It Smells Like FSB, It Sounds Like FSB and It Looks Like FSB - but They Tell It Is FENNOVOIMA-Migrit Solarna Energija-ROSATOM (and Some of Finnish Politicians believe it......?)

We have a strange theater play going on in Finland. It's called Fennovoima Hanhikivi -1 nuclear power plant.

The latest news tells us that Finnish ownership of Fennovoima NPP-company has risen over 60% because of a new owner Migrit solarna energija http://www.migrit-energija.com/en/index.html  from Croatia with a 9% piece of cake! Finnish ownership! Yes, indeed!

 Shareholders have invested huge Euro 26. 000 (Yes, correct, you just read it: twenty six thousand euros) on the company, which would be one of the main owners of a 8 Billion euro NPP with 9% ownership!

Well, you guessed right again! There will be Russian money behind the company. Lots of Russian money. Laundry? Who knows. My gut feeling is that there isn't everything OK on this case. Smells like geopolitics. Smells like Moscow driven  we want it - we'll get it -project. Smells like a Rosatom-FSB-overseas -project.

I just can't help it. And I guess I'm not the only one.

English Wikipedia tells about FSB:
"Putin emphasized three major tasks of the agency: neutralizing foreign espionage, safeguarding economic and financial security of the country and combating organized crime."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Security_Service 

"Safeguardin economic and financial security...." Hmmmm.....!



Now this is a test for Finnish politicians: do they have guts to whistle blow game-over signal to Kremlin and Fennovoima-Rosatom coalition or are they just puppets singing old songs of 70ties.

 Finnish national interests demand finishing this project now.

I hope Finnish Security Intelligence Service (SUPO)  http://www.poliisi.fi/en/supo  will really use its international contacts to find out who really stands behind Migrit solarna energija and where do the money come from needed for Fennovoima ownership! This is also a question that EU want certainly get decent answers. Russian invasion on European energy industry while the conflict in Ukraine continues should ring some kind of alarm bells in Brussels.

We'll wait and see what happens!

Let's hope for the best!



JPS

Energy Change Movement Launches Its Campaign - the Goal: 100 % Renewable Energy Finland in 2050

Last Thursday - 5th March 2015 - there was a campaign launch for the Energiaremontti2015 campaign. Here is the press release:

Press Release 5 March

Finland is starting an Energy Renewal! Old energy policy has reached dead end.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

The Energiaremontti2015 campaign, which translates as “energy renewal or renovation 2015”, has gathered support from all Finnish parliamentary parties. The campaign was published today, and is also backed by an excited group of supporters from companies and the scientific community nationwide. Young candidates from all parliamentary parties support the campaign.

They have a common message: Renew our Energy! Let’s seize the opportunities provided by the breakthrough of new energy technologies and renewable energy and make them a competitive advantage for Finland.

The aim of the campaign is Finland’s transition to a 100 % renewable, energy efficient and smart energy system. The change starts right now, and it must be ready by 2050. The use of coal in electricity and heat production must be stopped by 2025 and the use of oil and natural gas by 2035. By 2050, transportation must also operate on renewables only. The campaign does not call for prematurely closing currently operational nuclear reactors nor for revoking permits already given to new reactors.

The campaign was initiated by citizens who are excited about the possibilities that new energy provides. “Finland has been hitting the breaks when it comes to energy policy, relying on obsolete assumptions about energy. It’s finally time to take some bold steps towards a new energy future”, says Campaign Manager Piia Kuosmanen.

Updating our energy system will bring new clients to Finnish companies that can then hire new employees. When the domestic market is working, our most competitive energy solutions can compete on the world market, bringing vital export opportunities.

Professor Peter Lund, who studies new energy systems in Aalto University, supports the campaign: “Energy and climate issues are the biggest challenges of our time. They can’t be solved by looking back but by investing in new energy opportunities. It’s high time for Finland to step into the new era of energy thinking. Favoring Finnish products brings us jobs, exports and growth, also when it comes to energy. At the same time we can solve pressing climate challenges.”

A group of politicians supporting the campaign demand that the goal to go 100 % renewable is written in the next government’s program. “Finland as a nation needs a common energy vision that extends from the left wing to the right wing of politics. This vision must be a Finland that is 100 % renewable. Change has to start now”, the group says in their statement.  

To learn more about the Energiaremontti2015 campaign, please contact:

Campaign Manager Piia Kuosmanen, +358 45 138 3184, pkuosmanen@gmail.com

Links (In Finnish):

Energiaremontti2015 on Twitter @Energiaremontti

Energiaremontti2015 on Facebook www.facebook.com/energiaremontti2015.fi 

Goals of the campaign http://energiaremontti2015.fi/mika-energiaremontti/ 

Supporters of the campaign http://energiaremontti2015.fi/energiaremontin-tukijat/ 

Statement of politicians supporting the campaign http://energiaremontti2015.fi/kaikkien-eduskuntapuolueiden-edustajat-vaativat-energiaremonttia-hallitusohjelmaan/ 

*       *       *

Let's do it now!

JPS

Could Countries that Do Not Have Nuclear Weapons Have a Counter Strike Possibility After Being Attacked with Nuclear Weapons?

After the mankind has opened the Pandora's box of nuclear age it seems quite clear that the only thing that keeps us avoiding nuclear war is the threat of a nuclear counter strike. This balance of fear is maintained by nuclear states controlling each other not least with treaties and agreements reducing their arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.

Arts-photo: Jukka Seppälä / C.F.


But for me, personally, being a pacifist by heart, it has been of great concern when nuclear states like USA or Russia have directly or indirectly mentioned the possibility of a preemptive tactical nuclear strike against countries that do not necessarily have nuclear weapons.

Especially the situation in Ukraine has been reminding us of the possibility of first use of nuclear weapons against a nation that does not own one. The new military doctrine of Kremlin mentions nuclear weapons as a possible countermeasure in a situation where the existence of the Russian state is threatened by attack with conventional weapons. But it is left open when this kind of situation could occur - this can be freely translated by the Russian government. And what makes me to worry about it is how some Russian military leaders have taken the possibility of using nuclear weapons as a part of the political discussion on  Ukrainian war.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/russian-general-calls-for-preemptive-nuclear-strike-doctrine-against-nato/506370.html

http://www.newsweek.com/russia-has-threatened-nuclear-attack-says-ukraine-defence-minister-267842

But should the countries with no nuclear weapons arsenal start gaining the Bomb?

There is evidence of a nuclear renaissance based on some government's will to create a nuclear weapons arsenal of their own. For some Arabic countries the threat they believe to occur because of Israeli or Iranian nuclear arms it seems obvious that they are participating on nuclear programs having their own Bomb in mind. And there are many countries around the world that are secretly the friends of the Bomb, though officially they have nothing to do with it. Their nuclear power is only for peaceful purposes. So does Iran also claim. Who believes these promises.

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/nuclear-kingdom-saudi-arabias-atomic-ambitions

Building up new nuclear reactors is creating new nuclear weapons states.

And I can understand the point behind this thinking: why should only the U.S.A. , China, Russia, India, France, the UK, Pakistan, Israel, North Korea, Iran have nuclear weapons? Why not others? Russians and Americans did not ask anybody for permission to build up their Bombs. Nor did the others. Why should us?

Well, we have gone way too far that road to turn back - or have we?

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/pakistan-to-have-200-nuclear-weapons-by-2020-us-think-tank/514478-2.html

Imagine if!

We could just make a little imaginary exercise: we could think what will happen, if the countries without nuclear weapons were creative enough to find out their very own possibility of counter strike (in the case their land has been targeted with a nuclear strike) without having their own nuclear weapons.

All they have to do is realize, how they could cause an equivalent economical loss to the nuclear invader, than the strike causes them. And there is a clever and simple - as well as much cheaper than creating your own nuclear arms program - way to do it.

You just train, say a few hundred commandos, to attack the nuclear power plants and spent nuclear fuel pools for the possibility that some government would run a  nuclear attack on your country.

 Then you have only to officially announce of having this kind of special force. That's it. No nuclear state is so stupid that it risks of attacking with nuclear weapons such a country, that is capable of having a counter strike with conventional weapons / special commandos that will cause hundreds of billions to thousands of billions of dollars loss to the target country and leave more severe radioactive fallout than after a limited strike with nuclear weapons.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-08-15/nuclear-reactors-across-u-dot-s-dot-seen-vulnerable-to-terrorist-attack

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/26/opinion/chasdi-nuclear-terrorism-risk

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/26/how-u-s-nuclear-reactors-are-vulnerable-to-terrorists/

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2013-03-14/potential-cost-nuclear-accident-so-high-it%E2%80%99s-secret

http://cdn-lejdd.ladmedia.fr/var/lejdd/storage/images/media/images/nucleaire/8830485-1-fre-FR/nucleaire.jpg

http://solarwindpronet.blogspot.fi/2013/04/nuclear-accident-in-france-would-cost-1.html?showComment=1417817305871#c2279222501389777857

But is it against international treaties about warfare to attack nuclear reactors or spent fuel pools?

Sure it is, but as well the nuclear strike against any country is. And if it is remained as a counter strike threat, it is as ethical as having nuclear weapons ready to be launched if someone attacks you with nuclear missiles. This is only fare for the poor countries that have no possibility to produce their own nuclear bombs....

Well, after seen this imaginary possibility to have their own counter measures for tactical nuclear attacks, some countries may announce of this possibility. Or most probably not. But one thing I hope will happen is that the strategists of nuclear powers will abandon all plans to attack with nukes on countries without nuclear weapons - because they know now: even a single nuclear detonation on others territory could cost them thousands of billions of dollars - it's simply too risky a business!

And some people still think that nuclear power is safe......

No nukes is better!

Renewable energy is the only safe, ethical, democratic and environmentally reasonable power source we have. And it is also economically competitive now! Let's make the change - together!

JPS

Finland - 20 years behind others - in energy politics

Finland is seen as a country of leading technologies and a superior schooling system. And I'm proud to be Finnish for many reasons.

Thinking of the 70'ies: the energy policy of Finland   Photo: J.S. / C.F

But there is one sector in our society that has never left 1970'ies. And it is the centralized power generating policy.

We are hearing the same arguments about cheap base load power generated in nuclear power plants year after year. The same thesis and phrases we are used to hear for many decades.

But.

The rest of the world does not speak the same language any more.

Nuclear power is out.

http://www.worldnuclearreport.org/WNISR2014.html#_Toc268768688

http://bellona.org/news/nuclear-issues/2014-10-sweden-edging-nuclear-power-incoming-government

It is out without state (taxpayers) subsidiaries. Hinkley Point is the last fortress of nuclear industry to survive, asking for common money to be paid for their save-the-earth nuclear nightmare: world-record-expensive new Areva-reactors. And the case is not yet closed....

http://www.beyondnuclear.org/home/2014/10/8/hinkley-point-c-will-be-the-most-expensive-nuke-ever-if-comp.html

http://energytransition.de/2014/10/price-of-new-nuclear-revisited/

Or then there is still this Russian nuclear-arms-and-power-combination-giant, ROSATOM. It is trying to get leading role on worlds nuclear power and nuclear fuel market. Nobody knows (perhaps except Mr. Putin) how much Russian state is dumping money on it to keep it going. But if it were an ordinary company running only with private money, it's story could have ended long ago....

And the Chinese and Indian nuclear projects are still running..... (they have the Bomb....)

But solar power is the answer. And wind. And geothermal. And tidal waves. And bio-energy. 

Renewables are the winners of the future. And the future is already here.

http://www.iea.org/newsroomandevents/pressreleases/2014/september/how-solar-energy-could-be-the-largest-source-of-electricity-by-mid-century.html

But we, the Finns (or at least our politicians), are slow to learn.

We have high quality science. We have skilled scientists. We have talented professors demanding energy change. http://energiapolitiikka.fi/  We have over 60 % of our citizens opposing the construction of Fennovoima nuclear power plant. Most of Finns are interested in solar energy and other renewables. But our government is showing green light to Fennovoima and nuclear power in general, keeping on shouting the old mantras of 70'ties about cheap power for the industry, while gaining the most expensive one.

Perhaps it would now be the time for them to read the news and think twice before they continue repeating their outdated phrases. The times they are a changing!

Stop Fennovoima NPP project!           Photo: J.S. / C.F.

JPS

Nuclear Finlandisation - Finnish Government Agrees on 100 years Russian Nuclear Dependency

“It is a 100-year-long project. 10 years to construct, 60 years to operate, then hopefully 20 years to operate to get an extension approved by the state, and then 10 years to decommission,” (ROSATOM Overseas’ representative Roman Dyukarev)

http://en.itar-tass.com/economy/749996 

There is a hell of a discussion going on in Finland about finlandisation. I think that is just a part of modern finlandisation. You are not allowed to talk about the subject - economical-political decisions based on not conflicting the Russian interests if our own business interests are threatened at the same time.

Our former Minister of the Environment, Mr. Ville Niinistö made the discussion by mentioning the word finlandisation on Financical Times interview a few days ago http://search.ft.com/search?queryText=ville+niinist%C3%B6 . Leading politicians have called Minister Niinistö unpatriotic for his outcome on the issue. Also leading opposition parties have been criticizing Niinistö for using that ugly word. And president Sauli Niinistö was also giving a statement that he cannot see any finlandisation now. http://yle.fi/uutiset/news/ 

But is it really so? I'm afraid it is not.

If we are closing our eyes to the fact that Russian influence on our energy policy will be sealed for next 100 years if we accept this Fennovoima-ROSATOM -project when 2/3 of Finns are against it as well as most of energy experts, so this could be called FINLANDISATION in it's gravest form.

So Finland is accepting a Russian nuclear weapons company under straight control of Vladimir Putin to be running a nuclear power plant for a century, causing huge losses to Finnish taxpayers and making it very difficult to develop domestic renewable energy industry. That is what I would call UNPATRIOTIC.

*  *  *

By the way, Ville Niinisto used to be a researcher on political history - especially on finlandisation, before he entered to political career....

JPS

ROSATOM's Mission and the Interests of the Finnish People and EU

"ROSATOM's Mission is to maintain national interests in defence, nuclear safety and nuclear power by achieving global leadership in advanced technologies, competencies and innovations."

http://www.rosatom.ru/en/about/mission/ 

Should we be more critical to ROSATOM-Fennovoima NPP-project?    Arts Picture by Jukka Seppälä / Creator's Fingerprints

This mission statement on ROSATOM's own website should have been read with care by Finnish politicians and ministers long ago. 

Wishful thinking belongs to real politics of Finland on areas where it can lead to severe difficulties when it's time to pay the bill.

The owner and operator of Olkiluoto NPP, TVO, pays a hard bill of about 100 million euros for planning costs for Olkiluoto-4 nuclear reactor. The company was just today denied the licence to construct the 4th reactor of Olkiluoto NPP in Eurajoki, South-Western Finland.

http://yle.fi/uutiset/economic_minister_says_fennovoima_reactor_can_go_ahead_greens_may_quit_cabinet/7471840

Olkiluoto-3 NPP in 2012                                           Photo: JS / C.F.

And they have to manage to run a super-expensive OL-3 EPR-reactor, having electricity price somewhere between 65-120 e/MWh, while Nordic market price for power varies somewhere between 25-39 e/MWh. And the reason for building nuclear power was 'cheap power for the industry'.....

It is quite strange how many Finnish politicians ignore to see the geopolitical importance of nuclear power business to Russian leaders, though ROSATOM openly tell it on their official website. 

Finnish government (all parties but the green movement) are giving a false signal to the Russian people and to president Vladimir Putin by accepting cooperation with a Russian state owned nuclear weapons company that is governed by -  Mr. Putin. If we are willing not to accept the Russian invasion on Ukraine, so we shouldn't be playing atomic games with the Russian army nuclear arms manufacturer - and funding it's activities. It is a risky and rough way to go and it seems that most part of the funding for the Fennovoima-ROSATOM NPP project is coming from Finnish taxpayers, EU-citizens. The recent polls show that 2/3 of Finns are against Fennovoima-ROSATOM plan. Private money and plenty of energy companies and consulting companies have found it to be too expensive, risky and unprofitable to be realized.

Olkiluoto-3 Fiasco should be ringing the alarm bells for the nation. The 10 billion euro project is not scheduled to be generating power to the grid before late 2018 - the original deadline for on grid was 2009. Nobody knows if it will be finished by this latest time estimate. I hope not. I have written about it several times before on my blogs: http://solarwindpronet.blogspot.fi/2012/12/olkiluoto-3-epr-to-cost-at-least-85.html  and  http://solarwindpronet-suomi.blogspot.fi/2013/05/tehdaan-olkiluoto-3-ja-4-voimaloista.html .

It is widely known fact that OL-3 is one of the most problematic  NPP projects in the world. And now our own politicians admit it too:  http://yle.fi/uutiset/vapaavuori_olkiluoto_3_on_teollisuushistoriamme_surkein_tapaus/7472933 (in Finnish).

*   *   *

The Russian should now face the renewable energy future            Photo: JS / C.F.

If we are willing to cooperate with the Russian Federation on energy business, it should be mainly on renewable energy. 

That would support heavily EU's sustainable energy plans and give the Russians a clear signal which way to go in the future. Distributed power generation and intelligent grids are here to stay - and they should belong to the future of modern Russia - because we share the same planet.

*   *   *

By the way, I Highly appreciate the outcome of our Minister of the Environment Ville Niinistö on Fennovoima-Rosatom issue! He's a brave man and a honest, good politician! Wishing him Good Luck!   http://yle.fi/uutiset/vihreat_lahtee_hallituksesta_jos_ydinvoimalupa_hyvaksytaan/7472441 (in Finnish).

JPS

Mr. Putin and Mr. Niinistö - the World is Waiting for a Peaceful Solution for Ukraine

According to YLE-news, Finnish president Sauli Niinistö will be meeting the president of Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin tomorrow in Sochi, Russia.    http://yle.fi/uutiset/niinisto_and_putin_to_meet_friday/7411362

The Ukrainian crisis is one of the most severe conflicts  ongoing at the moment on our planet, and one highly related with energy issues. I have been writing about this on my previous blog article last March,  http://solarwindpronet.blogspot.fi/2014/03/finnish-government-to-force-fennovoima.html

but now  it's time to return to the subject.

Russian Federation is a great country, one of leading powers of the future world, and a land of opportunities and one rich of natural resources. This should be admitted by everyone and overlooked by no-one. Russian people are famous of being friendly and warm-hearted to their quests, where ever they come from. Sharing and caring belong to the Russian national tradition.

So I see no reason not to believe the negotiations to bring good fruit: the Russian people is willing to live in peace with its neighbors, as well as its leaders do.

And the Ukrainian people is willing exactly the same - live in peace, co-operate and trade with Russia. But they will ride on their own horse, their own way, and be independent. And they have the right to do so.

It's regrettable that things have escalated to civil war in Ukraine. But more than anything else we need now good solutions, win-win structures that can be accepted by every player of the game which of a great deal is innocent civilians not willing to play this kind of ugly war game.

The winter is coming. Houses of civilians in eastern Ukraine are badly damaged, electric power is lost, water and sewage systems don't function etc. This problem must now be addressed by international community. But fighting must come to an end before that. The sooner the better.

Mr. Putin: 

I would like to ask you if you are interested in getting back the good reputation of Russian Federation that it had among western countries before the Ukrainian crises? And getting back the respect of wider audience in Russia? The economy is as important for Russia as it is for Europe or the U.S.A. - would you like to take a quick way to win back what has been lost and achieve a little bit more?

Russia could be winner as well as Ukraine and other European countries. We could turn this demanding situation into a good end. And turn a new, brighter page in the history of European  - Russian relations and whole the mankind. You, Mr. Putin, are a key player.

We had a rental agreement with former Soviet Union after the WWII to let Hankoniemi in Southern Finland as a military base for the Soviet Union for some decades. Soviet leaders found later on that arrangement unnecessary and terminated the use of that military base before the original deadline of that agreement. The key words were co-operation and trust of political leaders of both Finland and Soviet Union.

I think nobody seriously denies the fact that Crimean is very important to Russia. But the means to reach that strategic goal could be rethought. How about 50 year agreement with Russian Federation and Ukraine about renting the area for Russian military base on Crimean peninsula? The rest of the peninsula could be demilitarized zone like Ahvenanmaa (Åland) in Finland. UN could be controlling that both sides respect the agreement and that the Russian population on that area is respected and treated equally with Ukrainian and other nationalities. Crimean peninsula could be declared also a free trade zone to boost the economy on the area. So Russia would have its military base and capability to keep its defensive power on the area. And the international community could once again see Russia as a responsible and trustworthy companion.

And about the energy issues, Mr. Putin:

You know very well as every wise leader on this planet today that oil, gas, coal and nuclear power are each a no option to mankind if we like to survive. We have perhaps five to fifteen years to turn the CO2 -emissions into a sustainable level. And there we need renewable energy, masses of renewable energy. Russia is a great country with massive potential to produce renewable energy and also manufacture means to generate it for others. Russia could be among the leaders in new technology. But for that we need international co-operation. Finland have clean technology know-how, so does Germany and many other European countries. But as well we need China and the U.S.A. to join the common fight against greenhouse effect. And in the future African countries as well as India, Australia and Southern America will be joining the front to fight climate change.

The Ukrainian people including Russian speaking East and South-East Ukraine need an energy change. Being dependent on Russian natural gas is no good for Russia nor for Ukraine in the long run. They need heating and power for winter and it could be organized by international co-operation including Russian efforts. Bio-energy and solar and wind power should be the main power mix of the future Ukraine. Natural gas could be as backup for some decades. Building solar and wind power takes only a few years and it will be boosting local economy greatly giving working opportunities to tens of thousands. Russia could be part of the solution and learn how to make the energy change that is needed also in Russia. Time for oil, coal and gas economy is simply running out, and you know it, Mr. Putin.

The world is creating the energy change to renewables quicker than anybody thought, people around world are more than ready for it:

"Although only a handful of respondents (9
percent) have solar products, 55 percent
say they are considering purchasing
or signing up in the next five years.
Given rising interest and adoption,
we continue to observe a variety of
innovative companies entering the
market. We also see a growing array of
solar home solutions and community
solar projects, as well as a host of
supporting services—from automated
support to financing instruments."
("In 2014, more than 13,000 residential consumers were surveyed across 26 countries.")

 http://www.accenture.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/PDF/Accenture-New-Energy-Consumer-Architecting-Future.pdf

And nuclear power is dead. You know it too, Mr. Putin. 

Selling nuclear reactors for power generation will be in five years like trying to sell steam engines to automotive industry. it's simply outdated, risky and far too expensive way to generate power. And selling reactors for nuclear weapons grade plutonium production is not a good deal either. We really don't need Vietnam or Egypt to have nuclear weapons, or any other (new) country. We don't need any new nuclear reactors in Finland, neither Fennovoima-Rosatom, nor Olkiluoto -TVO-Areva. We have enough power without NPPs and the majority of Finnish people are opposing Hanhikivi-1 and other new NPPs.

Now it could be time for Russia to enter into wind power era and start large projects with technical leaders on that area. We have know-how of arctic wind generation in Finland - our best generators are running up to -30 degrees centigrade (Sensors specified for -40°C) while southern manufacturers stop at -20.. There are plenty of arctic areas suitable for large scale wind power generation like Siberia, northern U.S.A. and Canada. There could be a big market for Russian industry in the future. And biomass or bio-gas heat and power generation could be another sustainable clean tech market for the Russian industry to enter in the near future.

But we need to stop fighting in Ukraine first. We need to get everyone understand that Russia is a powerful country that has its own important interests and that it is also taking care of its international responsibility to respect the other states on the area. Everyone involved on Ukrainian crises has made mistakes but solving the crisis is based on new positive steps everyone must now take to reach the goal: just, quick and lasting peace on the area.

And Mr. Niinistö:

I hope you will have a good meeting with president Putin! I hope that you will appreciate the opinion of Finnish people when according to new opinion polls 2/3 of Finnish people are against the building of Hanhikivi-1 nuclear reactor. People in Finland want to see renewable energy projects - surely in co-operation with Russian companies also. And Finnish people is surely wishing for a peaceful solution to Ukrainian crises - a solution that is acceptable for both Ukraine and Russia.

Good Luck for both Mr. Presidents!

JPS