|
|
Post by Bonobo on Jan 10, 2009 22:13:24 GMT 1
Poland is the only country in the region which doesn`t have a nuclear plant. Even tiny Lithuania has one, inherited from the Soviet Union.
Why am I for nuclear energy despite conservationists`/environmentalists` protests?
1. The modern nuclear power plants are safe. There is little chance that an accident similar to one in Czarnobyl might happen.
2. Poland is surrounded by foreign nuclear plants exploited by our neighbours. If an accident happens there, we have no influence on it anyway.
3. Currently Poland uses up a lot of coal for heating. It creates unbelievable pollution, especially in Polish cities.
Nuclear energy soon in Poland
thenews.pl
08.01.2009
Poland's Ministry of Economy is to present in mid-January a
comprehensive project of energy policy for the country until the year
2030 - announced deputy economy minister Joanna Strzelec-£obodzinska .
The document is to include an entry on the need to develop nuclear
energy in Poland. It follows a declaration by PM Donald Tusk that
intensive works will be undertaken on the construction of the
country's first nuclear power plant this year.
The first Polish nuclear power plant was supposed to be built in the
northern locality of Zarnowiec. The project was approved in 1972 and construction began 10 years later but due to protests in the late 1980s and early '90s the nearly finished site was abandoned. It may get a second chance now after Poland reached an agreement with France, the European leader in nuclear technologies, which will sell Poland nuclear reactors.
According to initial reports, the plant would be located in the north
or east of the country which has the most neglected energy
infrastructure. The government will also conduct an awareness
campaign to convince Poles and ecologists that nuclear energy is a
safe way of producing electricity.
Energy experts welcomed the decision. They say that with growing
demand for electricity, the traditional power plants burning coal are
generating more and more environmental problems, especially by
emitting huge amounts of greenhouse gases. Also, the price of
electricity produced by nuclear power plants is about 20% cheaper
than the one generated by traditional sources.
Ecologists opposed the idea of building nuclear power plants in this
country. They claim that instead Poland should focus on renewable
energy sources and develop clean coal technologies.
If everything goes according to the plan, Poland will start producing
nuclear energy by the year 2020.
|
|
tomek
Nursery kid
Posts: 256 
|
Post by tomek on Jan 11, 2009 23:30:36 GMT 1
I am not suport this nuclear trash. Countrys must stop it. It is so dangeorus. When nuclear energy station explodes, earth gets pollution on many years. It is imposible for life on it longer.
And such stations produce pollution - what is hapen with nuclear material from the station when it stopped functioning any longer? You must put it in a place far from peoples bkoz it is dangeorus.
But black coal is too polluting also. So, what good outlet from this situation? Wind fans and water electric power, that is good and not harming to natural. Poland has many rivers, what about this? Build thousands of water fans in rivers, not one big dangeorus nuclear station.
|
|
|
|
Post by locopolaco on Jan 13, 2009 20:58:43 GMT 1
I am not suport this nuclear trash. Countrys must stop it. It is so dangeorus. When nuclear energy station explodes, earth gets pollution on many years. It is imposible for life on it longer. And such stations produce pollution - what is hapen with nuclear material from the station when it stopped functioning any longer? You must put it in a place far from peoples bkoz it is dangeorus. But black coal is too polluting also. So, what good outlet from this situation? Wind fans and water electric power, that is good and not harming to natural. Poland has many rivers, what about this? Build thousands of water fans in rivers, not one big dangeorus nuclear station. sure they do.. step out of the box. geothermanl is probably the best. dams are bad for habitats and wind turbines are ugly, and in general undesirable, imho. |
|
|
|
Post by Bonobo on Jan 18, 2009 1:34:46 GMT 1
Poland aiming at own nuclear power by 2020
1/13/09
WARSAW, Poland (AP) — Poland's prime minister says the ongoing
natural gas dispute between Russia and Ukraine is pushing his
government to speed up plans to build nuclear power plants.
Donald Tusk said his Cabinet decided Tuesday to step up construction of its first-ever nuclear power plants, and that he expects them to produce power by 2020.
Tusk added that Poland will further seek to reduce its dependence on Russian gas imports, including through construction of a liquid gas storage system and a gas port.
Poland was one of several nations to see a drop in natural gas
deliveries as part of the dispute between Moscow and Kiev. Warsaw was largely able to make up the shortfall through an increased inflow from pipelines running through Belarus.
|
|
|
|
Post by valpomike on Jan 18, 2009 17:17:02 GMT 1
Go Poland Go, stand alone. I hope this works for them, so they will not have to go to Russia for anything.
Mike
|
|
tomek
Nursery kid
Posts: 256
|
Post by tomek on Jan 18, 2009 22:52:42 GMT 1
[quote author=tomek board=poll thread=591 post=9031 time=1231713036When nuclear energy station explodes, earth gets pollution on many years. It is imposible for life on it longer. And such stations produce pollution - what is hapen with nuclear material from the station when it stopped functioning any longer? You must put it in a place far from peoples bkoz it is dangeorus. But black coal is too polluting also. So, what good outlet from this situation? Wind fans and water electric power, that is good and not harming to natural. Poland has many rivers, what about this? Build thousands of water fans in rivers, not one big dangeorus nuclear station. sure they do.. step out of the box. geothermanl is probably the best. dams are bad for habitats and wind turbines are ugly, and in general undesirable, imho. How, Sir, is this bad for envainment? Wind turbines? Could you explein please. Dams are big and ugly, yes. But it is no need to build dams, they should built little hydro plants, with power to 5 MW, sometimes so small like 100kW. MW is for megawatts, kW is for kilowatts. Hover dam in America is 2000Mw, it is giant, maybe dirty to envainent, I dont hear about it, but smaller plants are secure to envainment. I dont know what geothermical waters are in Poland, I never seen no waters of this. |
|
|
|
Post by valpomike on Jan 19, 2009 23:02:22 GMT 1
Tomek,
I am glad to see you posting again. Tell us all what you think.
Mike
|
|
tomek
Nursery kid
Posts: 256
|
Post by tomek on Jan 22, 2009 22:52:46 GMT 1
Tomek, I am glad to see you posting again. Tell us all what you think. Mike I donot know if I can telling more. I tell evrythuing about nuclaer danger. What more are you expecting? |
|
|
|
Post by valpomike on Jan 23, 2009 0:31:36 GMT 1
I don't live in Poland, but just care very much for her, and I think nuclear power would help her many ways.
Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by jeanne on Jan 23, 2009 2:20:33 GMT 1
I am not suport this nuclear trash. Countrys must stop it. It is so dangeorus. When nuclear energy station explodes, earth gets pollution on many years. It is imposible for life on it longer. And such stations produce pollution - what is hapen with nuclear material from the station when it stopped functioning any longer? You must put it in a place far from peoples bkoz it is dangeorus. But black coal is too polluting also. So, what good outlet from this situation? Wind fans and water electric power, that is good and not harming to natural. Poland has many rivers, what about this? Build thousands of water fans in rivers, not one big dangeorus nuclear station. Tomek, I agree with most of what you are saying. I have never trusted nuclear power, as I feel it is very dangerous. Something about splitting atoms really bothers me...makes me think it is counter-creative, which is a bad thing and contrary to nature. I too think that there are better ways of generating energy...such as wind and water power. |
|
|
|
Post by tufta on Jan 23, 2009 15:16:33 GMT 1
I think the nuclear power is a good way out of this maze. The modern nuclear powerhouses are much safer than they used to be, also the radioactive garbage methods seem safe - they are kept 500 meters beneath the ground!
Wind and hydropower plants are an exellent additive but they will never be able to provide enough energy for any industrial (or postindustrial) nation. The modern coal plants are eco-safe as well, they use gasified coal or a special liquid made of coal. And the chimneys have a system of filters, including the electromagnetic ones. So - the future seems not that dark at all if a country is to posses all these means of energy production combined, including the geothermal energy (numerous spots in Poland but of only local significance).
|
|
|
|
Post by valpomike on Jan 23, 2009 16:15:33 GMT 1
I think you get more return for the dollar with nuclear, and it is now very safe, we even use it on one of our submarines, and it works there well.
Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonobo on Jan 23, 2009 21:59:24 GMT 1
I think the nuclear power is a good way out of this maze. The modern nuclear powerhouses are much safer than they used to be, also the radioactive garbage methods seem safe - they are kept 500 meters beneath the ground! Wind and hydropower plants are an exellent additive but they will never be able to provide enough energy for any industrial (or postindustrial) nation. The modern coal plants are eco-safe as well, they use gasified coal or a special liquid made of coal. And the chimneys have a system of filters, including the electromagnetic ones. So - the future seems not that dark at all if a country is to posses all these means of energy production combined, including the geothermal energy (numerous spots in Poland but of only local significance). . Yes. |
|
|
|
Post by tufta on Feb 2, 2009 12:24:27 GMT 1
the geothermal energy (numerous spots in Poland but of only local significance). I was wrong. It turns out that 80 per cent of Poland's theritory is on usable sources of geothermal or geothermic energy. There're already nine middle-sized towns using this kind of energy for central heating. A large scale project is now underway to use that kind of energy countrywide. Good news. |
|
|
|
Post by valpomike on Feb 3, 2009 16:29:26 GMT 1
It takes a big person to say I was wrong, and you did.
I still think nuclear power is good for all, if done correct, and checked on all the time.
Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by tufta on Feb 3, 2009 17:14:38 GMT 1
It takes a big person to say I was wrong, and you did. I still think nuclear power is good for all, if done correct, and checked on all the time. Mike I too think nuclear power should be introduced in Poland, together with geothermal power and clean coal technologies. |
|
|
|
Post by valpomike on Feb 3, 2009 17:48:11 GMT 1
Any and all ideas, must be used, if they work out, good, if not, stop using them.
Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by valpomike on Feb 4, 2009 2:37:41 GMT 1
Today I read that Poland has plans for it's first nuclear power plant in the localities of Klempicz and Konin, in mid=western Poland, and it could be in operation around the year 2020. This is of today's news, 02-03-2009
What do you know on this?
Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonobo on Feb 17, 2009 9:17:32 GMT 1
WARSAW, Feb. 13 (Xinhua) -- Poland will begin training nuclear
system operators next year and order a reactor within 3 to 4 years
in order to be able to launch a nuclear power station in 2020,
Deputy Economy Minister Adam Szejnfeld said on Friday.
Szejnfeld met with officials from France's Ministry for Energy
and European Affairs and with French reactor producer, the Areve
group, in Paris on Wednesday.
On Tuesday the minister met officials of those firms interested
in investing in Poland's energy sector, Electricite de France and
GDF Suez, and Societe Generale bank.
"It takes 3-4 years to order a reactor and 5 years to order a
turbine. This means that we should submit orders in 3-4 years at the
latest," Szejnfeld was quoted as saying by Polish news agency PAP.
Another challenge facing Poland is the creation of technical
supervision and power station security, he said.
Poland has enough time to select the best technology provider
and the best financing system, the minister added.
On Jan. 13, the Polish government decided that two nuclear power
plants will be built in Poland by 2020.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonobo on Mar 14, 2009 21:20:12 GMT 1
Small private nuclear plants to be constructed in Poland?
thenews.pl
25.02.2009
The power station would have a power capacity of up to 1100
megawatts – two times less than the plant planned by the government in Zarnowiec, northern Poland. The cost of the construction would be 5.4 billion euros.
Constructing a coal-fired power unit would be cheaper but investment in atomic energy could pay for itself in some 15 years, says experts, which is twice as fast as in the case of the traditional
power stations.
"For energy producers constructing small nuclear power plants has
become more profitable than modernising and building classic coal-
fired units," believes Andrzej Strupczewski of the Atomic Energy
Institute.
Several energy producers in Poland, including the Konin power
station, central Poland, are interested in investments in nuclear
power. However, there are some doubts concerning security. According to experts, building atomic units near coal-fired plants is safe, but has not yet been tested anywhere in the world.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonobo on Apr 28, 2009 23:34:24 GMT 1
Poland needs updated network to boost wind power
By Gabriela Baczynska
Thu Apr 16, 2009
KATOWICE, Poland (Reuters) - Poland must upgrade its power transmission network and update laws to aid the development of wind power as part of a shift from heavily polluting coal, an industry lobby said on Thursday.
Poland gets more than 90 percent of its electricity from coal, while just 7 percent of the 150 million megawatt hours of annual power production comes from renewable sources.
"The problem of wind energy in Poland is not the one of no willing investors... but the lack of connections to the network and the transmission links themselves," Jaroslaw Mroczek, head of the Polish Wind Energy Association, told a seminar.
"On top of that, there are no changes to legislation, which would encompass the specificity of such investments, " he said.
Poland's transmission network is mostly outdated and a large part reaches back to communist times more than two decades ago. Experts say it has to be replaced shortly to prevent more blackouts in the European Union's biggest ex-communist economy.
Mroczek also said current regulations are blocking the development of wind farms off the Baltic coast.
State-owned grid operator PSE Operator, as well as other companies that manage the transmission system, say they are receiving a growing number of requests to connect wind power plans to the network.
Mroczek said most have been rejected.
He also cautioned that Poland was unlikely to meet its target of producing 15 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2020 as part of a European Union aim to derive 20 percent of its energy from such sources.
Poland's Deputy Environment Minister Bernard Blaszczyk told the seminar in Katowice, the heart of Poland's coal producing region of Silesia, that biofuels would remain the country's main renewable energy source for the years to come.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonobo on Jul 3, 2009 16:25:07 GMT 1
Again conservationists go mad.
Care for birds stops Polish wind farm plan
UPI
June 16, 2009
Plans to build a wind farm in northern Poland will never materialize thanks to European Union's law on bird protection, Warsaw ecologists said.
Polish environmentalists said construction of the ecologically- friendly wind power plant on Poland's Baltic Sea Debki beaches cannot be realized because it would pose a serious risk to the seaside's birds.
The wind farm's turbines would violate bird protection directives stipulated in Natura 2000, an EU ecological network set up in 1992.
Activists opposing construction of the wind farm said it would endanger some unique species that live along the Baltic seaside, Poland's thenews.pl Web site reported.
The wind farm was to be built as a joint venture between Polish and Danish companies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonobo on Nov 15, 2009 22:40:29 GMT 1
France, Poland sign nuclear cooperation accord
PARIS, Nov 5 (Reuters) - France and Poland signed a technical cooperation accord in nuclear power on Thursday but Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said it was too early to say whether French firms would be partners in its planned reactor.
Under the agreement, signed during a visit to Paris by Polish ministers, France will offer help training technicians and in research and development.
Tusk said France had "taken a big step forward" with the agreement but it was too early to say what nuclear technology Poland would finally adopt for the reactor it plans to build by 2020.
"Decisions on the choice of investors and partners are a long way ahead of us," he told reporters during a news conference with French President Nicolas Sarkozy. "France is a valuable partner but probably not unique."
Poland wants to build one or two nuclear power plants to break its reliance on coal and intends to identify a technology supplier by 2013.
The plant is to be built by state-owned utility PGE in cooperation with the partner.
Discussions have already been held with France, the United States, Canada, South Korea and Japan.
|
|
|
|
Post by tufta on Nov 17, 2009 12:15:33 GMT 1
France, Poland sign nuclear cooperation accord
at last! |
|
|
|
Post by Bonobo on Nov 18, 2009 20:01:04 GMT 1
France, Poland sign nuclear cooperation accord
at last! Many experts are sceptic. Plans set the date of the first nuclear station at around 2025. |
|
|
|
Post by Bonobo on Jan 26, 2010 13:51:13 GMT 1
Poland is in an energy bind
Heavily reliant on coal, Poland is facing pressure to switch to renewables while its facilities already need an upgrade.
By Jan Cienski
GlobalPost
November 27, 2009
KATOWICE, Poland — Carbon dioxide and global warming have an entirely different meaning when more than 90 percent of your electricity is generated from coal.
That is why Poland has become the leader of a coalition of European coal-burning countries determined to ensure that the costs of CO2 emissions mitigation is borne fairly by wealthy countries as well as poorer developing ones.
The latest fight is over the European Union's proposal to spread the pain of reducing emissions so that poorer countries also do their share in cutting greenhouse gasses. Poland is adamant that any aid paid to poorer countries in the rest of the world should come mainly from the wealthiest nations of Europe.
"We do not believe that the poorer countries of Europe will help the poorer countries of the world on behalf of the richer European countries," said Poland's Finance Minister Jacek Rostowski.
The issue is an acute one for Poland because coal is by far the country's main source of energy, and there is no sign of that situation ending in the foreseeable future.
A new plan that looks at the country's energy needs to 2030, which was accepted by the government earlier in November, is frank about coal's importance: "Eliminating coal from the portfolio of primary energy resources would worsen Poland's energy security," says the document.
The plan does make some concessions to environmental concerns. Energy derived from coal is to drop from 94 percent today to 60 percent in 2030, with the rest made up by a new nuclear plant, renewable energy and gas.
Poland's current reliance on coal is making it a growing target of environmental groups. In the leadup to an EU summit last month, Donald Tusk, Poland's prime minister, was portrayed as a green Frankenstein monster (next to a Nicolas Sarkozy Dracula, Angela Merkel skeleton and Gordon Brown witch) above a plea asking EU leaders to support a climate finance package.
But the pressure has not swayed Poland from its strategy. The country is gradually shifting to less polluting forms of energy under pressure from the EU, which has committed to its ambitious 20/20/20 program — producing 20 percent of the EU's energy with renewables and a 20 percent reduction in CO2 emissions by 2020.
But for now coal continues to be king.
<!--pagebreak- ->
Even Jerzy Buzek, a former Polish prime minister who is now head of the European Parliament, admits that the dirty fuel will continue to play a key role. "No one in the EU doubts that coal will continue to be a fundamental source of energy for decades to come," he said during a recent visit to Poland.
Poland is Europe's largest coal producer — digging up 84 million tons last year in an industry that employs 120,000 people and is very powerful politically.
Switching to other sources of energy is problematic both economically and politically.
Poland needs to import about 90 percent of its oil and 70 percent of its natural gas — and the source of both of those fuels is Russia. Poland is already twitchy about its level of dependence on an increasingly unpredictable Russia, and it would be politically impossible to import much more.
Although Poland is hugely dependent on coal, the industry has been underinvested for years. Jerzy Markowski a former minister and now a coal consultant, estimates that Poland would need to invest about $7 billion to upgrade it coal mines, plus an additional $45 billion to build new power plants.
Poland has the lowest electricity use per capita in the EU, and energy demand is expected to rise by about 50 percent by 2030, meaning that the country faces the possibility of blackouts unless enormous funds are invested now in energy.
"If not for the economic crisis we would already have a deficit," said Markowski.
Although the country is much more energy efficient than it was under communism, when enormous amounts were wasted, it still uses about twice as much per unit of output than the EU average.
At the moment the coal sector invests about $350 million annually in mines, which is enough for running maintenance but not enough to expand production.
"I have to admit that investments should be higher than they currently are," said Miroslaw Kugiel, CEO of Kompania Weglowa, Europe's largest coal company.
The problem for the coal companies is that banks are reluctant to lend to them because the sector has had huge difficulties in turning a steady profit in the past. The government is also constricted by EU rules that limit state help for industries. One option would be privatization, which is already under way in the power generating sector, but is still considered anathema in coal.
|
|
|
|
Post by valpomike on Jan 26, 2010 19:10:17 GMT 1
You can never stop the use of coal, but we all must move ahead with the times, and make our energy the best, and less cost, we can, but must be very careful well doing it.
Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonobo on Mar 24, 2011 18:44:05 GMT 1
Prime Minister Donald Tusk may consider holding a referendum on the construction of Poland’s first nuclear power plant as the concept requires social support, he said during a press conference in Goleniow, a town in West Pomerania province.
"Without public backing, this kind of plan has no meaning”, Tusk said. He assured his audience that the installation would be modern and safe.
Left-wing party SLD is in favor of holding a referendum regarding the nuclear power plant construction, SLD deputy head Katarzyna Piekarska said at a press conference.
"I won't rule out such a decision (of holding referendum) in the future,'' Tusk said.
Last week, Tusk said Poland would not give up its plan of opening the first of two planned 3,000-megawatt plants by 2020, despite safety concerns raised by the crisis in Japan.
|
|
|
|
Post by valpomike on Mar 24, 2011 18:45:52 GMT 1
Do it, it can only help the people of Poland, with work to build it, and cut cost to the people.
Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonobo on May 30, 2011 18:45:40 GMT 1
Nuclear plant to cost 13.5 billion euro, experts estimate
30.05.2011
New figures drawn up by energy specialists reveal that Poland’s first nuclear power plant, which is hoped to go online by 2020, will cost up to 13.5 billion euro.
The figure tanslates to around 3-3.5 billion euro per 1000 MW, although extra funds will have to be spent on the purchase and securing of the property where the plant will be built.
“This figure is just a reference point,” Witold Drozdz, deputy chairman of PGE Energetyka Jadrowa, which is charge of Poland’s nuclear efforts, told the Rzeczpospolita daily.
However, according to Andrzej Strupczewski from the PolAtom Nuclear Energy Institute, the plant’s construction costs could rise by as much as 50 percent due to planning procedures.
Taking into account a power output of 3000 MW, the total expenditure for the proposed plant would amount to 13.5 billion euro.
Meanwhile, Poland’s plans are a reversal to a decision taken by German Environment Minister Norbert Rottgen, who announced the phasing out of nuclear power by 2022, Monday..
The move comes after a team of experts was called up to review Germany’s nuclear power plants after the Fukushima blast in Japan caused widespread contamination following a tsunami in March.
|
|
