BANKS DODGY DEALS CAMPAIGNS
About BankTrack
Visit us
Organisation
Our team
Our board
Guiding principles
Team up with us
Jobs at BankTrack
Our annual reports
Funding and finances
History
BankTrack in the media
Our privacy policy
Donate
2023-03-17 00:00:00
Briefing: The role of financial institutions in decarbonising the steel sector
2023-03-09 00:00:00
Dutch bank ING supports controversial pipeline to import gas from authoritarian Azerbaijan
2023-02-23 00:00:00
Financial institutions need to address steelmaking’s coal addiction
2023-02-07 00:00:00
What COP15 means for banks: meeting the Global Biodiversity Framework requires protecting Indigenous rights and divesting from harmful industries
2023-03-20 08:50:41
Who dares to finance Eni and Exxon’s dangerous Rovuma gas plans in Mozambique?
2023-03-14 14:59:00
New ING policy could spark bank shift away from financing oil and gas infrastructure
2023-02-24 13:46:14
Pego power station conversion plans halted
2022-12-14 11:08:26
HSBC announces it will no longer finance new oil and gas fields
Connect
2022-11-22 00:00:00
Banking on Thin Ice: Two years in the heat
2022-11-17 00:00:00
BankTrack Global Human Rights Benchmark 2022
2022-10-21 00:00:00
Burning forests in the name of clean energy? How banks are failing to exclude the harmful wood biomass industry from finance
2022-06-28 00:00:00
The East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP): Finance Risk Update No. 3
2022-04-05 00:00:00
The BankTrack Human Rights Benchmark Asia
2022-03-30 00:00:00
Banking on Climate Chaos 2022
See all publications
Sections
Banks Dodgy Deals Campaigns
Our campaigns
Banks and Climate
Banks and Human Rights
Banks and Nature
Banks and Pandemics
Our projects
Tracking the NZBA
Banks and Putin's war in Ukraine
Tracking the Equator Principles
Tracking the PRBs
Find a Better Bank
Banks and the OECD Guidelines
Media
News Publications
Fossil Banks No Thanks StopEACOP Forests & Finance Banks & Biodiversity Drop JBS Bank of Coal Don't Buy into Occupation
BankTrack
About BankTrack Visit us Organisation Our team Our board Guiding principles Team up with us Jobs at BankTrack Our annual reports Funding and finances History BankTrack in the media Our privacy policy Donate
Successes Contact BankTrack
Donate Mailing list Facebook Twitter Login
Home › Dodgy Deals ›
Dodgy Deal
Cernavoda nuclear power plant (units 3 & 4)Romania

Project – On record

This profile is no longer actively maintained, with the information now possibly out of date
Lead organisation:
BankTrack
Contact:

Jan Haverkamp, Greenpeace International, Czech Republic

Last update: 2016-10-06 23:32:29

Project – On record

This profile is no longer actively maintained, with the information now possibly out of date
Lead organisation:
BankTrack
Contact:

Jan Haverkamp, Greenpeace International, Czech Republic

Last update: 2016-10-06 23:32:29
Why this profile?

What must happen

Banks should refuse to provide capital for this project or for Electronuclear or any of the strategic investors, as the project does not work with state of the art nuclear technology (a 2nd generation reactor design), has unacceptable effects on the environment (e.g. tritium emissions), and goes counter the development of a sustainable energy policy for Romania.

About
Sectors Nuclear Electric Power Generation
Location

The plans to build Romania's Cernavoda nuclear power plant are old - they were part of an energy policy devised by the dictator Nicolae Ceaucescu who was deposed in 1989 and wanted to build five reactors. The Cernavoda 3 and 4 reactors are based on the Canadian CANDU6 design which, according to the Western European Nuclear Regulators Association, has not changed since 1979. There are big question marks over the reactor's safety which shares the same design flaw as the reactor which caused the Chernobyl disaster in 1986.

Construction on reactors 2, 3, 4, and 5 was halted at Cernavoda in 1991 to concentrate on reactor 1, which was commissioned in 1996 almost 20 years after negotiations first started, costing the state $2.2 billion. Cernavoda 2, commissioned in October 2007, was the last nuclear power station to start operation in Europe. Cernavoda 3 and 4 are not expected to start operation until 2014 and 2015 at the earliest.

Nuclearelectrica, the state run owner and operator, says the project will cost about 4 billion euros. As with nearly all nuclear reactor projects, that estimate will almost certainly rise and quickly. The Romanian government is aware of the financial risks involved. In order to keep the six strategic investors happy, it has put extensive state aid into the project. The Government has made a guarantee of EUR 220 million, an EUR 350 million subsidy for 855 tons of heavy water, and contributed EUR 800 million from the National Development Fund. CEE Bankwatch and Greenpeace have complained about this state aid to the European Commission.

After all this, the two new reactors will not even be used to supply electricity to Romanian consumers. They will instead export electricity to neighbouring countries.

Impacts

Social and human rights impacts

Cernavoda is a small town of slightly more than 20,000 residents in the southeast of Romania located on the Danube River, not far from the Black Sea. Cernavoda 1 and 2 produce approximately 18% of Romania's electricity. Water from the Danube is used for cooling the reactor. Traces of tritium, a radioactve isotope of hydrogen, have been found in the water that is released back into the river from the reactor.

Recommendations have been made to relocate pregnant women and mothers with very young children, and local residents have been advised not to eat produce grown in local gardens.

During the Environmental Impact Assessment of Cernavoda 3 and 4, Greenpeace organised a presentation of a report by Dr. Ian Fairlie into tritium emissions from the existing reactors. During the presentation in the town hall in Cernavoda, the state owned operator Nuclearelectrica disrupted the meeting and used intrusive surveillance on Dr. Fairlie and the Greenpeace team. All attendants at the meeting were registered by taking in their ID cards at the entrance of the town hall. Local human rights activists criticised the resulting lack of opportunity for local inhabitants to discuss the findings presented by Dr. Fairlie freely. Romanian law clearly assigns responsibility for the safe operation of the reactors to the operator, Nuclearelectrica.

Clearly, pregnant women and children up to 4 years old are more vulnerable to the high tritium emissions of CANDU 6 reactors. This risk of exposure will become even higher should the two new planned reactors come on stream.


Environmental and climate impacts

The level of tritium emitted from the CANDU6 reactors will increase to unacceptable levels if reactor 3 and 4 are permitted to upgrade. On average 60% of tritium releases occur in the Danube and 75% in the atmosphere.

The power station is located in an area that is seismic active (the Vrancha breach) which has seen heavy earthquakes in recent history. An earthquake in 1977 destroyed much of the Romanian capital Bucharest and caused damage in the area surrounding of Cernavoda. The CANDU 6 reactor also lacks sufficient protection against terrorist attack.


Other impacts

The Romanian Government is aware of the financial risks involved in this project. In order to convince the six strategic investors, they decided to put extensive state aid into the project, but did not sufficiently realise this will be in breach with European state aid regulations.

The Government decided to grant a government guarantee for 220 Million Euro, a subsidy for 855 tons of heavy water for the sum of 350 Million Euro and 800 Million Euro from the National Development Fund, from which 20 Million Euro is to be allocated in 2009. CEE Bankwatch and Greenpeace have complained about this state aid to the European Commission.

Financiers
Institution type
Finance type
Year

unknown which banks will finance

Companies

AECL

Canada
Website

ArcelorMittal

Luxembourg
Website

CEZ Group

Czech Republic
Profile
Website

Electrabel

Belgium

ENEL

Italy
Website

EnergoNuclear S.A.

Romania
Website

Nuclearelectrica

Romania
Website
No companies
News
BankTrack
Partners
Blog
External
BankTrack news BankTrack blog Partner news Partner blog

Romania seeks Chinese boost for nuke plant

2011-08-19 | Beijing | upi.com
BankTrack news BankTrack blog Partner news Partner blog

Crisis Throws Romania’s Nuclear Project into Doubt

2011-01-26 | Romania | Balkan Insight
Blog
BankTrack news BankTrack blog Partner news Partner blog

BankTrack calls on banks to stop funding nuclear power

New website exposes nuclear secrets of commercial banks
2010-05-26 | Nijmegen, the Netherlands | BankTrack
Blog
BankTrack news BankTrack blog Partner news Partner blog

Cernavoda nuclear reactor too dangerous to build, says new report

Greenpeace calls on Romanian government to shelve the project
2009-03-10 | Bucharest | Greenpeace International
Blog
BankTrack news BankTrack blog Partner news Partner blog

Greenpeace files illegal state aid complaint for construction of nuclear plants in Romania and Bulgaria

2009-02-25 | Brussels | Friends of the Earth Europe
Blog
BankTrack news BankTrack blog Partner news Partner blog

Greenpeace study warns Cernavoda inhabitants of tritium dangers from nuclear power plant

Environmental group demands the Romanian Government to look at sustainable alternatives to nuclear power
2007-10-31 | Bucharest | Greenpeace International
Resources
Documents
Videos
2011-01-26 00:00:00

Briefing: RWE and Cernavoda

NGO document
2011-01-26 00:00:00 | Heffa Schücking, urgewald
2009-03-10 00:00:00

Greenpeace recommendations on Cernavoda

NGO document
2009-03-10 00:00:00 | Greenpeace International
2009-02-20 00:00:00

Letter from Greenpeace International to EU commission Directorate General Competition on Cernavoda

Correspondence
2009-02-20 00:00:00 | Greenpeace International
2008-11-01 00:00:00

Risks of Operating Candu 6 Nuclear Power Plants: Gentilly Unit 2 Refurbishment and its Global Implications

NGO document
2008-11-01 00:00:00 | Greenpeace International
2007-09-25 00:00:00

Cernavodă 3 şi 4: Evaluarea Impactului asupra Mediului: Raport pentru Greenpeace

NGO document
2007-09-25 00:00:00 | Dr. Ian Fairlie
2007-09-10 00:00:00

Cernavoda 3 and 4: Environment Impact Analysis: Report for Greenpeace

NGO document
2007-09-10 00:00:00 | Dr Ian Fairlie
2007-07-06 00:00:00

Tritium Hazard Report: Pollution and Radiation Risk from Canadian Nuclear Facilities, Toronto (2007) Greenpeace Canada

NGO document
2007-07-06 00:00:00 | Greenpeace International

Cernavoda nuke plant violates EU competition laws

2012-08-07 17:02:36
Updates

2009

2009-06-28 05:10:28 |

The Environmental Impact Assessment of the Cernavoda 3,4 is currently in its final stages.

The Romanian government is looking for possible financial models for the project. A government decision including government loan guarantees, subsidies for heavy water and direct investment from the government budget structural funds had to be reconsidered, as they would constitute illegal state aid.

Send feedback on this profile
Sections
Banks Policies Dodgy Deals Campaigns
Our campaigns
Banks and Climate Banks and Human Rights Banks and Nature Banks and Pandemics
Our projects
Tracking the NZBA Banks and Putin's war in Ukraine Tracking the Equator Principles Tracking the PRBs Find a Better Bank Banks and the OECD Guidelines
Media
News Publications
Fossil Banks No Thanks StopEACOP Forests & Finance Banks & Biodiversity Drop JBS Bank of Coal Don't Buy into Occupation
BankTrack
About BankTrack Visit us Organisation Our team Our board Guiding principles Team up with us Jobs at BankTrack Our annual reports Funding and finances History BankTrack in the media Our privacy policy Donate
Successes Contact BankTrack
Vismarkt 15
6511 VJ Nijmegen
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 24 324 9220
Contact@banktrack.org
Donate Mailing list Facebook Twitter
©2022 BankTrack
BankTrack is a registered charity in the Netherlands (ANBI) - RSIN 813874658
Find our privacy policy here

Stay up to date

Sign up now for all BankTrack's news


Make a comment

Your comment will be reviewed, before being posted