Sorry, no graphic

Krsko

City, Country
Krsko, Slovenia

Number & type of Reactors
1x PWR-664

Net Electric Power as % in 92 of national total
632 MWe

Major population Centers in a 150 km radius and
total estimated population of 150 km r. region
Approximately 5 million, Including Ljubljana, Trieste, Graz, Zagreb, parts of Croatia, Bosnia

Date of commercial operation start up
or (if unfinished) date of construction start.
Startup '81

Operator/Builder
Westinghouse-builder

Accidents and Dangers:

The plant is sited in a seismically active area, earthquakes with levels above Krsko designed resistence have ocurred; during the war in former Yugoslavia there had been expressed threats of missile attacks or terrorist diversion against the plant several times, in 1991 the plant was disconnected from the grid because of terrorist diversion;

Local Contact Group:

ASTE c/o Retina
Koseskega 25
6100 Ljubljana, Slovenija
phone: 386-61-332-938; fax: 386-61-1253243
Retina@kud-fp.si http://ljudmila.kud-fp.si/ecolab/

Key Arguments/History

Slovenija will likely have a national referendum for early closure of Krsko in July 1996. Krsko is over dimensioned for the size of Slovenian and Croatian power (electricity) sector. Krsko has no sufficient replacement unit of unplanned outages making the grid unstable. Currently problems with the steam generators require an additional US$200 million if they are to be replaced . The steam generator investement alone, if redirected, could replace 12 -15% of the total power capacity by environmentally friendly and economically viable alternatives. Even a small earthquake could cause the plant’s shut down for a long period, which would lead to great instability and disturbances in the power sector. And due to the political and military instability within the region the plant has been declared military and terrorist target.

Alternatives:

163 MW could be replaced by economically viable and environmental friendly small scale hydro power plants app. 220 MW by economically viable replacment of heating systems to use gas turbine technology (energy saving potential of 4,6 PJ/y). App. 200 MW are economicaly viable (at the level of prices in 1993) in industrial CHP capacity. App. 240 MW is the potential of new CHP DH schemes (estimated primary energy saving 12 PJ/y). App. 350 MW could be replaced by economically viable and environmentally acceptable large scale hydro plants.