Matti Kojo

The Renewal of Nuclear Power in Finland

PART I: INTRODUCTION The Transillumination of Finnish Nuclear Policy T.Litmanen PART II: THE APPLICATION AND RESISTANCE Analysis of Justification Arguments in the Application for the 5th Nuclear Reactor in Finland A.Lampinen Social Dynamics behind the Changes in the NGO Anti-Nuclear Campaign during 1993-2002 H.Lammi PART III: DECISION-MAKING IN FINLAND The Anatomy and Actors of a Decent Deal: Reading the Nuclear Discourses of the Parliamentarians A.Berg Nuclear Policy Processes in Finland in a Comparative Perspective E.Saynassalo The Strategy of Site Selection of the Repository for Spent Nuclear Fuel in Finland M.Kojo The Temporariness of Societal Risk Evaluation: Understanding the Finnish Nuclear Decisions T.Litmanen PART V: CONCLUSIONS The Revival of Nuclear Power in a Strong Administrative State M.Kojo

Not excluding nuclear power: the dynamics and stability of nuclear power policy arrangements in Finland

In this article, we aim at using the policy arrangement approach to explain the renewal of nuclear power policy in Finland from 1986 to 2010. From the point of view of national nuclear power decision making, we distinguish three different policy arrangement periods: (1) rejection (1986–1993), (2) revival (1994–2002) and (3) renewal (2003–2010). Within each period, the four dimensions which are, such as policy coalitions, ‘rules of the game’, policy discourses and resources are analysed. The three periods indicate that policy development has not been unilinear. In the rejection period, the ‘shock event’ of Chernobyl mixed up the policy arrangement. For example, the supporting coalition was temporarily paralysed, the political effectiveness of discourses changed and the anti-nuclear coalition found new resources. In the revival period, liberalisation and deregulation of electricity markets altered the formal rules of the game. A new energy policy of not excluding nuclear power was formulated, in which nuclear power was defined as a low-emission and technically or economically viable mode of production that could support environmental and climate objectives. The informal rules of the game also changed, as the supporting coalition re-styled its lobbying strategy. The latest period – renewal – is characterised by a strong supporting coalition aimed at further increasing nuclear power production capacity in Finland. This was most evident in the discourse aimed at the liberalisation of the licensing process. Despite changed policy arrangements, there is also continuity in the Finnish nuclear power policy, as the main formal rule of the game – the Nuclear Energy Act of 1987 – was largely left untouched. The supporting coalition seemed to survive the nadirs better than the challenging coalition, due to the proximity of interests held by the energy-intensive export industry, state and labour unions over the last two periods, and due to an asymmetry in the resources. It was revealed that climate change discourse strengthened during all the periods. The analysis also indicated the importance of the government programme, as it may or may not exclude nuclear power.

The Strategy of Site Selection for the Spent Nuclear Fuel Repository in Finland

Posiva Ltd (Posiva), the company responsible for practical preparations and implementation for the final disposal of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) in Finland, suggested that the Government of Finland should consider only Olkiluoto in Eurajoki in its application of a Decision-in-Principle (DiP) for the final disposal site in May 1999 (Posiva 1999a, 5–6). The municipal council of Eurajoki approved a favourable statement on the Decision-in-Principle on 24 January 2000. The government made the DiP on 21 December 2000, and Parliament ratified the decision on 18 May 2001.

The (de)politicisation of nuclear power: The Finnish discussion after Fukushima.

When the Fukushima accident occurred in March 2011, Finland was at the height of a nuclear renaissance, with the Government’s decision-in-principle in 2010 to allow construction of two new nuclear reactors. This article examines the nuclear power debate in Finland after Fukushima. We deploy the concepts of (de)politicisation and hyperpoliticisation in the analysis of articles in the country’s main newspaper. Our analysis indicates that Finnish nuclear exceptionalism manifested in the safety-related depoliticising and the nation’s prosperity-related hyperpoliticisation arguments of the pro-nuclear camp. The anti-nuclear camp used politicisation strategies, such as economic arguments, to show the unprofitability of nuclear power. The Fukushima accident had a clear effect on Finnish nuclear policy: the government programme of 2011 excluded the nuclear new build. However, in 2014 the majority of Parliament again supported nuclear power. Hence, the period after Fukushima until 2014 could be described as continued but undermined loyalty to nuclear power.

The rationality of acceptance in a nuclear community: analysing residents' opinions on the expansion of the SNF repository in the municipality of Eurajoki, Finland

The project to build a final disposal repository for Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) in the municipality of Eurajoki, Finland, is approaching its 2012 deadline for the application of a construction licence. At the same time, the nuclear waste company Posiva is already planning to expand the disposal capacity of the repository. This paper addresses the question of acceptance among the residents of Eurajoki regarding the repositorys expansion, and examines what aspects should be taken into consideration when explaining local opinions. The local acceptance figures for Eurajoki are analysed in relation to assumptions of the six common explanation types. The relationship between information deficit, social trust, benefit-cost calculation, perceived moral responsibility, perceived risks and threats, and acceptance of nuclear power, on the one hand, and local acceptance of expanding the repository both for current actors and for possible other domestic operators, on the other, is explored. The data provided in the paper is based on a survey carried out in June 2008. The respondents were selected from the residents of the municipality of Eurajoki and the neighbouring municipalities using stratified random sampling (N = 3000). The response rate of the survey was 20% (N = 606).

Nuclear community considering threats and benefits of final disposal. Local opinions regarding the spent nuclear fuel repository in Finland

This paper focuses on local opinion regarding the siting of a spent nuclear fuel repository in the municipality of Eurajoki, Finland. The research question is how the residents perceive the final disposal. The analysis showed that positive perceptions regarding spent nuclear fuel siting issues are more likely to be found among men and more affluent residents, which can be viewed as an indication of the ‘white male effect’. Contrastingly, women and less-advantaged people are more likely to resist the disposal of spent nuclear fuel in ‘their backyard’. Two approaches, ‘nuclear oases’ and ‘industry awareness’, are used to interpret the findings.

The Revival of Nuclear Power in a Strong Administrative State

The new millennium began with two major nuclear decisions by the Parliament of Finland. In May 2001 the Parliament ratified the Decision-in-Principle (DiP) concerning the final disposal repository for spent nuclear fuel (SNF). One year later, in May 2002, it voted for the construction of a new nuclear power plant (NPP) unit. After the favourable voting result the Parliament decided unanimously to approve the extension of the planned disposal repository. The decisions were unique. At the beginning of the millennium, the difference from other countries was striking because at the same time SNF management in other countries — with the exception of Sweden — had either come to an end or else important decisions were being postponed as the result of political disagreements. Furthermore, some countries were shutting down their NPPs because nuclear power was no longer being viewed as an acceptable source of energy. Today, however, as we move towards the end of the first decade of the new millennium, the situation is already somewhat changed, with several countries reconsidering their nuclear power policies. According to Frogatt (2007a; see also 2007b), the position of nuclear power in the European Union (EU) countries can be classified into the following four categories: (1) countries with an active construction programme (Bulgaria, Finland and France); (2) countries that are to take key decisions in the near future (Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and the UK); (3) countries which are maintaining the status quo and extending the lives of their current plants (the Czech Republic, Hungary, the Netherlands and Slovenia); and (4) countries which have agreements to phase out their current NPPs (Belgium, Germany and Spain).

Russian nuclear energy diplomacy in Finland and Hungary

Abstract We compare Russian nuclear energy diplomacy toward Finland and Hungary, where the Russian state corporation Rosatom intends to build nuclear power plants by the 2020s. Russian nuclear energy diplomacy features Rosatom working with other state institutions, its own subsidiaries, and an extensive network of companies and R&D actors to support Russian nuclear power projects abroad. Using the structuration approach, we find three interests driving such diplomacy: energy business and associated profits; modernization of the Russian economy, including the diversification of its export structure; while foreign policy interests are also involved, considering the constraints emerging in EU–Russia energy diplomacy in the oil and gas sectors, including the sanctions since 2014. Some domestic actors in Finland and Hungary make the linkage between nuclear energy and foreign policy as explicit as do some Western commentators. Seeking to pursue these interests, Russian actors must accommodate their considerable assets to the structural constraints they encounter in the target countries. We identify four structural dimensions: the Russian actors are well endowed as regards the resources, technology, and infrastructure dimension; and the dimension of finance, business models, and markets. However, on the institutional dimension, they face a less controllable environment. Regarding the ecological dimension, they must conform to local safety requirements. In both cases, Russian actors were able to strengthen perceptions of joint interests with actors in the target country facilitating the nuclear power plant projects, thereby paving the way for the use of soft power.

Local Negotiation on Compensation: Siting of the Spent Nuclear Fuel Repository in Finland

The aim of the paper is to analyse the local negotiation process between the Municipality of Eurajoki and the nuclear power company Teollisuuden Voima (TVO) and the nuclear waste management company Posiva Oy. The aim of the negotiations was to find an acceptable form of compensation for siting a spent nuclear fuel repository in Olkiluoto, Finland. The paper includes background information on the siting process in Finland, the local political setting in the Municipality of Eurajoki and a description of the negotiation process. The analysis of the negotiations on compensation is important for better understanding the progress of the Finnish siting process. The paper describes the picture of the contest to host the spent nuclear fuel repository. It also provides more information on the relationship between the Municipality of Eurajoki and the power company TVO. The negotiations on compensation and the roles of various players in the negotiations have not been studied in detail because the minutes of the Vuojoki liaison group were not available before the decision of the Supreme Administrative Court in May 2006.Copyright

Threats and Benefits: Updated Information on Local Opinions Regarding the Spent Nuclear Fuel Repository in Finland

The aim of the paper is to provide updated information on local opinion regarding the siting of a spent nuclear fuel repository in Finland. The main question is how the residents of the municipality perceive the threats and benefits of the repository. In accordance with the Decision in Principle by the Council of State passed in 2000, the Olkiluoto area in Municipality of Eurajoki was chosen as the location for the repository to accommodate spent nuclear fuel produced in Finland. Updated information on local opinions is needed as the siting process is approaching the next phase, the application for a construction license by 2012. The nuclear waste management company Posiva, owned by the utilities Teollisuuden Voima and Fortum Power and Heat, has also applied for a new Decision in Principle (DiP) for expansion of the repository. The data provided in this paper is based on a survey carried out in June 2008. The respondents were selected from the residents of the municipality of Eurajoki and the neighbouring municipalities using stratified random sampling (N = 3000). The response rate of the survey was 20% (N = 606). The paper is part of a joint research project between the University of Jyvaskyla and the University of Tampere. The research project “Follow-up research regarding socio-economic effects and communication of final disposal facility of spent nuclear fuel in Eurajoki and its neighbouring municipalities” is funded by the Finnish Research Programme on Nuclear Waste Management (KYT2010).Copyright