Forced energy crisis and rapid prices growth - it is not only an impartial forced tendency but also result of the policy of the access limitation for the really effective energy resources manufactures to the market. First of all, an artificial suppression of the Russian nuclear companies on the West.
This spring appeared a hope that one of the oldest export limitations against Russian nuclear industry would be abolished. Referring to reliable sources, influential edition Nuclear Fuel informed that after the visit of the high-ranking Eurocommittee official in Moscow could be adopted an agreement abolishing the so-called Corfu declaration that regulates export of Russian uranium production to Europe.
The edition had in view a European official Dominik Ristory from the energy and transport department of Eurocommittee. According to AtomInfo.Ru information, question about the quotes for Russian uranium production was also discussed during the talks between the European Union commissar on energy Andris Pibalgs and Victor Khristenko.
Americans prefer quoting Russian uranium openly; Europeans at the same time prefer secret declarations. Agreement on the dumping investigation suspension between Russia and United States is already thoroughly scrutinized; the fact of existing of the same agreement in Europe - already mentioned Corfu declaration - was called in question and even denied.
The declaration was adopted in June 1994 by the countries of the European Union during the summit on Corfu island, that is where a name of this document from. Declaration contained strict frameworks for the European nuclear agency EURATOM - its policy should be realized in a way that will keep the share of European uranium suppliers in European Union not less than 80%.
Practically the same day when declaration appeared, an agreement for the partnership and cooperation between Russia and European Union was adopted. Article #22 of the agreement has withdrawn nuclear materials trade from the general trade agreement. It was promised to Moscow, that status of Russian uranium will be defined during two years. Further happened contrary to the famous proverb - even after 14 years of expectations this promise has not been kept.
We have to admit that activities of Europeans of that time were not arbitrariness. In the early nineties Russian suppliers in a literal sense of this word streamed out on the international market. Poor condition of the domestic nuclear industry and absence of the coordinated export policy made Russians desperately compete with each other making the prices lower.
Undoubtedly unlimited damping had to be stopped, both Russia and Europe were interested in that. There was only one question how it should be done. Moscow insisted on the refusal from quoting Russian import of nuclear materials and even demanded including of the correspondent statements to the various protocols, memorandums, declarations and other diplomatic documents. European countries formally admitted demands of Russians, but continued privately following the positions of Corfu declaration.
Russian nuclear industry had felt the steel snatch of the secret declaration immediately. In 1994 EURATOM blocked the contract for the delivery of 400 tons of natural UF6 from Russia. BNFL company was a customer, that planned to resell this delivery to the German generating company KLE. Ban of the contract was motivated by "the threat for the diversification of the sources of uranium production supplies to the European Union". German customers tried to put the decision of EURATOM in issue, but failed. From that time many European companies began treating cooperation with Russian nuclear companies with prudence that influenced the volume of the turnover. Problem of the secret quoting became more acute with the enlargement of the European Union to the East. States that traditionally headed for the Russian nuclear technologies, such as Bulgaria, Slovakia and other, and were buying fuel for their NPPs in Russia entered the European Union. 20% quote, established by the Corfu declaration has finally turned into the protectionist instrument for the limitation of Russian uranium export to Europe.
Moreover, entirely unpleasant precedents took place - for example, EURATOM tried to call in question Bulgarian plans to prolong contracts with TVEL for the nuclear fuel supplies to the "Kozloduy" NPP. There were also unofficial attempts to convince Bulgaria that orientation on the Russian fuel assemblies for the NPP "Belene" was unreasonable.
Annual EURATOM reports still retain items about the necessity of limitation of deliveries of Russian production to European Union. But there are also small positive shifts - for example in 2005 EURATOM declared, that "natural uranium import limitations are not considered as necessary". Speaking about dump enrichment from Russia, here Europeans are frankly using double standards, demanding change of the status from the goods to commodities for European companies in USA and at the same time establishing quantity limitations for the Russian enriching companies on their market (equating it with goods this way).
European uranium dump enrichment at Russian sites, including Angarsk, implemented in the interests of the European enriching companies is a characteristic example of those problems that faces Russia because of the Corfu declaration nowadays. Russian companies have to take upon themselves this work to enter European market that causes certain irritation in Russian society. But we can't avoid it - direct access to European end-consumers is hampered by the limitations in Europe.
But it is not correct to think, that Corfu declaration has a negative impact only on Russia. European energy companies have to work with caution with Russians and are loosing because of this open and competitive market. Softening or total refusal from the quotes should benefit European energy companies; they have already declared it several times.
Obvious prove of the advantageousness of Russian uranium production for Europe is also a "floating" limit of real, but not fixed quotes. European companies year after year have already shifted the fixed limitations (20%) of reactor uranium import from Russia. Nowadays share of Russia in uranium dump enrichment for the European states is estimated within the range of 27-28%. Besides, Russian companies are implementing contracts for the uranium reject material enrichment, taking into account this type of activity the share of Russia on European uranium enrichment market is about 50%.
Problem of the European quotes for the Russian uranium production has become an issue of active political discussions in last years. During the Munich conference on the security problems, that took place in February 2007, chancellor of Germany Angela Merkel appealed to Europe and Russia to cooperate active in the sphere of reliable, stable and ecologically safe energy supplying.
As you know Vladimir Putin agreed with the chancellor's appeal, but preferred to remind that cooperation should be honest and based on the equal market principals and rules. "It is obvious, that price for the energy resources should be defined by the market, but not be a subject of political speculations, economical pressure or blackmailing", - declared Russian President of that time.
In the opinion of Vladimir Smirnov, that was a head of "Techsnabexport" for the long time, in such conditions when world consumers don't have enough quantity of energy resources, further maintenance of limitations for Russian uranium and uranium production supplies will be "an absolute archaism". But will the European politicians adopt this thesis and will they keep their promise given 14 years ago, will they change the discriminational Corfu declaration? Hope for that is cherished both in Moscow and in Brussels.
SOURCE: Vladimir Rychin, AtomInfo.Ru
DATE: July 10, 2008