1. Home
  2. / Economy
  3. / Angra 3: BILLION-dollar project stalled for almost 40 years is delayed ONCE AGAIN and has a new deadline to start operating
reading time 4 min read Comments 1 comments

Angra 3: BILLION-dollar project stalled for almost 40 years is delayed ONCE AGAIN and has a new deadline to start operating

Written by Alisson Ficher
Published 18/10/2024 às 19:03
Angra 3: 40 years of delays and billions of reais invested. New postponement pushes the operation to 2030 or 2031. (Image: IA illustration)
Angra 3: 40 years of delays and billions of reais invested. New postponement pushes the operation to 2030 or 2031. (Image: IA illustration)

Construction of the Angra 3 nuclear power plant, which began in 1981, is facing yet another delay. With billion-dollar costs, the operation has been rescheduled for 2030 or 2031.

For decades, the construction of the Angra 3 nuclear power plant has been synonymous with unfulfilled promises and billions of dollars being drained without concrete results.

The project, which should have been operational for a long time, continues to disappoint expectations.

Now, another obstacle appears in the way: the initial forecast of entry into operation between 2027 and 2028 is no longer valid.

According to Eletronuclear, new deadlines push the operation of Angra 3 to the end of 2030 or even 2031. The reason? Tenders, contract signings and all the bureaucracy involved in the process of completing the plant.

And that's not the only problem. The work will require a new investment of $ 23 billion and will still need to face questions from the Federal Court of Auditors (TCU), which points to the risk of new postponements, as shown by Economic Value Newspaper.

The Federal Court of Auditors, in turn, highlights more complications. A public inspection report indicated that there is a three-year delay in hiring the construction company that will be responsible for carrying out the next stages.

Furthermore, the contract for the supply of heat exchangers, essential for the operation of the plant, is also experiencing problems.

The company Nuclebrás Equipamentos Pesados ​​(Nuclep), responsible for the production of this equipment, is nine months behind schedule, which could lead to further delays in the delivery of the work.

According to the TCU report, the current delay does not compromise the overall schedule, but there is a fear that new problems could directly impact the project.

Construction of Angra 3 began in 1981, but work was halted in 1984.

In 2010, the government tried to resume construction, but in 2015, with two-thirds of the plant already completed, the project was again suspended due to the consequences of Operation Lava Jato, which revealed a corruption scheme in the Electronuclear.

The soap opera of billion-dollar contributions

The financial issue has been one of the main obstacles to the completion of the plant. According to the BNDES, continuing construction of Angra 3 will require $ 23 billion, while giving up on the project would have an estimated cost of $ 21 billion.

In other words, abandoning the project now would be almost as expensive as finishing it. Furthermore, BNDES highlighted that part of the $ 23 billion necessary has already been secured by contracted financing, which will be released in the coming years.

The president of Eletronuclear, Raul Lycurgo, defended the urgency of a definitive decision on the future of Angra 3.

He stated that the impasse is costing Brazil dearly and that, if the National Energy Policy Council (CNPE) approves the continuation of the works this year, the bidding for the resumption of the project could take place until June 2025, with the signing of the contracts scheduled for the second half of 2025.

In this scenario, works would resume between the end of 2025 and the beginning of 2026, with completion expected in five years.

Angra 3, which has the potential to generate 1.405 megawatts (MW), has already consumed R$12 billion just on the storage of equipment acquired between 2009 and 2023.

This equipment is stored in different locations, such as in Angra dos Reis and at Nuclep facilities.

The cost of not completing the project also includes the return of R$ 1,5 billion in tax incentives obtained from the import of equipment for the plant, in addition to capital contributions from the National Treasury and Eletrobras, as shareholders, to cover withdrawal costs.

The weight of energy on the consumer's pocket

Another important factor involving the future of Angra 3 is the impact on energy costs.

According to the president of Eletronuclear, the price of energy production from the plant, estimated at R$ 660 per megawatt-hour (MWh), would be competitive in relation to thermal plants used to maintain reservoir levels, which can cost more than R$ 1.000 per MWh.

For comparison purposes, Angra 1 and Angra 2, which are already in operation, have generation rates of R$ 355 per MWh.

If Angra 3 had been built at the same time as Angra 2, the costs would be much lower, as Lycurgo pointed out.

Now, Brazil needs to decide whether it will continue to pour money into this project that seems to have no end or whether it will bear the losses of abandoning it altogether.

The future of Angra 3 remains uncertain, and the costs of this indecision are extremely high. Do you think Brazil should continue with the project or is it time to abandon construction altogether?

Be the first to react!
React to article
Register
Notify
guest
1 Comment
Older
Last Most voted
Feedbacks
View all comments
Ebson
Ebson
22/10/2024 10:58

Regarding the question at the end. I am certain that this work must be completed. It is embarrassing and increasingly expensive that this delay in deciding to build it shows a lack of management and commitment to Brazil. The previous government took its time but was even brave in assuming from the beginning to continue. I do not know how they would have made progress or if they would have concluded it, but they ended their term with the works already underway. This current government is said by many to be a leader in public works, but with this stance they are throwing their reputation in the trash. Many hope that the decision will be made yes soon. There is a group of die-hard followers who are determined to oppose it. But their reputation on this issue is in their own hands, which “is to make a positive decision” and urgently.

Alisson Ficher

Journalist graduated in 2017 and working in the field since 2015, with six years of experience in print magazines and over 12 thousand online publications. Specialist in politics, jobs, economics, courses, among other topics. If you have any questions, want to report an error or suggest a topic on the topics covered on the site, please contact us by email: alisson.hficher@outlook.com. We do not accept resumes!

Share across apps
0
We would love your opinion on this subject, comment!x