RWE AG Germany to build 770 MWe Turkish power plant in Denizli

Dear Energy Professional, Dear Colleagues,

German power company RWE AG announced that they have signed an agreement to build a new 775 -megawatt thermal power plant in Denizli, western Turkey, with their local joint venture Turcas. Financial details were not released yet by the investors but RWE, based in Essen, said they would probably make its final investment decision in the first quarter 2010.

We have further reviewed and evaluated the EIA reports in their web site
http://www.rweturcasdenizlienerjisantrali.com/index2.html

We noticed that Chamber of Mechanical Engineers is missing from the list of local stakeholder NGOs. We are not so happy about that.

Metka, a Greek power plant builder/ constructor with in-house basic engineering capability, will be responsible for construction, and Germany's Siemens AG will supply major components, including gas and steam turbines, RWE said in a statement. The plant, to be finished in 2012, will be a 775-megawatt combined cycle gas turbine plant.

"The Turkish market is attractive, and we wish to carry out a few more projects in order to participate in the growth opportunities the country offers," Leonhard Birnbaum, RWE's chief strategic officer said.

Germany's energy titan RWE and Turcas Guney Elektrik Uretim A. S have awarded METKA the contract for the construction of a 775 -megawatt power plant near Denizli, Turkey, an official announcement said by METKA's Press Release.

The budget for this project is at approximately 600 million Euro, of which 450 million Euro plus a 40 million Euro option for EPC contractor while the backlog of projects contracted to the METKA Group now stands close to a total of 2.3 billion Euro. This is a major achievement for the Greek company which will for the first time cooperate with RWE, one of the leading energy companies. Details are as follows

Project Owner: RWE & Turcas Guney Elektrik Uretim A. S. - the newly established joint venture formed by the leading European utility company, RWE AG and Turcas Elektrik Uretim A.S., a subsidiary of Turcas Petrol A.E. (Turcas), a major energy player in South East Europe.

EPC Contractor: METKA S.A. Greece- with in-house basic engineering capability. METKA has a long background in the Energy sector, with particular strength and experience in the construction of power generation facilities. Building on its long standing industrial manufacturing and site construction activities in the power generation field, METKA has successfully developed its capabilities to become the leading EPC contractor in Greece, with a growing profile in the region and beyond.

METKA has completed significant thermal power generation projects on EPC basis including the "Endesa Hellas" Co-Generation Plant and the Lavrio Unit-V natural gas fired Combined Cycle Plant, as well as several open cycle gas turbine power plants for the islands of Crete and Rodos. Recent international projects include the Petrom 860 –megawatt combined cycle project in Romania and the Korangi 220 -megawatt combined cycle power plant in Karachi, Pakistan.

The Company has experience related to lignite fired power plants, having played a very significant role in the construction of most of the lignite fired units in Greece. The most recent example of this activity is for the new 330 -megawatt unit at Florina in Northern Greece.

For lignite fired units it is also important to mention the recent EPC contracts for environmental upgrades of existing units, such as the installation of new fly-ash electrostatic precipitators and the upgrade of existing precipitators at Kardia and Agios Dimitrios, plus the replacement of the electrostatic lignite precipitators at the Megalopolis power plant. In each of these cases METKA was the majority partner in the consortium established to carry out the EPC contract.

Denizli Key Project Characteristics: Turn-key engineering, procurement and construction for state-of-the-art natural gas fired combined cycle power plant with a net power output of 775 megawatt. The plant will be based on Siemens SGT5-4000F gas turbine technology, using a multi shaft concept: 2 on 1 configuration of two gas turbines, two heat recovery boilers and one steam turbine.

Schedule: The project will be executed in phases, with a first phase for engineering and activities related to permitting the plant, followed by the full project construction phase. Commercial operation of the plant is planned for the end of 2012.

Budget: METKA's scope represents an amount of approximately Euro 450 million with various options which may be exercised up to the end of the first phase with a total amount of approximately Euro 40 million.

METKA says that they are proud of this new award by a client with such strong credentials, representing a significant further recognition of its capability as a major EPC contractor at the international level.

Your writer feels happy to get such news on new energy investments in our local energy market, provided that they are environmentally friendly, they have completed all obligations for Environmental Impact Assessment Reports, they receive their updated license from the Local Regulatory Board, design by local engineering companies as much as possible, fabricate in the local fabrication plants as much as possible, install by our local contractors, commissioned and supervised by our local engineering power, operated by our own staff, and regularly checked by our own Labor force in programmed maintenance.

Your writer sincerely feels that energy investors deserve all our support to complete those power plant investments. They deserve since they risk their own property in order to get proper "Corporate Financing" at reasonable interest rates, and payment terms.

Hence your writer also tries to avoid them to make any technical mistakes in their power plant design, furthermore to avoid incorrect selection of the necessary equipment, wishes them to operate the plant for many years, to generate electricity which will push our economic prosperity.

There are not much project details; only already known details are disclosed. We learn that the output capacity is 775 -megawatt. Siemens will supply the major equipment, Siemens SGT5-4000F CGG configuration will be in the scope. Suppliers are expected to install air cooled cooling system. That means they will not use much underground water. That is good for nearby ongoing agricultural activities. As a matter of fact, water is scarce at the neighboring site.

Foreign investor should be comfortable here that we are ready to help them. We should warn that they should not get involved in any fraud for speeding the public procedures, getting EIA and EPDK license updates.

Local investor should feel comfortable that we shall be warning them in proper design, sourcing fabrication, site installation, logistics, and public approvals.

We all expect that these energy investments should bring prosperity, employment and peace to the site. Maximized local manpower, maximized local engineering/ fabrication/ site installation capabilities should be employed.

After brief review of the project, we feel that the investor group should need answers to the following questions as a stress test of the investment project;

We need to learn the origins of the basic equipment, gas turbine, steam turbine, heat recovery steam generator, condenser, cooling tower. Since the foreign investor is from Germany, we understand that the gas turbine will be of Siemens 2 each SGT5-4000F.

Similarly steam Turbine will also be purchased from Siemens. What are the budget figures? When are they going to be delivered to site? How are they transported from which sea port?

Since there will be space limitations at project site, the heat recovery steam generator will be of vertical gas pass, forced circulation type with supplementary firing. Who will be designing the forced circulation type HRSG (CMI- Belgium?), who will be the fabricator?, who will be the local construction company for site installation?

In EIA certification and Local regulatory board for license updating, there should not be any deviation of the information they will be declaring in the local information meeting and the information they will be furnishing to the public administrations.

Since the selected site is 545 meters above sea level, they need to have supplementary firing in their heat recovery steam generators in order to reach 775 -megawatt electricity generation output. We would be too pleased to learn the details of their burners, burner management systems, emission controls.

We shall be too pleased to learn where they will be purchasing the cooling towers, air cooling system design and equipment. As we all know similar size thermal power in Baymina Temelli project, they could not install air cooling systems since the towers would be in the airplane landing route to Murted air force airport.

Investors are to check if the plant air cooled cooling towers are free from airplane landing routes of Denizli Cardak International Airport which is only 20kms far, as well as emergency landing site at nearby highway. Red lights on the high cooling towers may not be sufficient for the air traffic. Foreseeable Risks are to be clearly defined at this point.

We need to know who will be the site constructor, what is the budget figure? They should be local companies. Local labors will be needed at the site for smooth and fast execution of the construction.

We need to know the estimated project period, the importance milestones; we expect that 28-30 months could be a reasonable period.

We need to know who will be making and paying the new 380 kV transmission and new natural gas incoming pipeline to the site.

We need to know when the major equipment land transportation will be made; do we have sufficient roads for that transportation, which will be making the road reinforcement to enable the transportation?

Do they have long term natural gas purchase agreement with respective organizations; do they have long term electricity sale agreements?

Do they/ investors consider any capacity extension in the long term in 10-20 years time? Do they have enough space/ land for that extension??

It is known that Siemens SGT5-4000F gas turbine is also suitable for IGCC. Do investors consider any IGCC application in future by gasification nearby Aydin, Yatagan indigenous lignite mines to avoid any energy supply risk?

Generally we observe that after plant construction and generation of income in 3-5 years, the foreign party decides to sell her shares to the local partner and leave the project/ country. That was the case in Enron in Trakya, selling all her shares to her local partner, Steag in Sugozu. How is the long term policy of the foreign party in this case?

We will be too pleased to learn if the local party will be thinking to create local engineering department to carry out necessary basic engineering in the long term.

We only get pleased to read investment, and sincerely feel that energy investors deserve all our support to complete those power plant investments. On the other hand, there is great risk in project finance of such investments due to public response.

Partners should make the risk assessment for long term gas supply and electricity sales.

Those companies, who are ignorant of local workforce employment expectations, and neglecting local engineering contribution, neglecting world class environmental limitations, will surely deserve the highest level of local resistance in legal platforms. They may have too much of a headache during project execution; therefore, the project finance institutions should make their risk assessments carefully.

We would like to warn them not to make any technical mistakes in their power plant design, avoid incorrect selection of the necessary basic equipment, as well as environmental requirements, and wish them to operate the plant for many years, to generate electricity which will push our economic prosperity.

The investors should feel comfortable that we shall be warning them for proper design, sourcing fabrication, site installation, logistics, and public approvals. We all expect that these energy investments will bring prosperity, employment and peace to the site. Maximized local manpower, as well as maximized local engineering/ fabrication/ site installation capabilities should be employed.

May God bless them with wisdom for all those who need. May God save you and forgive you for making any mistakes in your risk assessment. God bless you all.

--
Haluk Direskeneli, Ankara based Energy Analyst

Asset Shortage during Power Shortage

TUROGE 2010- 9th Turkish International Oil & Gas Conference
16 March 2010, at 15:30 hours, Sheraton, Ankara, Turkey

Dear Energy Professionals, Dear Colleagues,

In his December 2006 article on the Macroeconomics of Asset Shortages, Economist Ricardo J. Caballero says, “The world has a shortage of financial assets. Asset supply is having a hard time keeping up with the global demand for store of value and collateral by households, corporations, governments, insurance companies, and financial intermediaries more broadly.”

It is so sad to visualize that on one hand world assets cannot find proper investments, while on the other hand our local power plant investments can not find money to get started.

There is a great investment credibility problem in our local energy markets. We need to have a clear evaluation of this major problem starting from the annual investment requirements of our local market, clear figures of electricity supply/ demand in the local market, the capacity we will need in the future, and what we shall face if we do not initiate such investments.

In order to review the balance of electricity supply demand in Turkey, we look at the internet pages of a local Public Transmission company, and we come up with a Turkish Installed Capacity at 44,472.5 MWe as of November 2009.

We can also visualize that, on a month-by-month basis, installed capacity is lower in 2009 than in 2008. In 2008, installed capacity was 41817 MWe, and Peak load was 30842 MWe.

We understand that we had no such a big shortage problem in year 2008.

In 2009, our Installed Capacity was 2600 MW higher, but our demand peak was 4% lower than it was in 2008.

The hardest years for the Turkish system are the drought years since we have a high sensitivity due to the relatively high hydro capacity.

So we multiply the installed capacity by 4650 hours for higher scenarios and by 4500 for lower scenario; this is a rough approximation for capacity utilization.

Please do note that the system has the ability to achieve more than 5000 hours on average annually. If the resulting number is less than the expected demand, then it means the electricity generation system is under stress.

44472.5 MW x 4500 hours (average per year overall availability) = 200 TW-hours
44472.5 MW x 4650 hours = 206.8 TW-hours

Expected demand for 2009 is 194 TW-hours.
Expected demand for 2010 is 206.6 TW-hours.

So without any adding any additional capacity, the existing installed capacity should be enough until the end of 2010.

In summary, Turkey has almost 45,000 MWe installed capacity, though we did not exceed 36,000 MWe at peak hours in 2009.

The remaining portion is NOT available since they are not reliable – sources such as wind, solar, hydro, all renewable – or they are almost out of service, as in case of many old local thermal power plants, such as Hopa, Afsin- Elbistan-A.

Apart from periods of economic crisis, Turkey needs approximately a 6-8 percent increase per year in electricity output in order to keep the desired growth rate.

New investments require a project execution period of 2-4 years for natural gas-fired combined-cycle power plants, 1-2 years for wind, 5-7 years for hydro (ILISU?), and 7-20 years for nuclear.

In this period, money is allocated, but revenues are not generated before completion.

Every kw of power created costs approximately $1000 US Dollars on average. Combined-cycle plants cost a bit less, $500-$600 USD per kw, while thermal power plants cost around $2000 USD per kw. There is no average price per kw available for nuclear power plants.

Now let us do some simple arithmetic with a low end of 6% annual electricity generation increase for an available power capacity of 36K MWe:

36,000 Mw = 36,000,000 Kw
Minimum 6 percent increase for each year x 1000 US Dollar investment per Kwe
0.06 x 36m x 1000 = 2.16 billion US Dollars per year investment needed minimum

So we feel that the figure of $1 billion USD per year upfront becomes too prudent for a higher expectation of the growth rate. So who will finance such a big investment package??

Leading local financiers may say that it is easy for Turkish financial capability, but one should not be so sure about that.

Furthermore, nuclear power plants are NOT a solution to power shortages, since we do not know the exact time required for project execution period, and the final completion date.

It could take approximately between 7 to 20 years to complete a nuclear power plant at this time for many reasons, including legal battles, technology restraints, fabrication difficulties, financing limitations, and regional and international politics.

Blackouts in small regions are currently happening already in Turkey. Although people living in big cities like Istanbul, Ankara, etc. do not face these shortages, it is a reality of life in many towns.

Many of them are classified as power disorders, but those power disorders wander from one area to another in Anatolia. A power failure in one area is repaired (!) and soon after that repair another new power interruption occurs in a neighboring region.

There may be unexpected blackouts (like the one in Paris another in New York, sometime in 2005) due to unforeseen technical problems.

But according to optimistic public employees of our local Public Transmission Company, the local system has enough reserve capacity till the end of 2012 in their worst-case scenario.

The best-case scenario is that we end the prevailing electricity comfort in 2014 or 2015. But capacity projections always have worst-case flexibility to predict a serious problem in 3-5 years in time.

Hence, this projection likely reflects the delay between EMRA licensing and full electricity-producing operation.

EMRA licenses, which are issued after March 2009 and are not included in the worst-case scenario, could be generating electricity in 5 years time and could delay the situation to 2015-2016.

In our opinion, the ground for an electricity supply crisis has been forming gradually since the beginning of 2006.

We may unexpectedly encounter a power shortage crisis, and we turn a blind eye to the facts, in fact the culprits, while searching for other reasons as the cause.

Project financing is too difficult in Turkey, especially at this time of global financial turmoil. Public institutions have limited or almost no capability.

Local investments are generally realized by “corporate finance” methods. Local investors risk their own property in order to get proper "corporate financing" at reasonable interest rates, and payment terms.

In the past, we have realized energy power plant investments exceeding 4000 MW installed capacity. Those natural gas-firing cogeneration plants quickly pay for themselves and create more money for further investments in new plants.

However, we do not have the investment environment for “non-recourse” project finance to secure “off taker” contracts.

Therefore, it is too difficult to find the necessary project financing for mega projects such as nuclear plants and the plants in Afsin Elbistan. We have lost time in the past and continue to lose more and unable to recover fast in due time.

Turkey will need more local private financing and local contracting, local engineering, if applied. If an investment project does not create jobs for local engineering firms, if it does not create jobs for the local qualified workers, if it does not give contracting opportunities to local companies, then we do NOT need that project.

Your writer/speaker sincerely feels that our local private investors deserve all our support to complete new power plant investments, provided that they create jobs for the local engineers and jobs for the local qualified manpower.

Please do note that above forecast is your writer's humble estimation, and does not reflect opinions of any public or private institution. Your comments are always welcome.

--
Haluk Direskeneli, Ankara-based Energy Analyst

Recession slows Turkey's drive for coal-fired power- Reuters

ISTANBUL, March 11 (Reuters) - A rush to build coal-fired power stations in Turkey has stalled, brought low by last year's deep economic recession, environmental concerns and regulation, industry officials say.

Turkey's economy shrank 6 percent in 2009, but cheap imported coal could still drive the power-hungry economy once it returns to the sort of robust growth that saw output rise on average 6 percent a year between 2003 and 2008, they say.

Since 2004, the Turkish Energy Market Regulatory Authority, EPDK has issued 21 licenses for new privately owned coal power projects with a total generation capacity of 10,363 MW -- some 20 percent of the country's power needs.

"There was a huge demand, an 8 percent increase in power demand each year," said Osman Bulent Tor, a senior researcher at Tubitak Uzay, a technology research institute in Ankara.

Turkey had made major investments in natural gas but price rises and supply problems made that option less attractive.

Cheap, easily available high quality coal attracted new players such as Eren Holding, originally a textile company, ICDAS, which began life as a steelmaker, and construction firm Enka.

But with the economic crisis electricity demand stagnated and new power plants were suddenly less attractive. EPDK data shows only one of the planned new facilities -- operated by the conglomerate ICDAS at Canakkale on the Asian shore of the Dardanelles -- is in operation, and then only partially.

"Suddenly this global economic crisis happened, everybody stopped producing," said Robert Yildirim, chief executive of Yildirim Group, a conglomerate with interests in coal. "These projects were suddenly cancelled, put on the shelf."

Administrative hurdles have snared other developments. New coal plants are unpopular with local residents and green groups, and some proposals have run into problems with the environmental authorities.


INVESTMENT APPETITE

Bulent Yenal, financial affairs coordinator at Hattat Holding, said his company was awaiting the result of the environmental impact assessment on its power plant at Amasra on the Black Sea.

Others say government control of electricity distribution has discouraged investors.

"You aim to build a new generating plant, but the problem is whether the transmission line is available," said Mohammad Shahidehpour, a U.S. academic at the Illinois Institute of Technology who has studied electricity restructuring in Turkey.

"Both transmission and distribution are completely regulated, in the sense that the government manages all of that," he said.

Despite the problems, analyst Haluk Direskeneli said he thought the plants would be built, driving up demand for thermal coal beyond the 20.37 million tonnes the Turkish Statistical Institute says Turkey imported in 2009.

"Global crises do not slow down investment appetite if there is real demand for more energy consumption, as in the case of Turkey," he said in an e-mail.

"Intelligent companies, such as Koc, Sabanci, Zorlu, Akenerji, Enka, Gama, Oyak, continue to work on strategic planning on energy investments," he said.

Some projects have indeed made headway. Sencer Aras, a project co-ordinator at Eren Holding, says construction was progressing at its 1360 MW project in the Zonguldak region on the Black Sea.

"The first unit we started with, it is almost complete," he added. "The second unit, which is 600 MW, will be ready in June or July. The last unit will be in operation at the end of the year."

(Editing by Sue Thomas)

Tunchbilek Thermal Power Plant

Dear Colleagues,

Total installed capacity of Tunçbilek-Kütahya Thermal Power plant is 430 MW. The annual availability of the power plant is around 35%. The coal reserves exist for a new additional capacity of 2x150 MW after privatisation.

There are 5 units in TunçBilek Thermal Power plant in Turkey.

1st and 2nd units were built by DurrWerke Germany in 1956 each with 24 MWe steam turbines by AEG of Germany.

3rd unit was constructed by SGP of Austria in 1966 with 65 MWe steam turbine by Elin of Austria.

The 4th and 5th units were delivered by Elektrim of Poland in years 1978-1979 each with 150 Mwe steam turbines by KWU of Germany.

In year 2002, Tunçbilek Thermal power plant administration opened an international tender to replace the old existing electrostatic precipitations (E/P or dust collectors) of their 4th and 5th units each with 150 MWe electricity output.

These 4th and 5th steam boilers were firing poor quality 2200 kcal/kg LHV coal with approximately 40% ash and 20% moisture from nearby local coal mines.

Earlier the E/P supplier company (Czech- Slovak?) received the order but in the end they could not meet the required dust collection requirements at stack exit less than 250 Milligrams per Nm3 dry basis.

The first Contract was cancelled. It is later retendered but this time to meet new stack dust emission requirement to be less than 100 Milligrams per Nm3 dry basis in accordance with new 2004 environmental regulations.

However since the first contract for 4th and 5th units was cancelled, the administration applied to the local courts for compensation.

The first contract price is not valid since the delivery could not meet the first requirement to have stack emission less than 250 Milligrams per Nm3 dry basis.

The second contract will not be comparable with the first since it is in compliance with new emission requirements which is set to be less than 100 Milligrams per Nm3 dry basis.

Please do note that in near future that figure will be less than 30 milligrams per Nm3 dry basis in accordance with new EU legislations.

This situation is not the first, and will not be the last in E/P replacement contracts in our power plants.

We have a similar story in Catalagzi-B thermal power plant where the original supplier has received the E/P replacement order without competitive tendering and in the end they could not meet the required emission limitations. Contract is cancelled. The case is in the local court. We have Kangal and Yenikoy E/P replacement contracts ongoing. We are not sure if they will be meeting the required emission standards. We have new Yatagan and Soma E/P replacement tenders soon.

TuncBilek thermal power plant is too old, and getting older every day. Its pulverized coal firing technology is outdated for the available low LHV local lignite coal. Its dust collectors are not sufficient to meet new EU emission regulations. There is no Flue gas desulphurization. The new ESP units will not help since there is no sufficient space to install them. New rehab works will not work in the long term operation. Moreover it is almost at the city center.

Please do note that first three units are not in operation. They are too old. Last two units need ESP for operation. Since we do not install the new ESP units in accordance with the new EU regulations, it is risky to run them. In the end we have a plant with no electricity generation, waiting idle for the ESP units to be installed. We have a downrated capacity but not in operation.

So the best thing to do is to close the plant, sell the equipment at scrap value, dismantle the plant and make the vacated plant space a green park for the public. Since we have available local coal, we can install a new thermal power plant far from city center preferably at a remote land, with capacity 4x150 MWe with new technology, CFB or even IGCC or CCS with full compliance to environmental regulations provided that we create jobs for local qualified workers, and more jobs for Turkish engineers and local contractors.

It is now your Sunday Puzzle. What should be the decision for appropriate compensation in Tuncbilek 4th and 5th units for the first contract as of year 2010?  Have a nice weekend.
--
Haluk Direskeneli,  Hamburg based Energy Analyst

Nuclear Power Plant in Sinop Turkey

Dear Colleagues,

Reuters announced today that the Turkish state power company Elektrik Uretim (EUAS) will sign a nuclear energy cooperation agreement with South Korea's Kepco, a Turkish energy ministry source said on Wednesday.

The agreement will cover cooperation with South Korea for a planned nuclear power plant on the Black Sea at Sinop.

Construction of nuclear infrastructure could start in the short-term, said South Korean Deputy Prime Minister Young Hak Kim, speaking at a Turkish-South Korean business conference in Istanbul.

Turkey wants to build two nuclear power plants to reduce dependence on foreign energy imports and cover a looming shortfall in electricity for an economy that grew by an average of six percent a year between 2003 and 2008.

Ankara's nuclear plans suffered a setback late last year when a Turkish court annulled a 2008 tender, won by Russia's Atomstroiexport, Inter Rao and Turkish Park Teknik, citing problems with the pricing of electricity from the proposed plant.

Ankara has been in talks with Moscow since January over a possible intergovernmental agreement that would hand Russian firms the licence to build a separate plant at Mersin on Turkey's Mediterranean coast.

Numerous Turkish and foreign firms have also expressed an interest in any nuclear tender.

Half of Turkey's power plants are fired by natural gas, of which Turkey has few reserves, and the country faces a chronic power shortage without annual investment of between $3-5 billion, analysts say.

The government sees atomic power meeting 20 percent of Turkey's power needs by 2030. Turkey has cancelled four previous attempts to build a nuclear plant, beginning in the late 1960s, due to the high cost and environmental concerns.

It is your writer's sincere feeling that the ongoing Nuclear Power Plant Construction Policy is not appropriate nor correct.

Turkey is simply not ready for such a huge project with lack of qualified personnel. The lack of qualified local personnel is one angle ignored, but another one is the mismanaged de-grading/ aging power plants already operational. We can't even operate nor rehabilitate the existing thermal power plants properly.

Most of the Turkish contracting firms are not capable of anything but laying the groundwork of the plant site, and handle simple mechanical site installations. It is our feeling that our public employees do not have experience for project management and contract management of such gigantic project.

These missing issues on insurance, necessary credit financing will give unnecessary and unfair commercial advantage to Russian and Korean parties over reputable western counterparts with proven international references.

Russian and Korean parties do not care these commercial details with luxury of full government backing.

Russian, and Korean references are not so proven technologies nor the latest forth generation in the commercial international markets. Russian and Korean companies might come to dominate the nuclear energy sector, a sector that was supposed to reduce Turkey's dependency on overseas resources.

They may have other strategic expectations, such as staying at the stronghold strategic seaports of Turkey, Akkuyu on the Mediterranean coast, close to strategic MiddleEast conflict zones, Sinop on the North at BlackSea coast,

The overnight contract decision is too short for a comprehensive evaluation and careful risk analysis for a nuclear power station in that size and output. Hence the contract documents are not made yet public, and the information available is also not so commercially sound.

These are all state secrets, and there is no transparency. We need to be too careful on what we are going the get in the end. We may not be pleased with the end product.

Nuclear Power plant contracts which would be a sort of “I did it my way” scheme will be signed between government to government agreements. However parliament approval sessions is expected until the general election which is 17 months ahead from today.

Your comments are always welcome

--
Haluk Direskeneli, Ankara based Energy Analyst