National Energy and Climate Plan related to new nuclear capacities
3. Petko Kovachev – Executive Director of the Green Policy Institute
Works on issues related to energy, energy policies and their relationship with environmental protection since 1990. Analyzes all energy strategies of Bulgaria since 1996. Works on projects related to alternative scenarios for energy development of Bulgaria, the future of nuclear energy, financing of energy efficiency and RES by international financial institutions, etc.
Key arguments:
Systemic problems in the energy sector:
Corruption schemes and political games
Poor governance and centralisation
Lack of investment in grid infrastructure
Alternative solutions:
Energy efficiency and savings
Development of renewable energy sources (solar, wind, bioenergy)
Energy storage (batteries, CHP)
Decentralised systems and energy communities
Specific proposals for change:
Stopping new nuclear power projects
Accelerated transition to green energy
Reforms in the regulatory system
Restructuring the coal sector
Presentation: Instead of new reactors – a fair transition and green energy for all
The three experts present a comprehensive critique of the plans for the expansion of nuclear energy in Bulgaria, highlighting the technical, economic and management problems related to the project, as well as offering alternative solutions for the energy transition.