1. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Ignalina NPP Closure and Decommissioning
Meeting the Cost
Decommissioning Funding Group – 16 March 2011
2. … the decommissioning of the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant with
two 1500 MW RBMK-type reactor units inherited from the former
Soviet Union is of an unprecedented nature and represents for
Lithuania an exceptional financial burden not commensurate
with the size and economic strength of the country …
Accession Treaty, Protocol 4
3. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Plant Overview
• Largest and most
Plant Type RBMK-1500
advanced RBMK design
(also with later safety Number of units 2 (of 4 planned)
Basics
upgrading) Power per unit 1250 MWe
Nearest settlement Visaginas
• Intended to serve NW
Staff in 2011 2000 (approx.)
region of Soviet Union
Unit 1 Unit 2
• Supplied 70-80% of LT Operation First operation Dec 1983 Aug 1987
national demand Final closure Dec 2004 Dec 2009
• Closed at around mid-life Load factor
45.5% 57.4%
(since independence)
• Low load factor
(lack of consumers in 1990s)
4. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Impact on National Energy Supply
2007 2010
Primary Energy Sources
5. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Impact on National Energy Supply
Export
EE GB DK AT SE NL SK GR PT NI IT HU FI LV IE LU LT
LT SI CZ BG FR RO ES DE BE PL
2009
Import
Import/Export of Electricity Supply for EU Countries (2010)
Source: ENTSO-E (European Network of
Transmission System Operators for Electricity)
8. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Impact on Visaginas
• Purpose-built town (pop. ~30,000)
• Wholly reliant on INPP
• Largely Russian-speaking with poor
socio-economic integration
• Hard-hit by closure
– reduction of employment opportunities
– loss of status
– massive rises in heating prices
• Ministry of Energy funding social
mitigation measures
• PHARE study estimated 440 m Euro in
social costs for best-case scenario
9. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Decommissioning Strategy
Immediate Dismantling
Advantage Drawback
Use of existing workforce: Costs incurred earlier
(a) social mitigation (b) staff knowledge Higher radiation levels
Use of operational infrastructure
Defined regulatory framework
Better cost definition
No legacy to future generations
10. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
RBMK plant decommissioning
Technical difficulties: • huge primary masses of buildings
• large proportion of contaminated masses
• large volumes of operational waste
• irradiated graphite – no established disposal method
11. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Comparison with Greifswald NPP (1)
6 x 440 MWe VVER
Greifswald NPP Ignalina NPP
Operational Solid Waste 15,000 m3
(to be retrieved and managed)
30,000 m3
Operational Spent Resins 2,000 m3
(for cementation)
5,800 m3
Required Spent Fuel Casks 61
(for interim storage)
190 (additional)
59%
Steel from Equipt. Dismantling 116,000 tons
contaminated
130,000 tons
91%
Steel 2,660 tons
Reactor Core Structures
Steel Graphite Shielding (serpentine / sand) 17,100 tons
2,300 t 3,800 t 11,000 t
12. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Comparison with Greifswald NPP (2)
• International experience exists in dismantling pressurised water reactors
• Ignalina NPP is pioneering the immediate dismantling of an RBMK
more difficult to define technology and costs
Smaller reactor size
permits integral removal
and storage of main vessel
Not possible for RBMK
13. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Overall schedule
Opening waste
ISFSF
management
routes
SWMSF
(Design &
construction) Landfill Facility
Near Surface Repository
Fuel in core Fuel in pools Fuel fully removed
Unit 1 Post-operation
Operation
activities Dismantling & Decontamination
Fuel in core Fuel in pools Fuel fully removed
Unit 2 Post-operation
Operation
activities Dismantling & Decontamination
General site Site Operation & Maintenance D&D Demolition
activities
2001-2010 2011-2020 2021-2030
14. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Sequence of starting dismantling
2
5
6
3 4
1
1. emergency core cooling system water storage tanks (Building 117)
2. turbine generators with auxiliary systems, feed facilities and heat supply facilities (Block G)
3. reactor gas circuit and special venting system (Block V)
4. low salt water and main coolant circuit bypass water treatment facilities (Block B)
5. control room, electrical equipment and deaerator (Block D) heat pipe service / fire fighting (Unit 1 only)
6. reactor building (Block A)
15. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Current Status
• Dismantling outside units since 2009
(e.g. service water pump house)
• Dismantling unit facilities since 2010
(Unit 1 emergency core cooling system)
• 2 major facilities in construction
(a) Interim Spent Fuel Storage Facility
(b) Solid Waste Management &
Storage Facility
• 2 major facilities under design
– Landfill (constructing Buffer Store)
– Near Surface Repository
16. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Decommissioning Costs
Methodology
• Simplified “Global Decommissioning Programme”
– based on Final Decommissioning Plan
– takes account of activities performed up to now
– fully up-to-date and consistent with current planning
– enables long-term cost factoring
• Macroeconomic study
– performed by chief economist of leading commercial bank
– focussed on parameters relevant to decommissioning
(general inflation, energy costs, labour costs)
17. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Adjustments applied (1)
General inflation
Consumer Price Index (normalised to 2002)
• Since 2002 (preparation of Final Decommissioning Plan) = ~30%
• Forecast for 2012 to 2029 (annual rate of 2.5 to 3.2%) = ~110%
18. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Adjustments applied (2)
Energy prices %
• Broadly based study based
on several sources:
– International Energy Agency
– EC DG ENER
– Russian Ministry of Energy
– EPRI
– World Nuclear Association
• Adapted to specific
circumstances of Lithuania
– existing situation
– strategic initiative in energy
sector (e.g. interconnections
and new nuclear)
19. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Adjustments applied (3)
Wages and salaries
Average of public and private sector salaries (Litas)
2600
2400
2200
2000
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
• Significant rise in salaries since 2002
• Forecast for 2012 to 2029: from 7%, slowing to 5% in later years
20. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Breakdown by Generic Activities
Final Site
Total cost:
Clearance Preparatory Actions
2290 m Euro 5% 4%
(at 2011 prices) Fuel Removal
9%
110 100
General Site m€ m€
Operation 210m€ Post-operation
27% 9%
200m€
610m€
550m€
510m€
D&D
24%
Waste
Removal
22%
21. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Breakdown by Generic Costs
Other Investments &
Procurements
Total cost: 38% (2011) Adjustments
2290 m Euro
(at 2011 prices) (2012-2029)
870m€ Staffing
+160m€ 23% (adjusted)
450m€ Energy
Major 640m€ +150m€ 17% (adjusted)
Facilities
28% (2011) Major Facilities,
Investments &
+140m€ Procurements
320m€ 460m€
60% (adjusted)
Staffing
Energy 20% (2011)
14% (2011)
22. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Ignalina NPP Staffing
4600
3900
2800 Staff attributable to the cost of
post-operation and dismantling
2250
2000 2000
1800
1400
1100
500 600 500
2001-2003 2004-2009 2010-2012 2013-2016 2017-2023 2024-2026 2027-2029
Unit 1 Unit 2 New End of End of unit End of End of
closure closure skills defuelling dismantling all D&D demolition
23. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Energy costs
25 m Euro
Electricity Heat & Gas
20 m Euro
15 m Euro
10 m Euro
5 m Euro
2011 320 m Euro 460 m Euro
Adjusted (2011) (adjusted)
24. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Major Facilities
Facility: ISFSF SWMSF Landfill NSR
Status: Construction Construction Design Design
(Buffer Store
Construction)
Cost: 200 m Euro 120 m Euro 30 m Euro 290 m Euro
TOTAL 640 m Euro
25. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Other investments & procurements
Field Cost to 2011 Cost 2012-2029 TOTAL
Reliable heat & steam supply after closure (B5) 40 m Euro 0 m Euro 40 m Euro
Projects derived from the Final Decommissioning Plan
Projects B6-B36 excl. D&D consultancy (B9), Reactor 25 m Euro 85 m Euro 110 m Euro
Dismantling equipt. (B30), PMU (B31) and Melting Unit (B18†)
Reactor Dismantling Related Investments (B30, B37, B38) 0 m Euro 40 m Euro 40 m Euro
Consultancy Services
40 m Euro 5 m Euro 45 m Euro
(IIDSF PMU - B31)
D&D Consultancy (B9) 15 m Euro 5 m Euro 20 m Euro
Physical Protection and Fire Service Cover 10 m Euro 100 m Euro 110 m Euro
Site infrastructure for decommissioning 10 m Euro 15 m Euro 25 m Euro
Dismissal compensation, low price contracts, training,
insurance, business travel, etc. 55 m Euro 40 m Euro 95 m Euro
(Costs now paid from National Decommissioning Fund)
Support of post-operation 10 m Euro 45 m Euro 55 m Euro
Support of D&D implementation 0 m Euro 220 m Euro 220 m Euro
Final clean up of buildings, demolition and site restoration 0 m Euro 110 m Euro 110 m Euro
TOTAL (at 2011 prices) 205 m Euro 665 m Euro 870 m Euro
26. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Major Exclusions (1)
Direct Costs of Ignalina NPP Decommissioning
Field Exclusion Justification
No technical solution currently
Graphite All final disposal costs
available
No technical solution currently
All final disposal costs
available
Spent nuclear fuel
All costs of physical protection and surveillance
Long-term cost
beyond 2029
All costs of physical protection and surveillance of
Radioactive waste Long-term cost
storages and repositories beyond 2029
All costs associated with divestment of non-
Divestment Not currently quantified
decommissioning activities of Ignalina NPP
All costs associated with the operation of
Regulatory institutions Not currently quantified
regulatory institutions for decommissioning
27. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Major Exclusions (2)
Indirect Costs of Ignalina NPP Decommissioning
Field Exclusion Justification
Unemployment benefits, social support, Not currently quantified. PHARE Study
Local impact mitigation and redevelopment measures in estimated social costs of 440 m Euro at
Visaginas 2001 prices.
Loss of revenue to the State Budget Not currently quantified
National impact
Economic impact of loss of industrial
Not currently quantified
competiveness due to increased electricity prices
28. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Assumptions
Field Assumption Justification
GDP was built-up from estimates developed and refined
Global Decommissioning Plan (GDP) successively in successive planning documents (PDP,
Overall decommissioning
has identified all possible costs FDP, U1DP0, etc.). GDP accounts for real costs over
2000-2010 and further development of ongoing projects.
FDP concluded that dismantling of reactors is possible
Reactor dismantling
GDP assumes immediate dismantling and foresees long-term interim storage of associated
“orphan” waste.
Rises in salaries, energy costs and other
Macroeconomic study commissioned by Ministry of
Macroeconomic prices do not exceed the values
Energy based on best available data.
presented
29. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Risks
Field Risk Quantification of impact
Design & Build Major Investment Additional works, changes in regulatory 20% (60 m Euro approx.)
Projects (ongoing) requirements Excludes indirect impact of any further delays.
Build-only Major Investment Additional works, changes in regulatory
15% (50 m Euro approx.)
Projects (planned) requirements
Revisions of scope and unforeseeable
Reactor dismantling 50% (20 m Euro approx.)
variations
Upgrading of interim storage into long- 50 m Euro (approx.)
term near surface disposal (foreseen in
Bitumized waste 14,000 m3 to be retrieved conditioned and
GDP based on preliminary study) is not
possible. disposed of in NSR
Other Investments derived
Revisions of scope and unforeseeable
from Final Decommissioning 10% (10 m Euro approx.)
variations
Plan
Total 190 m Euro (approx.)
Other?
30. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Comparison with Greifswald NPP (3)
Greifswald NPP Ignalina NPP
Operational Solid Waste 15,000 m3
(to be retrieved and managed)
30,000 m3
Operational Spent Resins 2,000 m3
(for cementation)
5,800 m3
Required Spent Fuel Casks 61
(for interim storage)
190 (additional)
59%
Steel from Equipt. Dismantling 116,000 tons
contaminated
130,000 tons
91%
Steel 2,660 tons
Reactor Core Structures
Steel Graphite Shielding (serpentine / sand) 17,100 tons
2,300 t 3,800 t 11,000 t
3.2 billion Euro
Decommissioning
Funding Identified 1.4 billion Euro
31. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Resources: EU & international
1999 - 2003 2004 - 2006 2007 - 2013
210 m€ 320 m€ 837 m€
2011 2013
IIDSF interest: 50 m€ EU: 995.5 m€ EU: 1367 m€
Bilateral donors: 33 m€ Total: 1078.5 m€ Total: 1450 m€
• Legal basis of IIDSF and Ignalina Programme (from Accession
Treaty) include decommissioning and consequential measures in
the energy sector
• Relevant to examine use of funds to date:
– proportion of funding in each sector
– current funding available
32. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Resources: EU & international
Unallocated 10%
Administration 1% 111m
10 m Euro Energy Sector 29%
Euro
306.5 m
Euro
651 m
Euro
Decommissioning
60%
Total: 1078.5 m Euro
33. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
National Decommissioning Fund
• Limited by: Social
Unallocated
– Soviet period 28%
Mitigation
18%
– safety power reduction 29 m Euro
45 m Euro
– low load factor
– early closure
32 m Euro Energy
• Former funding Administration Sector
20%
– levy on INPP electricity 4% (6 m Euro) 49 m Euro
no present income
• Future funding Decommissioning
30%
– surcharge on electricity
sales (also limited)
34. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Other national sources
• Ignalina NPP own resources
– present cash assets: 100 m Euro
– future sales of materials: 30 m Euro
• State Budget
– taxes and ineligible income costs
460 m Euro to 2029 (at 20% tax)
35. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Conclusion
Resources
1450 m Euro FUNDING GAP 2740 m Euro
(adjusted)
EU and international donors until 2013 Lithuania 1290 m Euro
650m€ 480m€ (max) 320m€ 1480 m Euro
700m€ 2040m€ 190m€
Direct costs to 2011 Future direct costs 2012 to 2029 Risk
2011 2290 m Euro 2930 m Euro
Direct Costs (2011 prices) (adjusted incl. risk)
• Costs well-founded (cf. FDP & Greifswald) but significant funding gap
• Benefit to EU MS and ENP of Ignalina NPP experience
• Lithuania is contributing to the expected level
• Seeking EU funds to meet funding gap (with inherent risks)
37. Republic of Lithuania Ministry of Energy
Impact on National Energy Supply
Belarus 6%
Latvia 8%
Estonia 22%
Russia 64%
Breakdown of Electricity Imports by Country 1-3Q 2010