Nuclear companies calculate that keeping each plant going for another two years would avoid a big increase in government rates

In recent years the Government has been considering two alternatives for what to do with the highly radioactive waste from the facilities: storing it all in one central temporary repository (ATC). ​We will either locate it in Villar de Cañas in Cuenca or build seven temporary decentralized warehouses (ATDs) in the country. The government chose the second option, which required much larger investments. The alternative of building seven cemeteries means: further investment of approximately 2,000 million eurosIt increased to 19.244 million by 2100.

The expected extra cost will result in a multimillion-dollar increase in the rates nuclear power plants pay to the National Radioactive Waste Company (Enresa) to finance the management of their nuclear waste and the dismantling of the facilities. Nuclear companies say that with the largest planned investments, the Government will implement an increase of approximately 25% in this non-tax capital benefit, and this figure will increase from 7.98 euros per megawatt hour (MWh) of electricity produced by the power plants, as confirmed by various sources in the industry and reported by this newspaper. Close to 10 euros per head.

In total, depending on the final volume of annual electricity, the electric companies that own the nuclear power plants (Endesa and Iberdrolamainly and with the remaining contributions Nature and EDP) currently pays an average of around 450 million euros a year to the fund where the accumulated radioactive waste plan of around 7.5 billion is financed. With the increase in the rate foreseen by the companies, the payments made by the factories every year will be around 570 million, that is, 120 million more than now.

The large electricity companies, owners of Spanish nuclear power plants, are showing their refusal to take on higher costs than those envisaged in previous versions of the future PGRR because they attribute these extra costs to political decisions and the enormous delay accumulated by previous investments. Project to build an ATC in Villar de Cañas due to lack of institutional consensus. From the nuclear sector it is calculated as follows: Extending the operating period of each nuclear power plant by two years Interest rate increases will be prevented Postponing the country’s total nuclear shutdown until 2037.

More years go by

The estimates used by nuclear companies take into account the expected payments each year for the power generation of the plants (the longer the plants operate, the more electricity will be produced and the more will be contributed to the fund managed by Enresa); The amount available in the Enresa fund, which has been feeding power plants for years, is currently approximately 7.5 billion euros; and a 1.5 percent discount on the financing need based on the profitability achieved by investing that billion-dollar fund.

With all these variables, the extra cost foreseen in the future general waste plan will be covered. If all nuclear power plants operated for two more years anyone if some of the plants extend their lives beyond this two-year period According to industry calculations to which EL PERIÓDICO DE ESPAÑA of the Prensa Ibérica group has access (the fewer facilities they expand their business, the longer it will take to extend).

In 2019, the Government reached an agreement with major electricity companies to phase out all nuclear power plants between 2027 and 2035. Iberdrola, Endesa, Naturgy, EDP and public company Enresa It is considering the phased closure of seven Spanish reactors, planning Almaraz I in 2027, Almaraz II in 2028, Ascó I in 2030, Cofrentes in 2030, Ascó II in 2032, Vandellós II and He predicts that Trillo will close in 2035. These dates will require agreement on a new protocol to propose a new path forward for nuclear disruption and new deadlines, nuclear companies said.

Estimated increase in rates

The agreement between the government and major electricity companies in 2019 envisaged a maximum increase of 20% in the rate companies pay for the electricity they produce, which led the Executive to raise this rate to the currently valid €7.98 per MWh produced. A fee that was later deemed sufficient to cover the costs of managing nuclear waste and building a central temporary repository.

Enresa, the public company responsible for the management of radioactive waste in Spain, prepared the first draft of a new general plan for radioactive waste in 2020; where only the option of building a single ATC was considered and its financial memory kept this ratio at 7. , 98 Euros per MWh. The next version of the plan prepared by Enresa and submitted to the public hearing included two alternatives: building a single ATC or building seven warehouses across the country; 9.6 euros per MWh respectively.

In the last known version of the PGRR, the construction of only seven depots was already considered and the required capital benefit was predicted to be 9.7 euros per MWh. Each year, Enresa prepares an update of the financial forecasts linked to the improvement of long-term waste management, and in its last report last June, raises required rate forecast to 10.15 euros per MWhAccording to knowledgeable business sources. Nuclear companies predict that the Government will finally make a slight adjustment to this amount (due to lower than anticipated inflation at the time this forecast was made) and approve an increase in payments to around 10 euros per MWh.

Official Enresa sources consulted by this newspaper emphasize that in constant meetings with the facility owners, technical issues, the general costs of the PGRR and the investments that each facility must cover, but not the fee amount, are discussed. In any case, the financial forecasts prepared by Enresa are not binding and The decision on the amount of benefits applied to nuclear power plants is the exclusive responsibility of the Ministry of Ecological Transition.He also prefers to remain silent and not comment on when he will approve the new PGRR or the future increase.

Extra costs on the electricity bill?

Nuclear companies blame cost overruns for the massive delay caused by the former ATC construction project at Villar de Cañas in Cuenca. Lack of political and institutional consensus, and so they refuse to undertake them. This is how observations were collected on the draft PGRR sent to the Ministry of Ecological Transition by the Committee on Nuclear Energy (CEN), which groups Endesa, Iberdrola, Naturgy and EDP as owners of the reactors located in Spain. The newspaper reported..

The suggestion included in the claim reports of major electricity companies is that these additional amounts should be taken into account as the cost of the electricity system and charge them at the same electricity rate that all consumers pay. The capital benefit paid by nuclear power plants is not in any case a tax figure, but rather an additional operating cost of the facilities themselves (bearing the costs of managing the nuclear waste they produce) and is expressed as: Enresa.

Companies in the nuclear sector complain that in recent years they have experienced profitability problems due to tax burdens and ownership benefits borne by power plants, which cost around 25 euros per MWh of electricity produced. Their usual claims against the administrations include the reduction of tax liabilities and, more recently, the implementation of certain formulas that guarantee reasonable profitability to the facilities, such as long-term contracts. the electricity system itself that determines stable prices (which ensures that the system pays compensation to the power companies if the market price is lower than the agreed price, and that the nuclear companies refund the excess if the price is above) or through a payment mechanism for capacity, which means compensation to the power plants. For a certain fee in exchange for always being available and ensuring stability in electricity production.