Post by radovic on Nov 14, 2007 12:33:39 GMT -5
Serbia has neither need nor staff for a nuclear plant
Author: T.N.Ðakoviæ, R.Ž. Markoviæ | 14.11.2007 - 06:00
Construction of a nuclear plant would provide cheaper electricity to Serbia, but it would also bring a risk of a disaster and problems over waste disposal. In fact, Serbia would become just another country performing a dirty job for the USA, Dejan Dimov, ecologist and co-author of the Law on ban of construction of nuclear plants that the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia adopted in 1989, claims.
After proposal by Serbia Deputy Prime Minister Bozidar Djelic for reconsidering of the moratorium that bans construction of nuclear plants in Serbia, the Minister for Energy and Mining Aleksandar Popovic told ‘Blic’ that ‘there shall be no construction of nuclear plants in Serbia’.
‘Djelic’s statement was misinterpreted since he said that the moratorium should be reconsidered and not suspended’, Popovic said.
Dimov thinks that this is American interest exclusively. He gives the examples of Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Egypt, Syria…
‘All that is because of arms and not at all because of electricity’, Dimov claims. That is why, he is convinced, credits for construction of a nuclear plant would be easily provided.
‘The construction lasts 10 years at least. Payment is made as per formula 82 per cent of export going abroad and 18 per cent remaining to the nuclear plant’s host. Disassembling understands that the most dangerous, radioactive waste remains in Serbia’ Dimov says.
He also claims that the American ‘Westinghouse’ had for all constructions of the nuclear plants in the third world, to justify before the Senate congressional commission the assets given for corruption of individuals and governments of the countries in which the constructions took place.
After three incidents at the Three Miles Island in 1979, the USA stopped construction of even started nuclear plants and has not constructed a single new one until today.
German Government decided to close the last nuclear plant until 2025. Denmark and Sweden also decided to close all of their nuclear plants until 2015.
Why then a nuclear plant in Serbia?
Joze Comar, a scientific associate at the Vinca Institute claims that Serbia is equally jeopardized by the nuclear plants in the neighboring countries as it would be by a plant located downtown Belgrade. That is why he sees no problem as to why Serbia should not have a nuclear plant of its own. He points out huge gain from it.
Other experts claim that Serbia has neither need nor adequate experts for a nuclear plant. Such plant requires a team of about 300 to 400 people and 10 to 15 years for setting up of such a team.
Author: T.N.Ðakoviæ, R.Ž. Markoviæ | 14.11.2007 - 06:00
Construction of a nuclear plant would provide cheaper electricity to Serbia, but it would also bring a risk of a disaster and problems over waste disposal. In fact, Serbia would become just another country performing a dirty job for the USA, Dejan Dimov, ecologist and co-author of the Law on ban of construction of nuclear plants that the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia adopted in 1989, claims.
After proposal by Serbia Deputy Prime Minister Bozidar Djelic for reconsidering of the moratorium that bans construction of nuclear plants in Serbia, the Minister for Energy and Mining Aleksandar Popovic told ‘Blic’ that ‘there shall be no construction of nuclear plants in Serbia’.
‘Djelic’s statement was misinterpreted since he said that the moratorium should be reconsidered and not suspended’, Popovic said.
Dimov thinks that this is American interest exclusively. He gives the examples of Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Egypt, Syria…
‘All that is because of arms and not at all because of electricity’, Dimov claims. That is why, he is convinced, credits for construction of a nuclear plant would be easily provided.
‘The construction lasts 10 years at least. Payment is made as per formula 82 per cent of export going abroad and 18 per cent remaining to the nuclear plant’s host. Disassembling understands that the most dangerous, radioactive waste remains in Serbia’ Dimov says.
He also claims that the American ‘Westinghouse’ had for all constructions of the nuclear plants in the third world, to justify before the Senate congressional commission the assets given for corruption of individuals and governments of the countries in which the constructions took place.
After three incidents at the Three Miles Island in 1979, the USA stopped construction of even started nuclear plants and has not constructed a single new one until today.
German Government decided to close the last nuclear plant until 2025. Denmark and Sweden also decided to close all of their nuclear plants until 2015.
Why then a nuclear plant in Serbia?
Joze Comar, a scientific associate at the Vinca Institute claims that Serbia is equally jeopardized by the nuclear plants in the neighboring countries as it would be by a plant located downtown Belgrade. That is why he sees no problem as to why Serbia should not have a nuclear plant of its own. He points out huge gain from it.
Other experts claim that Serbia has neither need nor adequate experts for a nuclear plant. Such plant requires a team of about 300 to 400 people and 10 to 15 years for setting up of such a team.