The Ministry of the Environment, Climate and Energy keeps giving the impression that it does not want the construction of the second reactor of the Krško Nuclear Power Plant to happen, while at the same time promoting solar “solutions”. The reason for this is probably that renewable energy sources (RES) are more profitable. Let us remind you of Prime Minister Golob’s lobby, which seeks to boost panel sales at the expense of the taxpayers.
Experts have long pointed out that it is nuclear energy that can provide Slovenia with a stable electricity supply, while building solar power plants is “throwing money away” for Slovenia. The same applies to wind farms.
A user of the social network X, Jaka Šoba, wrote: “On the 16th of October, Aleksander Mervar reportedly presented the following:
A future with the second reactor of the Krško Nuclear Power Plant:
– the second reactor: 19,5 billion euros
– grid, storage, system: 4,9 billion euros
= the total: 24,4 billion euros
A future with renewable energy sources:
– capacity for 100 percent renewable energy sources: 34,2 billion euros
– grid, storage, system: 32,5 billion euros
= the total: 66,7 billion euros
And this is the reason for the Ministry of the Environment, Climate and Energy’s favouritism of the renewable energy sources solution!”
So, a future with the second reactor of the Krško Nuclear Power Plant would cost Slovenians a total of 24.4 billion euros, while a future with renewable energy sources would cost us 66.7 billion euros. For those who make their money from selling panels and the like, the second solution is undoubtedly worthwhile, as it also includes the installation of solar power plants. This is why Minister Bojan Kumer‘s misleading claims are not at all surprising.
At the beginning of the year, the Minister of the Environment, Climate and Energy stated that an investment such as the one required by the second reactor would “burden each Slovenian household with between 17,000 euros and 18,000 euros.” In connection with this, he asked: “Would it not be better to give this money to households, so that each can provide its own source of energy, and so we could decarbonise the whole of Slovenia?”
State Secretary Tina Sršen from the same ministry has also been working hard to demonise nuclear energy and to advertise the solar panels. The latter are part of her family business, which has been extensively reported in the media.
And here is the Director of the ELES Company that ensures the transmission of electricity, Aleksander Mervar‘s answer to our journalist’s question: “Yes, it is an investment, but it does not take into account the operation and maintenance costs. If I take that into account, then the Krško Nuclear Power Plant+the second reactor scenario is worse, but still better than relying on renewable energy sources 100 percent. In the figure, 100 percent renewable energy sources is not the same as 100 percent renewable energy sources in the National Energy and Climate Plan 2024. I have worked on ten different scenarios, these are two.”
Domen Mezeg
