The project for the construction of a second nuclear power plant in Bulgaria from the times of communism is on the verge of turning 40. Yet to this very day there is no such power plant.

Prime Minister Boyko Borissov once called the construction site a “puddle”, but this puddle has morphed into a financial black hole which has so far gobbled up around 2 billion euro, to absolutely no avail. Much of this money went into constructing the totally useless infrastructure needed for the future power station. More than 600 million euro was spent on the two nuclear reactors Russia was commissioned to build and deliver, which it did, even though the project had been shelved by the Bulgarian National Assembly. A few days ago came the news that the court of arbitration has ruled that Bulgaria must pay, with interest, another 32 million euro to the project consultants WorleyParsons Nuclear Services over omissions in the contract between the two partners, i.e. a job badly done by of the Bulgarian side’s legal counsel. And this added to the 265 million euro already paid out to the company.

The unfinished but exorbitant project – estimates are that it will cost in the neighbourhood of 10 billion euro – has never stopped stirring up controversy and conflicts among politicians and within the energy industry. The question is does Bulgaria need a second nuclear power plant at all, and what the economic benefits of having such a power plant would be. The nuclear lobby says that in 10-15 years’ time – that is how long it will take to build the Belene plant – the country will be experiencing a shortage of electric energy, to be more precise cheap electric energy, and that this energy can only be provided by a new nuclear power station. Their opponents say that a new nuclear capacity could never be cost-effective, knowing how low electricity sales prices in Bulgaria are, how poor people in the country are and how feeble local businesses are. And add that electricity consumption in Bulgaria is declining steadily, and that the classical thermoelectric power stations, the old nuclear power plant at Kozloduy, and the renewable energy sources will be entirely sufficient in the mid-term. Nor do they seem worried by the EU’s measures - for environmental reasons - to restrict electric energy generation by coal-fired power stations.

But there is one more reason why the future of the second nuclear power station in Bulgaria remains riddled with problems – the conditions the Bulgarian authorities are setting down for potential investors: that the new power plant must be predominantly privately run, with a minimum share for the Bulgarian state, that it must function without government aid, subsidies or guaranteed purchase prices of electricity. Experts argue that nowhere in the world has a nuclear power station been built, or is functioning, without involvement by the state. Knowing that for now, there is little investor interest in the project, the Bulgarian authorities sought to sell the two nuclear reactors delivered by Russia. But for this too it seems no one is interested. Another option being considered is to make these reactors operational at the nuclear power station that does exist – at Kozloduy.

Controversy, poor professionalism, no clear energy strategy, skirmishes between various lobbies, damages the country has to pay, colossal sums spent – that is how, at this point, the illusory project for a second nuclear power station in Bulgaria can be described. Be as it may, some solution has to be found. Not a solution at an expert level where engineers, designers and constructors are perfectly capable of solving any problem in their field, but a solution in the political domain. Such a solution is critical, knowing the tremendous amounts of public funds that have already been poured into the construction of the project with no benefit to the country whatsoever. It is plain to see things cannot be left to sort themselves out. The senseless spending of staggering sums must firmly be put an end to, ASAP, and the interests of the country and of every one of its citizens - protected.

English version: Milena Daynova