The Revival of Nuclear Power in a Strong Administrative State

Abstract

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).