ARMENIA’S ENERGY SECURITY: MAIN ACHIEVEMENTS AND CHALLENGES
Abstract
After the accident at the Fukusima Nuclear Power Plant in Japan, Armenia’s energy
industry found itself in the center of attention not only of its own country, but also, to some extent, of the world community. This interest was largely aroused by the need to re-examine the attitude toward nuclear power safety. In their comments about Armenia’s Metsamor Nuclear Power Plant, local and international experts reminded us of two important facts:
1. About the energy crisis at the beginning of the 1990s caused by the blockade of Armenia and the closing down of the Metsamor Nuclear Power Plant in 1989.
2. About the plans to close down the restarted Metsamor Nuclear Power Plant in 2016.
The accident in Japan gave reason to think about the most important questions of Armenia’s energy security: “What is the level of the country’s energy security? How does closing the existing nuclear power plant affect the country’s energy security? Will a new nuclear power plant be built?”
In this article, we will discuss precisely these questions, focusing particular attention on the political and economic aspects of the problem.
Downloads
References
Two of Armenia’s thermal power plants, Razdan and Erevan, operated on heating oil, while natural gas was mainly used exclusively by the population and industry. Not until 1993, thanks to partial modernization of the thermal power plants, .m;njbhdid the latter begin operating on natural gas. From this viewpoint, the main reason for the onset of the energy crisis in Armenia in 1992 was the halt in heating oil deliveries.
After the Spitak earthquake in 1988, many representatives of the intelligentsia and leaders of the independence movement that emerged began actively convincing the public that the Metsamor Nuclear Power Plant was a huge environ-mental threat to the country and its further operation threatened Armenia with extinction. In so doing, no expert or profes-sional evaluations were carried out before the nuclear power plant was closed down, and the decision to halt operation of the two energy units was political.
The first energy unit could not be restored largely because during the four years after the nuclear power plant was closed most of the equipment of this energy unit was dismantled for a variety of different reasons.
See: K. Karapetian, “Armenia’s Role in Ensuring the Energy Security of the South Caucasian Region,” 21st Cen- 2 After the Spitak earthquake in 1988, many representatives of the intelligentsia and leaders of the independence movement that emerged began actively convincing the public that the Metsamor Nuclear Power Plant was a huge environ-mental threat to the country and its further operation threatened Armenia with extinction. In so doing, no expert or professional evaluations were carried out before the nuclear power plant was closed down, and the decision to halt operation of the two energy units was political.
The first energy unit could not be restored largely because during the four years after the nuclear power plant was closed most of the equipment of this energy unit was dismantled for a variety of different reasons.
See: K. Karapetian, “Armenia’s Role in Ensuring the Energy Security of the South Caucasian Region,” 21st Century, No. 4 (22), 2008, p. 23 (in Armenian).ury, No. 4 (22), 2008, p. 23 (in Armenian).
It must be noted that despite the development of small hydropower plants, the main hydropower capacities that were to ensure the industry’s growth have not even begun to be built. This applies to two hydropower projects, Loriberd and Shnokh (for more detail about hydropower projects in Armenia, see, Hydropower Potential of Armenia, available at [http://www.renewableenergyarmenia.am/], 22 May, 2011).
See: A. Gazazian, “Gazoprovod Iran-Armenia mozhet stat shansom dlia Evropy,” 2 December, 2008, Deutsche Welle, available at [http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,3843202,00.html], May 2011.
See: Iran — Country Analyses Brief (2010) — Energy Information Administration, available at [http://www.eia.doe.ov/cabs/Iran/pdf.pdf, p. 11], 21 May, 2011.
It supplies about 8% of electricity production in the country.
See: “ES nameren organizovat forum donorov dlia sbora sredstv na zakrytie Armianskoi AES,” RIA Novosti In-formation Agency, 8 July, 2004, available at [http://rian.ru/economy/20040708/629389.html], 22 May, 2011.
See: G. Movsesian, “Budushchee Armenii—v razvitii iadernoi energetiki,” Respublika Armenia, 22 December,No. 093 (479), 2006.
See: “Pravitelstvo Armenii odobrilo strategiiu vyvoda Armianskoi AES iz ekspluatatsii,” Regnum Information Agency, 27 November, 2007, available at [http://www.armtown.com/news/ru/pan/20071129/24225/], 26 March, 2010.12 Arka Information Agency, 19 October, 2009.
[http://www.regnum.ru/news/1231523.html].
During the signing, it was announced that the new project might cost $5 billion (see: “Novyy blok armianskoi AES stanet rekordnym,” Kommersant, 21 August, 2010, No. 153 (4453)). Here is should be noted that this will be the most ex-pensive of any nuclear power plant construction projects with a 1,000-water-water energetic reactor ever carried out.
See: “Russia Can Finance 20% of the Construction of the New Nuclear Power Plant of Armenia,” Radio Liberty —Armenia, available at [http://www.azatutyun.org/articleprintview/2133108.html], 17 May, 2011.
See: “Armianskaia AES budet ekspluatirovatsia do postroiki novogo energobloka—Minenergo,” available at [http://ww.atominfo.ru/news4/d0761.htm], 1 May, 2011.
“Kak postupit s AES posle Iaponii?”—Armen Darbinian predlozhil novyi podkhod dlia armianskoi energetiki,”
available at [http://news.am/rus/news/54459.html], 1 May, 2011.
See: P. Brown, “EU Halts Aid to Armenia over Quake-zone Nuclear Plant,” The Guardian, Wednesday, 2 June,2004; M. Lavelle, J. Garthwaite, “Is Armenia’s Nuclear Plant the World’s Most Dangerous?” 1 April, 2011, available at [http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2011/04/110412-most-dangerous-nuclear-plant-armenia/], 1 May, 2011.
See: “Azerbaidzhan bespokoitsia po povodu AES v Armenii,” available at [http://www.georgiatimes.info/news/
html], 1 May, 2011; “Turtsia prodolzhit kampaniiu protiv Armianskoi AES,” available at [http://www.rosbalt.ru/avkaz/2011/03/21/830475.html], 1 May, 2011.
“Vlasti Armenii ne namereny otkazyvatsia ot stroitelstva novogo energobloka AES,” available at [http://
ww.panarmenian.net/rus/economy/news/67727/], 1 May, 2011.
“Armianskaia AES mozhet vyderzhat zemletriasenie do 9 ballov—seismolog,” available at [http://
ww.newsarmenia.ru/society/20110315/42413102.html], 1 May, 2011.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2011 AUTHOR
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
