The nuclear power plant has been out of action for 40 years Angra 3 has already consumed billions and needs even more to be completed. The government is at an impasse: should it continue with the project or abandon it altogether?
For almost four decades, a monumental work has been practically frozen in time, accumulating billions of reais in costs and creating heated debates among experts, politicians and the population.
cove 3, one of Brazil's greatest nuclear energy generation promises, has already consumed an astronomical amount of public resources, but is still far from becoming a reality.
The Angra 3 nuclear power plant project, which has been on hold for almost 40 years, had an investment of R$12 billion by 2023, and now you need at least another R$23 billion to be completed, according to the National Bank for Economic and Social Development (BNDES).
- Brazil will have a colossal niobium industrial plant and this already has a date to happen
- New helmet law brings fines that could cause a lot of headaches for drivers
- Janja, Lula's wife, defends that Petrobras explores a new oil field that could yield 5 BILLION barrels and generate 350 THOUSAND new jobs, saying that the state-owned company 'is a powerhouse in the matter'
- Labor shortages reach the South of the country, where it is difficult to find people to work in industry, construction and commerce
Construction, which began in 1984, has generated controversy due to its high costs, risks and unfulfilled promises that it would revolutionize energy supply in Brazil.
Despite the controversies, the Energy Research Company (EPE) and the government are at a decisive moment to decide whether the work will finally be completed.
The financial dilemma
According to a recent study presented by BNDES, the Brazilian government faces a difficult decision: continue with the investments or give up on Angra 3.
The cost of abandoning the project would be enormous, but completing it also requires an injection of billions.
Beyond the R$ 12 billion already invested, it is estimated that an additional investment of $ 23 billion to finish the construction.
Are technology and equipment still viable?
The president of Eletronuclear, Raul Lycurgo, explained that, despite the project having been on hold for so long, the material already acquired for construction, including the pure steel reactor vessel, is not obsolete.
Lycurgus stated that 12 thousand devices are properly stored and ready for installation. According to him, these components continue to be manufactured in the same way as 40 years ago, which guarantees their technical viability.
What is still missing?
Despite the existing equipment, Eletronuclear still needs to acquire all the necessary parts. instrumentation, control, supervision and monitoring, which should cost the Additional R$23 billion.
According to BNDES, this amount would be necessary to fully equip the plant and make it operational.
Financing and debts
In addition to construction costs, cove 3 is wrapped in R$ 14 billion in financing, which, according to Lycurgo, will need to be paid in advance.
The weight of these loans adds another point of controversy to the project, which is already widely debated among supporters and critics of nuclear energy.
The nuclear energy controversy
One of the main points of debate about cove 3 is related to the danger that nuclear energy can pose.
Critics point to the risks of accidents and environmental impact, while supporters, such as Lycurgo, argue that nuclear energy is a source of clean and safe, as does not generate greenhouse gases.
High cost per megawatt/hour
Another critical point is the cost of the energy generated.
According to Lycurgus, the cost of nuclear energy in cove 1 e cove 2 revolves around R$ 355,20 per megawatt/hour, while the production of cove 3 would initially cost about R$ 650 per megawatt/hour.
The president of Eletronuclear highlighted, however, that this value could be reduced if tax benefits were granted to the project, as already occurs in other sectors, such as aeronautical.
Comparison with other plants
Lycurgus also compared the cost of nuclear energy with that of other thermal sources.
Natural gas-powered plants, for example, have costs higher than R$ 1.300 per megawatt/hour, and diesel-powered thermal plants even exceed the R$ 2.000 per megawatt/hour.
He highlighted that, although these sources continue to be part of the Brazilian electricity matrix, ideally they should only be used at times of greatest demand, and not continuously, as is currently the case.
The future of Angra 3: is it worth it?
The big question around cove 3 is whether the investment is worth it given the costs and controversies involved.
Although the project has the potential to generate energy more cheaply than other thermal sources, the delay and high cost of completion cast doubt on the economic viability of the project.
Furthermore, the debate over the risks of nuclear energy continues to rage, raising uncertainty about the future of the plant.
Compliant highlighted by Miriam Leitão, journalist of the newspaper The Globe, Angra 3 is a project that “makes no sense from an economic or environmental point of view”.
For Leitão, the billion-dollar investment in nuclear energy diverts resources that could be applied to renewable sources, which are cheaper and less risky.
She argues that the cost of energy produced by Angra 3 will be very high, and the return on investment does not justify the resources needed for its completion.
And now, what will the government do?
With all this information at stake, the final decision is yet to come.
The government, together with the Energy Research Company (EPE) and the BNDES, you need to decide whether you will move forward with the conclusion of cove 3, or you will give up on the project altogether.
One thing is certain: the future of the nuclear power plant remains surrounded by uncertainty.
Do you think it is worth investing billions of reais to complete Angra 3, even with the risks and controversies of nuclear energy? Leave your opinion in the comments!