BELGIUM RECONSIDERS RENOUNCING NUCLEAR POWER

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BRUSSELS 002249 SIPDIS NOFORN SIPDIS DOE FOR NNSA AND NRC STATE FOR ISN/NESS, EB/OGE AND EUR/UBI E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/28/2011 TAGS: ENRG SENV PREL BE SUBJECT: BELGIUM RECONSIDERS RENOUNCING NUCLEAR POWER BRUSSELS 00002249 001.2 OF 002 Classified By: Economic Counselor Terri Robl, Reasons: 1.4 (b)(d)and (g ) ¶1. (C/NF) SUMMARY. The recent release of a political party-sponsored study of Belgium's nuclear energy options, combined with our analysis of views expressed more privately by Belgian government officials indicate that serious thought is being given to Belgium's future energy options. Opinion divides along party lines: conservative Christian Democrat parties (CD&V and CDH) favor continued reliance on nuclear power for electricity, Socialist and Green parties oppose it, and (economic) Liberal parties are favorable or undecided. A newly appointed Commissioner on Belgium's Nuclear Control Agency (FANC) privately told D/EconCouns he expected a new federal government following the Spring 2007 national elections, to reverse the 2003 Royal Decree that would phase out nuclear power beginning in 2015. Comment: It is increasingly clear to most objective analysts that Belgium has few alternatives to nuclear, given the costs, environmental obligations, and lack of substitute sources for the 55 percent of the country's electricity provided by nuclear power. ¶2. (U) A new study just released by the Jean Gol Center, a thinktank associated with the Francophone Liberal party (MR), makes a clear break with existing government policy set in January 2003. The MR is first of the governing coalition partners in the federal Belgian government to call specifically for repeal of the Royal Decree. The study outlines Belgium's energy needs and resources: Belgium is dependent on imports for 76 percent of all its energy needs, with 90 percent of those import costs for fossil fuels. Belgium has seven nuclear reactors feeding its electric power grid, supplying 55 percent of its electricity, and operating 90 percent of the time. While the country's conventional fossil fuel electric generating capacity actually exceeds that of nuclear plants (8369 megawatts versus 5800 megawatts),nuclear is preferred for reasons of reliability and cost. Fossil fuel-fired plants provide about 40 percent of baseline power needs, and back up alternative energy sources. The Federal Planning Office estimates Belgian energy demand will grow 1.2 percent annually through 2030. ¶3. (U) In reviewing the disadvantages of nuclear power, the report covers concerns of operational accidents, terrorist attack, high costs and long timeframes for construction, and limited stocks of imported uranium to fuel the plants. Contrasting with these, however, the report notes the advantages of high reliability, no CO-2 or other greenhouse gas emissions, the relatively small quantity of waste, all of which can be disposed of domestically, and uranium supply available from more politically stable countries. Potential costs to the government and the Belgian economy of a withdrawal from nuclear power are also revewed, including the job losses and higher coss of meeting Kyoto Protocol targets. Thesecosts are estimated at 4 to 5 billion euros annually from 2015 -2030, about 1 percent of Belgian GDP, which would have to be funded. Whie the Francophone Liberal party endorses the idea of alternative energy sources, the report claims they are currently 50 to 400 percent more expensive than nuclear per kilowatt hour. The optimistic target for all renewable energy forms is 8-9 percent of Belgian energy by ¶2020. ¶4. (C/NF) The MR report concludes that alternative technologies do not offer viable substitutes for nuclear energy in the near- to medium-term. Phasing out nuclear power, coupled with dwindling petroleum and natural gas reserves in Europe, would imply greater dependence on Central Asia and the Middle East for energy supplies. Given the party's goals of affordable energy, reduced dependence on oil, and reduced CO2 emissions, it touts nuclear as the best available option. ¶5. (C/NF) One member of the expert working group consulted by MR report writers privately told D/EconCouns the report reflects the opinion of many in the government. Pierre Tonon (protect),a newly appointed Commissioner in the Federal Agency for Nuclear Control, voiced the expectation that the federal government will back out of its 2003 policy favoring decommissioning after the spring 2007 federal elections. Within the present coalition, Francophone and Flemish Socialist parties and Francophone and Flemish Green parties still support the phase-out. Francophone Liberals (MR) officially favor nuclear energy; MR President and Federal Finance Minister Didier Reynders wrote the Preface chapter of BRUSSELS 00002249 002 OF 002 the MR study. The Flemish Liberal Party (VLD) claims to be undecided, but Federal Energy Minister Marc Verwilghen (VLD) is known to favor continued use of nuclear power. Verwilghen also commissioned an energy study, but its results have not been circulated yet. In Tonon,s view, a reformulated coalition including Christian Democrats and Liberals will gain office next spring, laying the groundwork for this important reversal in Belgium's energy policy. ¶6. (C/NF) COMMENT: Despite the firm stand taken by popular Socialist parties (and less popular Green parties),most serious assessments of Belgium's energy future conclude that continuing Belgium's reliance on nuclear power is the only viable option through the medium term. It would be difficult, however, for the present coalition government of Socialist and Liberal parties to reverse policy, since they were in power at its inception. The re-entry of one or both of the Christian Democrat parties into the governing coalition would provide a useful excuse to change. KOROLOGOS .