Finland is one of the very few countries - probably  the only western country - building more nuclear power at the moment. Since the Chernobyl accident in 1986, many countries including Sweden and Italy made the decision to ban nuclear energy altogether. Well, Chernobyl is forgotten and global warming has taken its place as the new environmental bogeyman. Also Finland has forgotten Chernobyl, even thought we still today have restrictions on quantities of fish, forest berries and mushrooms one can eat. (although the restriction on herring is not only for the becquerels, but also because they are full of mercury).

In 2005 Finland decided to order our 5th nuclear power plant from the French  company Areva. The announcement said that the power plant will cost 3,7 billion euros, and it will be operational in 2009. Well, it's 2009 now, and the plant looks like this:



The project has had so many problems that all Finns have lost count a long time ago. I don't think anyone knows how much it will cost eventually, but the 3.7 billion will certainly not be the number. The seller Areva has estimated that the cost will double. There are a series of security holes in the process, including lack of project management, lack of communications, differences between the plans and reality, etc. Reports of use of unlicensed  sub-contractors with questionable welding skills are not helping. The buyer and the seller are arguing over responsibilities in the press and on TV, the power plant provider openly badmouthing their client.

While this is going on in Europe's only nuclear power plant construction, Swedes and Italians decided to undo their nuclear ban decision. Many other countries are looking into more nuclear power in order to get away from their CO2 cut commitments, and/or from dependency of Russian oil/gas.

I tried to find international articles about the Finnish construction issue in English, but most links point to either Finnish websites, or the international Greenpeace. There's one website that calls itself climatesceptics.org, they have followed the topic since last year. But I'm surprised that problems of this severity are not discussed frequently in the more serious international newspapers.

Finns have been quite open to nuclear power, but opinions are changing. The most recent Finnish business and policy forum's attitude and value survey brings up a change in attitudes. The two most recent surveys have had a question on whether Finland should build a 6th nuclear power plant after the construction of this 5th plant is complete. In 2006 40% of the respondents said "yes", but in 2009 only 32% felt that we should build more nuclear power. These averages naturally divide into women and young people against, and men and older people for nuclear power.

One reasons for Finns to lose interest in nuclear power is of course all the troubles with the construction site, but also the fact that once operational, the plant will need uranium. International uranium mining companies have found good spots in Finland for opening uranium mines, which naturally does not please the local people. Once the mines are opened, these companies will sell uranium to the Finnish power plants, but also to other countries. The minister of trade and industry, Mauri Pekkarinen, has said that these villages have a "moral obligation" to grant lands for uranium mining, because Finland has already opted for nuclear energy. He is accusing these municipalities of NIMBY thinking. The minister of environment Paula Lehtomäki, has said that mining for uranium in North-Carelia would be "logical".

Funnily enough, when searching for a direct quote from Ms. Lehtomäki, the search with "uranium+minister Lehtomäki" brings up several articles where Ms. Lehtomäki requires Iran to stop uranium enrichment activities. Should this be called comedy or tragedy?

After the uranium has been used, it needs to be stored, too. Our good ministers have not yet pointed a "logical"  village who would have the "moral obligation" to store our own nuclear waste, and why not our neighbours' as well. After all, the uranium would have come from our mines in the first place.