Kyrgyzstan again speaks about construction of a nuclear power plant. According to experts, project implementation has both pros and cons.
At the end of May, it became known that ‘Rosatom’ prepared a preliminary feasibility study of a small nuclear power plant in the territory of Kyrgyzstan. Earlier, in March 2024, deputy energy minister of Kyrgyzstan Talaibek Baigaziev said at the ATOMEXPO-2024 forum in Sochi that the country intended to sign the agreement for construction of a small nuclear power plant and for full switching to ‘green’ power.
According to him, Kyrgyzstan holds a course for expansion of domestic generating capacity by developing renewable energy sources and construction of a base nuclear power plant.
“We won’t be able to build it fast. Yet we are heading for research and placement of these facilities based on our network infrastructure,” Baigaziev said.
Messages on NPP construction in Kyrgyzstan appeared in January 2022. The official website of the Russian state corporation ‘Rosatom’ reported that they signed a memorandum of cooperation in construction of small nuclear power plants with the ministry of energy of Kyrgyzstan. Later on, the ministry of energy of Kyrgyzstan reported that these were plans, while the final decision would be made by results of the countrywide discussion.
Afterwards, the construction issue was raised several times, but national authorities did not report anything specific. Now the project has no timeframes, investment amounts, terms of construction, or approximate location of the facility.
Minister of energy Taalaibek Ibraev said to CABAR.asia that there is the intention to build the NPP, yet it is a ‘long story’.
“Now we are focusing on developing HPPs, solar and wind farms. Sometimes, there is no wind, or lack of water, so we need the alternative. The nuclear power plant generates power 24/7 for 365 days a year, regardless of weather conditions. In other words, we have to think now how we will be supplied with energy in the future,” Ibraev said.
The official suggested that Kyrgyzstan considers construction of a small NPP, approximately 55 megawatt, yet it is being discussed now.
“It is a new thing for us, so we are not speaking about construction of the NPP tomorrow. We have to prepare the people, hold the discussion. We will not do anything if we don’t have public consent,” the minister assured us.
Public opinion
In 2023, the initiative group ‘Zhashyl Kyrgyzstan’ conducted a poll among Kyrgyzstanis about the NPP construction in the country. Just over three thousand people from all regions of the country aged 25 to 75 of different social statuses took part in the polling. Citizens had to answer 28 questions.
Most of the respondents, namely 89 per cent, associate NPP construction with the power shortage. The people indicated the scarcity of water in the country and the fact that HPP-generated energy is not enough for the whole republic. However, almost no one is aware of the reason of the power crisis.
Over a half, namely 78.9 per cent of respondents, agreed that the country is not ready for the NPP construction in its territory. It is mainly due to the people’s unawareness of the efforts taken by the state to minimise the nuclear risks. There is also no transparency in discussing security assurance.
65.9 per cent of respondents said they would not give their consent to construction and operation of the NPP if foreign specialists would be involved. Distrust in foreigners in this issue is based on the fact that experts would not share all risks related to safe operation of the plant and would leave upon completion of the construction.
Half of respondents agreed to trust domestic specialists. However, many said that the percentage of trust could be higher, if the country had a system of scheduled training of specialists and continuity.
A high percentage (88.9 per cent) of respondents associated their attitude towards the NPP as a hazardous facility mostly with the frequent transmission of information about consequences of NPP accidents in the world. Besides, there were concerns about the increased seismic activity and possible use of the plant by extremists.
Moreover, Kyrgyzstanis were asked if they would support the study of the peaceful atom in order to avoid the shortage of power. Opinions divided almost equally. On the one hand, there is a pride for the perspective that the republic could become one of the leading world countries, where various nuclear studies would be held. On the other hand, the study implies presence of possible risks related to the nuclear energy. 53.4 per cent of respondents voted against it.
Over 60 per cent of respondents voted for imposing a moratorium on NPP construction. However, just more than a half are willing to change their opinion given a smart awareness-raising work.
Pros, cons
According to analyst Marat Musuraliev, interviewed by CABAR.asia, the biggest benefit of the nuclear power plant is the absence of hazardous emissions to the atmosphere. In other words, such facilities compose the so-called ‘green square’ of energy, along with HPPs, solar and wind farms.
“Besides, they have a fairly high level of security. There is a regulator, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), above all nuclear power plants. And it strictly controls all nuclear power plants,” the expert said.
According to Musuraliev, the agency works out a set of measures after every NPP accident, which reduce the risk of recurrence of such accidents to a very low degree of probability. It is made possible by the research-based and detailed examination of all operating processes – from designing, operation, to NPP decommissioning and reclamation.
“Therefore, we should not worry about the nuclear power. The IAEA imposes strict requirements to construction and operation,” the expert said.
Moreover, according to Musuraliev, NPPs generate much heat.
The excess heat from the NPP can be emitted to the atmosphere via cooling towers (installations to cool circulation water used to remove heat from the main equipment – Editor’s note) or discharged to the reservoir. According to Musuraliev, this conventional process has been used many times for decades.
“At the same time, emission of excessive heat from the NPP poses an additional risk to a set of factors of glacier degradation given the proximity of Bishkek to glaciers,” the expert said.
As to ‘Rosatom’, which will probably build the NPP in Kyrgyzstan, the expert indicated both pros and cons. According to him, ‘Rosatom’ is the world’s largest company producing NPPs, controlling up to 60 per cent of the global market of new nuclear units.
“On the part of the state, where the company builds a NPP, it should only ensure the physical security of the plant in the form of a military unit and an air defence system. Kyrgyzstan can do it. Moreover, ‘Rosatom’ is updating the legislation of the countries, where it plans to build NPPs. Thus, all laws and regulations will be brought in balance with the level acceptable by the IAEA,” Musuraliev said.
At the same time, the analyst pointed out a range of political risks in this issue. According to him, Kyrgyzstan has a very high level of dependence on Russia: 90 per cent of petroleum, oil, lubricants are imported from there, and a significant portion of apparel is exported from Kyrgyzstan to Russia, 90 per cent of migrant workers from Kyrgyzstan work there and transfer up to 2.5 billion dollars to the republic every year.
The sanctions are not related to the NPP project, here nothing is violated, the expert specified. The point is that some companies can use the economic dependence of Kyrgyzstan on Russia and promote their interests.
“In other words, they can try to carry out various operations via the republic in circumvention of the primary sanctions imposed by the West against Russia because of its army’s invasion of Ukraine,” he explained.
In turn, independent expert in electric power industry Rasul Umbetaliev takes construction of the NPP in Kyrgyzstan negatively and pessimistically.
“Kyrgyzstan has vast power resources of waterways, i.e. over 140-160 thousand megawatts. So, I suggest developing hydropower industry as it is the most eco-friendly, safe and cheap type of power generation,” he said.
According to Umbetaliev, uranium will be used in NPP construction and operation. In other words, it will need to be mined and processed. Then, a question of nuclear waste disposal arises.
“Neighbouring countries will not agree to receive the wastes. So, we will have to either dispose of them in our country, or transport them somewhere else, which is expensive. Also, we have had more frequent and stronger earthquakes in recent years, which should not be ignored during NPP construction,” Umbetaliev said.
Ecologist Vladimir Grebnev agrees with these statements. According to him, nuclear power industry is generally one of the cleanest industries, and is a positive trend in solving energy problems.
“But it has a side effect, namely nuclear power wastes and high risk if the operating procedure is violated,” the expert said. “It will create additional risks for our country amid the seismic vulnerability of the territory and high density of population.”
According to analyst Marat Musuraliev, ‘Rosatom’ has introduced various technologies of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) processing in its territory.
“Therefore, they will probably take out all SNF to Russia and process it there, as Kyrgyzstan does not have such facilities,” he said.
Another critical issue, according to ecologist Vladimir Grebnev, is the availability of specialists.
Analyst Marat Musuraliev emphasised that the NPP is a too serious facility to let non-professionals in it. According to him, construction of a nuclear power plant is generally a ‘super long game’, i.e. it takes up to eight years to build the first unit, and other works take some time.
“Therefore, we should start training specialists in advance and not later than the start of construction,” Musuraliev said. “For example, Uzbekistan opened a branch of the National Research Nuclear University ‘MIFI’ in Tashkent. It teaches students for the future NPP, which ‘Rosatom’ is building in Dzhizak. We can make a similar effort here.”
According to experts, a set of other measures must be taken for construction of the NPP. Marat Musuraliev said that exact and relevant public opinion should be heard.
“Such projects will not be implemented unless it [public opinion] becomes loyal to NPPs,” he said.
Secondly, according to the specialist, the environmental impact should be assessed in advance to evaluate the degree of impact of future nuclear units.
Third, he said, nuclear technologies are not just about power industry, but also about other sectors. They include medicine, in part of both diagnostics and radio therapy; treatment of food products with irradiation to exterminate pests in them, which helps to preserve most of the harvest and prolong the storage life of foods; geology, where fissionable isotopes are used in mineral exploration and prospecting, etc.
“So, in fact, we have a lot to do, and we need to consider it thoroughly and reasonably, and then make a final decision,” the expert said.
According to ecologist Vladimir Grebnev, they need to find a place for construction, which will be the most distant from residential areas and less prone to earthquake effect, i.e. without any fractures, although this option still has substantial risks. Moreover, according to him, water is needed for heat exchange and nuclear reactor cooling, and any accident will have a cross-border impact given the cross-border nature of waterways.
“It is quite realistic to build small nuclear power plants, while larger options are not the best option for us,” Grebnev said.
Main photo: Freepik