TOP

Nuclear Transparency Watch

Prevent and anticipate through transparency and participation

Rolling stewardship in radioactive waste management

In the frame of the EU joint programme on radioactive waste management EURAD-1, the NTW members involved, together with other civil society members and EURAD participants, addressed aspects of rolling stewardship in radioactive waste management in the context of research and fruitful Interactions with Civil Society (ICS) methodology.

This helped in developing the following outputs within the 2 “strategic studies” work packages in which NTW was participating:

In parallel, NTW also launched a working group on this topic in which several presentations have been made by knowledgeable speakers from various backgrounds and with complementary knowledge such as Robert Del Tredici, Dr. Gordon Edwards, Marcos Buser, Reinhard Uberhost or Maryna Surkova. For NTW, Niels Henrik Hooge and Gilles Hériard-Dubreuil also provided some inputs.

The following presentations proposed in this working group are also available on NTW’s You Tube channel:

  • Webinar #1
    “Human uncertainties relevant to the safety associated with radioactive waste management and Rolling Stewardship”
    by Niels Henrik Hooge Master of Laws and Master of Arts in Philosophy. Interested in environmental and sustainability for a long time he has manifested itself in activism, cooperation with green NGOs in Denmark and abroad, as well as in many types of writing. In addition to editorial staff work in Danish environmental magazines, he has published several books, including most recently the novel “Kosova” (2016) and the poetry collections “Grøn nation” (Green Nation, 2015), “Miljødigte” (Environmental Poems, 2018) and “Miljødigte 2” (Environmental Poems 2, 2019).
    “The origin and evolution of the concept of Rolling Stewardship”
    by Ph.D. in Mathematics and Master of Arts in English Literature, Gordon Edwards, who has been a Professor of Mathematics and Science during all his career during which he did many publications in that field but not only. From 1970 to 1974, he was the editor of Survival magazine. In 1975 he co-founded the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility and has been its president since 1978. Edwards has worked widely as a consultant on nuclear issues and has been qualified as a nuclear expert by courts in Canada and elsewhere.
  • Webinar #2 – part 1 

    “Darkness, Visibility, and Transparency”
    by Robert del Tredici has a Master’s degree in Comparative Literature at the University of California, and he has been a teacher for much of his life, giving courses in Photography, Drawing, Mythology, and History of Animated Film at the University of Calgary in Alberta and at Vanier College and Concordia University in Montreal. He is and has been a prolific graphic artist and documentary photographer: The People of Three Mile Island (1980), At Work in the Fields of the Bomb (1987), Closing the Circle on the Splitting-off the Atom (1993); Linking Legacies (1995); From Cleanup to Stewardship (1997).

    Webinar #2 – part 2 
    “History of disposal projects and need for stewardship”
    by Marcos Buser, a geologist with a degree from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) in Zurich, also consultant and expert who has been active for more than four decades in the management of industrial and radioactive waste projects, and a former member of several scientific commissions for the Swiss government, including the Swiss Federal Commission for Nuclear Safety. He was a member of the StocaMine steering committee.

  • Webinar #3
    “An Introduction to Safety Culture – a possible resource for Rolling Stewardship of Radioactive Waste Management ?”
    by Gilles Hériard Dubreuil, born in 1957, has a background in mathematics and human sciences (sociology, ethics, risk management). From 1982 to 1990, he worked for various consulting firms, then for Mutadis from 1991 onwards, developing research and consultancy activities in the fields of governance of high-risk activities and sustainable development, as well as in the design and testing of democratic governance systems at local, national and international levels.
    “Rolling Stewardship – Safety Culture ; a regulatory perspective”
    by Maryna Surkova a professional at the Federal Agency for Nuclear Control (FANC) in Belgium where she oversees nuclear safety and regulatory affairs within the Ghent metropolitan area. Maryna holds qualifications from the SCK CEN Academy for Nuclear Science and Technology. With a strong technical and regulatory background, she ensures compliance with national and international nuclear standards. Based in Belgium, she combines scientific expertise with policy implementation to support FANC’s mission.

In fact, NTW has envisioned connected topic related to the concept of Rolling Stewardship addressing challenges of the long-term engagement and maintenance in various way, such as “Intergenerational Stewardship” or “Long-term Stewardship” for instance. This work is meant to be continued within the same platforms which were previously used such as the SITEX.network and EURAD but also with any interested partners such as researchers specialized in environmental stewardship or in radioactive waste management in the long term.

In order to help further research on this topic, Niels Henrik-Hooge, has developed a paper providing a synthetical overview of the different concepts and perspectives related to radioactive waste management in the long-term such as “Intergenerational Stewardship culture”, “Rolling stewardship” or “Long-term Stewardship”:
➡️ Rolling stewardship and management of radioactive waste in the long-term ⬅️

“Mining Companies In Greenland Should Be Better Controlled” 🇬🇱 NOAH

NOAH, the Danish member of Friends of the Earth (Foe), and member of NTW, has just release the following press released advocating together with the green NGO Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) and  Urani Naamik-Nuuk that “Mining Companies In Greenland Should Be Better Controlled”.

To know more about the Institutional mechanisms in Greenland to facilitate transparency and public participation in radioactive waste management in general, Niels Henrik Hooge, member of Nuclear Transparency Watch and NOAH Friends of the Earth Denmark, wrote an article about it in the EURAD deliverable D9.17 ROUTES – Implementation of the ROUTES ICS action plan second phase (p. 91).

This article was also presented orally in the frame of a webinar series (click here to watch).

 

Nuuk, Copenhagen and Melbourne, June 9, 2025

PRESS RELEASE

Mining Companies In Greenland Should Be Better Controlled

On May 29, the owner of the large Kuannersuit/Kvanefjeld uranium and rare earths mining project, Energy Transition Minerals (ETM), held its annual general meeting in Melbourne, Australia. The mining company has sued the Danish and Greenlandic governments for 10 billion EUR – equivalent to almost four times Greenland’s GDP – which is likely to make the case the largest in the history of the Danish Realm.

“For more than ten years, ETM has tried to force through a mining project that few residents in Greenland want,” says Erik Jensen, chairman of the URANI? NAAMIK / The No To Uranium Association in Nuuk. “The general meeting shows that the mining company has learned nothing and has no respect for the local population. Apparently, ETM still spares no effort to promote its project, even though it has been illegal for four years.”

One of the participants in the general meeting was Dave Sweeney from the green NGO Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF), who ensured that shareholders could ask questions of ETM’s management. His briefing from the meeting demonstrates that ETM does not deny that Julie Bishop, a former Australian foreign minister, who has been hired as a strategic advisor to promote the Kuannersuit/Kvanefjeld mining project, may be liaising with the Trump administration. She is already accused of double play in Myanmar, where she is both a UN special envoy and a lobbyist for Chinese mining companies. 290 environmental organisations have signed an open letter to the UN Secretary-General, calling for an investigation into the conflict of interest.

“The Australian uranium sector has over-promised and under delivered for decades”, says ACF nuclear analyst Dave Sweeney. “This history of leaks, damage and division has seen sustained and often successful community resistance to uranium mining. We do not want Australian mining companies seeking to ignore or override community concerns in Greenland. People must have a right to choose their future and to say no to mining and ETM and other companies must listen”.

Since the lifting of the ban on uranium mining in 2013 which ETM pushed through by threatening the Greenland government that it would not extract rare earths in Kuannersuit if uranium could not be mined, the company has only caused problems. This could have been prevented twelve years ago when questions were raised in the Danish and the Greenlandic parliaments about, among other things, the ETM ownership group’s alleged connection to organized crime in Australia.

“The fact that dubious mining companies can gain access to license areas is still a problem,” says Palle Bendsen from NOAH Friends of the Earth Denmark. “Together with three European and two Australian environmental organizations, NOAH complained to Nasdaq in late 2024 about the Australian-American mining company Critical Metals Corp. The company is on its way to take over Tanbreez Mining Greenland A/S, which owns the large Kringlerne/Killavaat Alannguat mining project in South Greenland. The deposit is reportedly the largest occurrence of rare earths in the world. Our complaint documents that Critical Metals Corp has misled the public, the authorities, and current and possibly future shareholders in at least twelve cases.”

After Donald Trump threatened to annex Greenland, the more than hundred large-scale license areas pose not only a serious environmental, but also a security problem. Together, they cover a fifth of Greenland’s habitable areas and instead of occupying the country with military means, Trump-supporters can buy it up piece by piece. For example, the American investment company GreenMet has 10 billion USD at its disposal for investments in Greenland. The company’s management includes a former Senior Advisor to the Director of National Intelligence and National Security Special Operations Advisor with a history as a Commander of a Special Operations Detachment in Afghanistan, a former highly decorated Special Forces Weapons Sergeant with more than 10 years of experience in special operations, an ex-CIA operative, and a former Director of Oval Office Operations, who used to be head of security for the Trump Organisation, while serving as Donald Trump’s personal bodyguard.

“With only a handful of employees, the Greenlandic Department of Mineral Resources has no chance of controlling the many mining areas, let alone who owns the companies that possess the licenses,” says Niels Henrik Hooge from NOAH Friends of the Earth Denmark. “Based on the experience with ETM, the Department can’t count on much support from the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Justice in Denmark, which together with the Greenlandic authorities are responsible for security and law enforcement in Greenland. Both the Greenlandic population and Greenlandic politicians want a closer relationship with the EU, so perhaps Denmark could use its upcoming EU Presidency to promote Greenlandic interests. Simultaneously, a moratorium on large-scale mining could be introduced for the next four years in order to protect the environment and avoid unwanted interference from the outside.”

Australian Conservation Foundation’s briefing on ETM’s annual general meeting

Regarding Energy Transition Minerals, etc., see: Mariane Paviasen and others, Greenland Is Under Attack, Nuclear Monitor #917, June 28, 2024, p. 8-12

For more information, contact:

URANI? NAAMIK / The No To Uranium Association in Nuuk: Erik Jensen, Tel.: +299 496790, E-mail: erikjensen1967(at)icloud.com

NOAH Friends of the Earth Denmark: Niels Henrik Hooge, Tel.: +45 21 83 79 94, E-mail: nielshenrik(at)noah.dk and Palle Bendsen, Tel.: +45 30 13 76 95, E-mail: pnb(at)ydun.net

Australian Conservation Foundation: Dave Sweeney, Tel.: +61 (0)408 317 812, E-mail: dave.sweeney(at)acf.org.au

Illustrative Programme for Nuclear Energy (PINC)

🇪🇺🔎 Nuclear Transparency Watch participated to the Illustrative Programme for Nuclear Energy (PINC) in 📅 May 2025 to address the following question:
On what ground could the 🇪🇺 EU support the «nuclear revival» ☢️📈 supported by some Member States ?

The following feedback can be found here.

“First and foremost, its important to recall that the countries supporting this revival are obviously mostly concerned and interested – they are operating nuclear energy and even industrializing it – and those 13 EU Member States are led by France a country reported to be lacking democracy in energy debates in various occasions including currently with the PPE (Programmation Pluriannuelle de lEnergie).

Also, before addressing this revision of the EUs Illustrative Programme for Nuclear Energy (PINC) in itself, its interesting to look back at the 2016 PINC which projected 14 GW of new nuclear capacity by 2025 when only 3.6 GW materialized because promises and reality are two different things especially when it comes to energy production which requires safety, time and a certain stability both political and financial. Today, the political situation in the EU and worldwide is more polarized and uncertain than ten years ago, in 2022 Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine leading to many issues around the Nuclear Power Plants there (Chernobyl and Zaporijia) and this year Donald Trump has created some major instability on the markets over night with its Liberation Days tariffs showing the economical vulnerability and dependency of most of the countries in the world. Therefore, when it comes to energy its crucial to have a broad and transparent perspective to support more easily EUs values and strategy because Europes current reliance on Russian uranium (valued at over 700 million in 2024) contradicts its sanctions regime for instance in addition to weaken its energy security (NTW supports the EU Commission’s roadmap for ridding itself of energy imports from Russia, including uranium and nuclear fuel published yesterday).

Furthermore, nuclear energy is highly represented in the EU – with around 100 operating reactors – compared to other regions in the world, but also not new. Its aging nuclear infrastructure (e.g., Frances fleet with an average age of 37 years) is in fact increasingly vulnerable to both climate change and cyber or military threats. In addition the nuclear sector is also aging and declining with more decommissions than new builds which face chronic delays and cost overruns (e.g., Flamanville-3 (France) and Olkiluoto-3 (Finland) – took over a decade longer than planned).

Instead of promising a «nuclear revival» to achieve carbon neutrality, the EU should focus on safety of the existing nuclear facilities including radioactive waste for which there isn’t yet any proven solution for the thousands of years ahead of us. In fact, from 2009 to 2024, nuclear Levelised Cost of Energy (LCOE) rose by 49%, while that of solar PV and wind decreased by 83% and 63% respectively providing quicker returns and less financial risks (WNISR 2024). Furthermore, nuclear energy’s exposure to climate-related disruptions such as droughts and heatwaves, which reduce reactor cooling efficiency and increase shutdown risks should also be compared to other source of energy because this undermines its reliability in a warming climate.

The European Commissions decision to allow only 4 weeks for public consultation after an 8-year gap is questionable especially when EU countries have also proven to be undemocratic on this topic. In the eye of trust building and citizen engagement, its important to be ambitious in including public in a meaningful way.

For those reasons, NTW believes that the main concern and interest should remain the safety of the life around the existing nuclear installations still operating or decommissioned before anything. Democratizing nuclear energy is a key aspect for safety and transparency especially nowadays with the serious economic, security and military challenges we’re facing, therefore resources should be given to citizens willing to engage beyond polarization and distrust to overcome potential misinformation or opacity.”

Report of the Aarhus Convention and Nuclear Round Table report

“Implementation of the Nuclear Safety Directive: transparency, public participation, and the role of civil society in independent nuclear regulation”

➡️ 📄 ACN roundtable report ⬅️

This report of the ACN round table held on 21-22 January 2025 was drafted by the co-organisers (NTW and DG ENER), reflecting the discussions and the presentations given during the event.

More information is available ▶️ here

EURAD-2 an EU programme on radioactive waste management

The EU programme EURAD-2 is following EURAD-1 a programme where Nuclear Transparency Watch (NTW) was involved from 2019 to 2024.

1st FORSAFF WP seminar 🗓23-24 April 2025 

Small Modular Reactors waste🛢️☢️ were addressed during the FORSAFF seminar 1 from 23-24 April 2025 🗓 at the ASNR‘ facility in Fontenay-aux-Roses 🇫🇷 gathering around 50 participants in person or online.

This Work Package dedicated to Small Modular Reactors waste 🛢️☢️ had 2 objectives:
• to identify stakeholder perceptions and concerns related to SMR waste management and develop recommendations for transparent information exchange and dialogue including improving communication with the public.
• to discuss on topic “Policy and Regulatory Framework” with challenges posed to existing policies and regulations by introduction of SMRs and associated spent fuel and radioactive wastes.

A good part of the seminar was dedicated to civil society concerns with some time for working groups exchanging on different challenging cases. 


1st CLIMATE WP workshop 🗓 26-27 March 2025 

Radioactive waste 🛢️☢️ and climate change impacts 🔥 🌊 were addressed during the 1st Climate workshop from 26-27 March 2025 🗓 at the Mines’ facility in Fontainebleau. A technical visit focusing on climate change impacts in Nemours 🇫🇷 (CEREEP center) launched this event.

Erosion test at the CEREEP center

Presentation, analysis, cross-study of keynote papers prepared by different waste management actors, including civil society, helped the 41 participants in elaborating shared viewpoints and outcomes regarding the prior topics to be considered.

Plenary session at the Mines facility in Fontainebleau
1st “Interaction with Civil Society” (ICS) workshop 🗓 24-25 March 2025 
In this new programme, a 1st “Interaction with Civil Society” (ICS) workshop took place in Fontainebleau 🇫🇷 at Mines-Paris’ facility on 🗓 24-25 March 2025 with participants from many 🇪🇺 European countries to exchange on ☢️🛢radioactive waste.
💼📋 This workshop which has been organised by NTW was particularly dedicated to the general overview of the programme’s  4 “Strategic Studies”:
🔹CLIMATE (impact of climate change);
🔹OPTI (HLW repository optimisation including closure);
🔹ASTRA (alternatives RWM strategies) and
🔹FORSAFF (WM for SMRs and future fuels).

Fourth NEA Stakeholder Involvement Workshop in Paris

NEA Stakeholder Involvement Workshop

The Summary Report from the Third NEA Stakeholder Involvement Workshop on Optimisation in Decision Making, which took place in Paris from 5–7 September 2023, where NTW was actively involved, has now been published.

The report captures the key findings from the discussions, including case studies, practical reflections, and proposals on how to facilitate optimisation in decision making through meaningful stakeholder involvement. It also outlines the next steps toward a generic framework for optimised decision making in the nuclear sector and beyond.

A Fourth NEA Stakeholder Involvement Workshop, will take place in Paris on 15–17 October 2025.

In preparation for the workshop, the NEA will be hosting a series of preparatory webinars. The third and final webinar is set to take place on 7 May 2025 and is now open for registration.

Continued participation and contributions will help in contributing for the next workshops.

Background

In fact, the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) will hold its Fourth NEA Stakeholder Involvement Workshop on Optimisation in Decision Making: From Insight to Action on 15-17 October 2025 in Paris, France

The workshop is the latest in a series of events that began in 2017 and seeks to foster dialogue and collaboration among diverse stakeholders in the nuclear sector.

The Third NEA Stakeholder Involvement Workshop on Optimisation in Decision Making, held in September 2023, brought together 120 participants from 23 countries, including representatives from regulators, operators, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), civil society and indigenous communities. Discussions centred on creating a framework for decisions that are optimised, inclusive and sustainable. The next event in the series will feature further discussion on developing a practical framework for optimised decision making.

Preparatory webinars

In the lead-up to the October 2025 event, the NEA has hosted two preparatory webinars exploring key factors that contribute to power imbalances and their mitigation when engaging stakeholders in nuclear decision making. Each webinar attracted approximately 50 participants, offering focused discussions. A third webinar is planned for 7 May 2025 to further equip participants with tools to support meaningful stakeholder engagement.

What to expect

The three-day Fourth NEA Stakeholder Involvement Workshop will feature:

  • plenary presentations by leading experts;
  • open dialogues to facilitate meaningful discussion; and
  • moderated panel discussions offering diverse perspectives.

Participants will include representatives from government bodies, industry, academic and research institutions, NGOs, international organisations and civil society to foster a broad and inclusive dialogue. The workshop outcomes will be compiled into a publicly available report, contributing to the ongoing discourse on the role of stakeholder engagement in the optimisation of decision making in the nuclear sector.

Opportunity to engage

The NEA is looking for case studies on the practical application of approaches and tools for stakeholder engagement, building on trust and ensuring transparency.

Contributions are welcome: the NEA can be contacted at stakeholder2025@oecd-nea.org

Find this article and more information on NEA home page: https://www.oecd-nea.org/jcms/pl_99778/fourth-nea-stakeholder-involvement-workshop-to-be-held-in-paris

Deep Geological Facility in the UK

Deep Geological Facility and correspondence in UK regional newspaper

A letter of NTW’s member, Tim Knowles, was published in a regional newspaper in Cumbria 🇬🇧 relating to the withdrawal of the only other area than Cumbria as a potential UK Deep Geological Facility location.

This letter underlines how this decision marks a very significant stage in the siting process and clearly affecting the “balance of power” between government, industry and communities.

 

 

 

19th March 2025

Sir,

The inevitable has happened in that the only alternative UK site for a deep nuclear waste repository has been withdrawn by Lincolnshire County Council in response to local hostility and other concerns. That leaves only West Cumbria and its two artificially split “communities” as the only potential location, unless government chooses to ignore the legal “volunteerism” approach and impose another solution.

By now everyone who takes an interest knows that an undersea mudstone type geology will be the likely location. Now that Lincolnshire is out of the picture that only really leaves a repository site fifteen to twenty miles out under the Irish Sea, probably accessed by tunneling out from a surface location near Sellafield. We have lived with this probability for decades and while it may be the most logical solution, huge issues remain to be resolved.;
🔹There is still no proof that the currently accepted high level waste packaging approach will survive the necessary thousands of years or that retrievability of the waste might be appropriate.
🔹The complex issues of whether plutonium should really be treated as waste given its potential as fuel plus the growing security and possible military use options are still not fully resolved.
🔹The issue of the major impact on our community, its infrastructure and the compensation benefits it should receive for hosting are far from resolved. It should be remembered that applying UK law and using comparator schemes like the Swedish system for repository benefit, West Cumbria should receive at least three billion pounds.

We need our politicians to gear up, learn about the international dimensions and risks associated with nuclear waste management and not to accept at face value what they are told by the nuclear industry and its regulators. This community should be professionally represented by independent experts and although the UK Treasury wont like it, government money should provided to allow peer reviews, impact assessments and strategic planning in a way to be
agreed by West Cumbrians.

It is sad but true that many of the promises made by both nuclear industry and government over many years have frequently not been delivered This huge project must be handled honestly and fairly, not only for West Cumbria today but because it will affect the lives of many future generations.

Tim Knowles
in the Whitehaven News

Interview of Dr. Petar Kardzilov in TV Eurocom on nuclear issues in Bulgaria

Dr. Petar Kardzilov was interviewed in “Honestly with Lyuba Kulezic” on TV Eurocom regarding his application under the Law on Access to Public Information with questions to the Minister of Energy regarding the State Enterprise Radioactive Waste and the Kozloduy NPP (click here for the link to the interview in Bulgarian).

There was an article in English about it (click here) and a complete translation of the interview here below:

Radioactive Issues

Interview with Petar Kardzhilov in the weekly publicistic program “Honestly with Lyuba Kulezich” on Eurocom TV, 06.03.2025 (uploaded to the Eurocom TV website on 07.03.2025).

Lyuba Kulezich: Petar Kardzhilov is here, you know him very well, he is a specialist in communications during risks and crises, one of the most consistent advocates for the right to freedom of Desislava Ivancheva and Bilyana Petrova – the infamous mayors of Mladost, who were thrown in prison for corruption. But the topic for which I invited him here tonight is a paradoxical title, which is his work, and which made me understand that within the Kozloduy NPP there is a nuclear waste storage facility – a topic that is extremely painful, not very popular in the public eye. But this same facility sells honey. Honey! Honey, in the sense of eating – bee honey! I could not understand anything from this insane contradiction. And that is why I invited him to explain it to me. Colleague Kardzhilov, what does this mean? Are we storing nuclear waste, are we producing honey at the nuclear waste storage facility? What is actually happening?

Petar Kardzhilov: Thank you very much for the invitation, dear Mrs. Kulezich! We are talking about the State Enterprise “Radioactive Waste”, which is subordinate to the Ministry of Energy, is not part of the Kozloduy NPP, but there are two of the main units on the Kozloduy NPP site, the other is the repository in Novi Han. In general, according to the Law on the Safe Use of Nuclear Energy… But, first, I must clarify here that I have been dealing with the topics of transparency and safety in nuclear energy as a doctor of public communication in risks and crises long before I became a PR in the Mladost region, and I am currently in an organization for transparency in nuclear energy, which was created after Fukushima.

Lyuba Kulezich: It is an international organization.

Petar Kardzhilov: Yes, the international Nuclear Transparency Watch. We search, find and report information that is not discussed in the media regarding nuclear power plants and nuclear energy. Such information is, for example, the level of radiation protection and the preparation of citizens for responding to crisis situations in individual countries, for example, a major accident at a nuclear power plant with increased radioactivity in the environment. Other such topics are the management of radioactive waste and the construction of new or the lifetime extension of the operating existing nuclear units.

Lyuba Kulezich: Why was it necessary for you to submit a request under the Access to Information Act to the Ministry of Energy regarding this problem – the storage of radioactive waste? Where is this problem in our country? Why is it not being talked about? What is this honey? I tell you again: I rarely encounter culinary-radioactive combinations as a common theme.

 Petar Kardzhilov: Yes, indeed. Well, this is the well-known, so-called “green washing” – when you try to account for some activity to the public, but you simply use some completely different “green” activities. If it were this honey festival, which has existed for sixteen years…

Lyuba Kulezich: …Within this enterprise?

Petar Kardzhilov: Yes, they are the main organizer and it is organized in their information center in the city of Kozloduy. If it were, let’s say, some kind of form that would attract citizens and explain to them what categories of radioactive waste exist, how long they are active and how high their activity is; for some isotopes it is about millions, even billions of years. They must be kept isolated from the environment in order for future generations to be safe. These issues are not explained, neither at the honey festival in question – as can be seen from the announcement on the website of the SE RW, nor on the website itself in separate sections with photos, etc. There are other questions in my request for information, for example, why the previous minister signed a contract with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for a study on deep drilling for the disposal of radioactive waste…

Lyuba Kulezich: Are you talking about Vladimir Malinov?

Petar Kardzhilov: Yes, Vladimir Malinov. And when in the strategy that we are appealing with Eng. Petar Penchev – Strategy for RWM in Bulgaria, updated version from the beginning of 2024. We are appealing it because it has not been discussed with society, with organizations, with active citizens like us and because of many existing vices. It is written in it that Bulgaria must build a deep geological repository – for the most dangerous part of the RW, which is the SNF, which, as we know, has been piling up since the beginning of the war in Ukraine at the Kozloduy NPP site.

Lyuba Kulezich: You know this, people don’t.

Petar Kardzhilov: Yes, it is generally published in some more serious media and websites, but they are hardly read by many people. Our mass media talk about Russian reactors, American reactors, what the price is, what the fuel is, how Bulgaria will almost perish without the production of electricity from NPP, which is not the case at all. But they never talk about these messes, these series of interconnected problems, such as radioactive waste, the preparation of citizens for a reaction in the event of a serious accident. By the way, we did a study three years ago with the Foundation for Environment and Agriculture of Mrs. Albena Simeonova and we came to the conclusion that the people in Kozloduy have no idea at all what to do after the sirens are sounded and they are announced…

Lyuba Kulezich: The people in Kozloduy?!

Petar Kardzhilov: Yes, the people in the city of Kozloduy, as we surveyed in two more cities and four villages around the Kozloduy NPP.

Lyuba Kulezich: But nobody knows? In an emergency situation?!

Petar Kardzhilov: Nobody knows, except for 5% of all 120 respondents we surveyed. And the respondents were from the Kozloduy hospital, two schools in the city, as well as municipal employees from these seven settlements.

Lyuba Kulezich: Okay, but you started talking about the idea of ​​the previous Energy Minister Malinov for burying RW…

Petar Kardzhilov: …Through deep drilling – deep borehole disposal…

Lyuba Kulezich: With a contract concluded with the US Chamber of Commerce. What is wrong with that?

Petar Kardzhilov: Well, the wrong thing is that a technology that is presented as modern and is only briefly mentioned in this strategy that we are appealing – for the management of radioactive waste and spent fuel, given that this is an American technology invented in the 1970s, which we now know has been categorically rejected in four US states. And right now, this company is looking for a guinea pig to drill for RW.

Lyuba Kulezich: But is that already a fact or is that why you are asking the new minister Zhecho Stankov?

Petar Kardzhilov: That’s why I ask the new minister how far this project has come, are such studies being conducted, by whom and where. And in the end…

Lyuba Kulezich: Nobody knows anything!

Petar Kardzhilov: …why nobody knows anything about these issues that affect generations in the future, hundreds of generations in the future.

Lyuba Kulezich: And how can people, citizens, understand the different types of RW that our plant releases? Where are they stored? What are the dangers? Are there any? How can they be prevented? Who takes care of the export of this NF, if there is an export of such fuel?

Petar Kardzhilov: There is no more export, because the war in Ukraine has started, only the glazed highly active and long-lived radioactive isotopes will be returned to us. Well, people certainly could not understand these important questions either from the website of the SE RW, or from the website of the Nuclear Regulatory Agency, let alone from the website of the Kozloduy NPP. There is no such information anywhere. One must be a specialist, handle documents, educate oneself with great effort and spend hours on the Internet to reach these conclusions, which most of the media, the mass media never explain to us and offer to our attention, because they clearly have no interest.

Lyuba Kulezich: Why not? I was just going to ask you, you are a member of an international organization for transparency in nuclear energy. With this silence, this shady behavior regarding such a key issue, of three institutions. What do you think is the reason for this? Is it just negligence?

Petar Kardzhilov: No, not just negligence. It is a matter of a mess. The mess in nuclear energy is the opposite of the system. A system, for example, an automobile plant, works in transparent ways, nothing is hidden there. While in nuclear energy, all the problems that are interconnected and interdependent must remain a secret. Because if everything is public, questions will begin about our money. Because, as Prof. Kaschiev announced…

Lyuba Kulezich: Georgi Kaschiev, yes.

Petar Kardzhilov: Yes, Prof. Georgi Kaschiev, who was the chairman of the first nuclear regulatory body in Bulgaria. He calculated that for 2023, Kozloduy NPP spent 320 million leva more on electricity production compared to 2020, 2021 and 2022.

Lyuba Kulezich: What does this mean?

Petar Kardzhilov: Well, this is another of the questions I asked Minister Stankov, since an inspection has begun at the Kozloduy NPP, as they briefly announced “due to suspicions of financial abuse”. I asked Mr. Stankov, according to the Access to Public Information Act, to report at least what the Kozloduy NPP’s accounting says. Where does this overspending for electricity production come from? It can’t possibly be from changing the fuel from Russian to American, even though the American is more expensive, but that happened last year – 2024. Also, I can’t imagine this overspending being from cleaning up and limiting the damage from the incident that occurred with the spill of radioactive water with boric acid last year – the end of May.

Lyuba Kulezich: In Unit Six.

Petar Kardzhilov: Yes, that’s right. Now, in the management of Kozloduy NPP, as well as of SE RW, there are some people… Over the past few years, several executive directors have changed at the plant. Galab Donev, first of all, the acting prime minister of President Radev, appointed Georgi Kirkov as executive director, and Andrey Krasnocharov as deputy executive director. This man, as it became known from the media, was investigated by a commission at Kozloduy NPP, which revealed how he manipulated data so that the oligarch from Pernik city, Lyudmil Stoykov, could win orders awarded by Kozloduy NPP. And, this same Mr. Krasnocharov is still the deputy executive director today, even after the replacement of three executive directors.

Lyuba Kulezich: Many questions, many questions, a whole bunch of questions that are crucially important to get an answer to. When do you expect this answer, colleague Kardzhilov? When should you receive it? There are deadlines under the law on access to information.

Petar Kardzhilov: The deadline is basically one month, I submitted it last week on Thursday. Since there are other organisations, they may request an extension of two more weeks.

Lyuba Kulezich: But these answers are extremely important, we need to learn them, because they concern such terrible consequences if this problem is left like this, on its own. And you mentioned something in our preliminary conversation about the nurse Natalia Stancheva.

Petar Kardzhilov: Yes! Natalia Stancheva. I asked if we could show the photo with her. Here it is. She revealed a terrible abuse – the existence of a polyclinic on the territory of the NPP, and also reported the existence of a pharmacy, a shop, restaurants, etc. – all of this is prohibited by law…

Lyuba Kulezich: Yes, yes, we remember who was sued – a slap trial – to pay one million leva to the Kozloduy NPP for damaging its prestige, as they claimed.

Petar Kardzhilov: Now she is looking for a lawyer, but since she is being harassed on the phone, she asked them to write her an SMS first if any lawyer wants to take over. The current situation with her is absurd and brutal: she has been kept in solitary confinement for four months and has not received a salary. Despite this, she has access, has not been fired and is present at the plant, she goes to work every day but doesn’t get assignments. Local lawyers cannot be trusted, because in the small town of Kozloduy everyone knows each other and are connected.

Lyuba Kulezich: Another paradox! Related to the permitted, unauthorized, semi-legal at the Kozloduy NPP and our nuclear energy. This was Dr. Petar Kardzhilov, whom you know well as a specialist in risks and crises communication, with extremely important questions that wait an answer from the Ministry of Energy, but affect our common life – all of us with you, one crazy case – who stores or does not store spent nuclear fuel, what is its fate? And that was “Honestly”…

Why 68% of Ukrainians Oppose the Completion of the Khmelnytskyi Nuclear Power Plant – panel discussion

A sociological study on Ukrainian public opinion regarding nuclear energy was conducted by the research agency Info Sapiens at the request of NGO Ecoaction and the Heinrich Böll Foundation, Kyiv Office – Ukraine.
The results of this study will be presented during an online event on March 20. The discussion will also cover key technological, economic, and environmental risks associated with the completion of Units 3 and 4 at the Khmelnytskyi Nuclear Power Plant. Recently, the Ukrainian Parliament approved draft  law No. 11392, which provides for the purchase of russian equipment from Bulgaria for this project.

Experts, politicians, and civil society will discuss the implications of these construction plans.

Registered participants will receive a link to the Zoom meeting prior to the event. The discussion will be conducted in Ukrainian with simultaneous translation into English: https://forms.office.com/pages/responsepage.aspx?id=WHBqOCUHH0a19D8oug9wnjW-88x2cJJPpgPK6CWpDvxURDJVR1dHS09DUlVEN1dHSkZXN1FPOUZLUi4u&route=shorturl

Date: March, 20th, 11 a.m. EET (10 a.m. CET)
Place: online via ZOOM

Speakers:

  • Inna Sovsun, Member of the Parliament of Ukraine
  • Olha Lyashchuk, project coordinator at NGO Ecoclub
  • Anastasia Shurenkova, researcher at InfoSapiens agency
  • Yuriy Nikolov, journalist and co-founder of the project Nashi Hroshi (Our Money)

Moderator Artem Kolesnyk, energy policy expert at NGO Ecoaction

Radiation Protection Research – PIANOFORTE White Paper

PIANOFORTE is a European Partnership for Radiation Protection Research ☢️ contributing to improve the protection of the public, workers, patients and the environment from environmental, occupational and medical exposure to ionizing radiation.
It brings together 58 partners representing 22 European Union countries 🇪🇺 as well as the United Kingdom  🇬🇧and Norway 🇳🇴, and is coordinated by the French Autorité de Sûreté Nucléaire et de Radioprotection (ASNR) and co-financed by the European Union’s EURATOM program and the governments of the participating countries.

Through the research activities carried out within its framework, PIANOFORTE contributes to the implementation of European policies such as the European plan to combat cancer , the green pact for growth, and the implementation of the roadmap for reducing industrial and natural risks.

PIANOFORTE has just released a White Paper on “The Vital Role of Radiation Protection Research in Europe’s Future”:

Address

  • Nuclear Transparency Watch
  • 38, rue Saint Sabin
  • 75011 PARIS
  • FRANCE
  • +32 (0) 2 284 53 97