Ross Hendin, CFP Contributor and Principal of Hendin Consultants, provides below another chapter to the Ignalina nuclear power plant case study. Here, Ross discusses a major foreign policy concern with regard to energy security in both Lithuania and Belarus- the threat of Russia:

The Jamestown Foundation today published an article by David Marples, detailing the political and perceived risks of the Rosatom nuclear power plant that was announced recently. Rosatom (the Russian nuclear power company) would build the plant, but it would sit on the Astravets site, just 20 miles from Vilnius, the capital of Lithuania.

While the article is titled and primarily focused on protests planned against the Belarus nuclear plant, it also talks about WHY the protests are happening, and WHY is key to understanding the other side of the Ignalina situation: The threat of Russians supplying the area with more nuclear power.

Many readers will remember the Chernobyl disaster of April 26, 1986 - it took place in Ukraine, but most of the fallout landed in Belarus. Residents still remember that, and are not eager for the Russians to rush another plant to market, and risk doing the same thing.

The article also points out two key geopolitical points :

This is a political and military, and not an economic or environmental decision, which highlights the importance of this from an energy security standpoint.

It is not overly feasible, and the Russian government is planning to loan money to pay for a large portion of it, which means that in time when it cannot payback loans, the Russian government will either own it, or own a very large investment in Belarus.

The reason the Ignalina plant is being decommissioned is because it is deemed not safe, and is based on Chernobyl technology. It came out a few months ago that the EU demand to close the plant stemmed from an Areva lobby, and now, since the announcement that the Russian government will put a plant there, the entire exercise becomes a moot point.

Lithuania is replacing their plant with a new, safer one, only to have another Russian plant no more than 20 miles away from their capital city. If the Russians can get the project underway fast enough, there will be no point to building a new Ignalina, as it will make no economic or logistical sense to do so. However, if the Baltics do stop production to consider buying power from the new plant, they should then consider just keeping Ignalina open, because at least that way, they are in control of the safety aspect of the plant’s maintenance, and are also able to guarantee their own energy security.