Kept in the dark

In “Core Issue” (The Bulletin, Vol.12, No. 4, Winter 2003-2004) Alexandru R. Savulescu quotes Mr. Ioan Jelev from the Romanian Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Waters and Environment on the public hearings in Bulgaria on the environmental impact assessment (EIA) of Unit 2 of the Cernavoda nuclear power plant. Having been involved on the Bulgarian side from the beginning to end, I cannot at all agree with Mr. Jelev’s statement that “the hearings were in accordance with the Espoo UNECE Convention on environmental impact assessment in a transboundary context.”

Bulgarian civil society organisations demanded full EIA documentation in local (Bulgarian) language to be made available, not only in Sofia but also in Bulgaria’s northeast, parts of which are within 100 km of Cernavoda. We also insisted, in line with the convention the two countries have signed, that public hearings be held in Sofia, Varna, Dobrich, Silistra, Rousse and if there is an interest — in other relevant towns in the region after sufficient time for the public to get acquainted with the EIA papers.

Neither of these requests was fulfilled. As nuclear power is quite a sensitive issue in Bulgaria nowadays, the Ministry of Environment and Waters in Sofia was not so keen to hold hearings throughout the country anyway. Romanian officials definitely rejected any possibility to submit full EIA documentation or organise any public hearings in Bulgaria. Moreover, they consistently insisted that a full EIA could not be delivered to Bulgaria due to the commercial sensitivity and issues related to national security. Thus the Bulgarian public was only allowed partial access to the submitted EIA documentation, only in Sofia, in English, and within a very restricted timeframe. This was a drastic violation of the rights of the Bulgarian population that lives within 100 km of Cernavoda to know about the construction in their immediate neighborhood and express their opinion.

Petko Kovatchev
Center for Environmental Information and Education, Sofia

EU accession — handle with care

It seems almost inevitable that joining the EU will have a very serious effect on the culture, traditions and environment of the CEE countries. British and other Western companies see CEE as a source of income. In essence, CEE is an area to be exploited rather than assisted. Industrial and emerging industrial countries cannot support their human populations without exploiting (external) renewable and non-renewable resources. By definition sustainability requires the human population of the world to survive on the “interest” — i.e. the overproduction — of renewable resources. In the Reith Lectures transmitted by the BBC, the British architect Sir Richard Rogers dwelt at length on the topic of the sustainable city. This concept is promulgated by many others, including ecologists. The fact of the matter is that a city (or any other urban area) is dependant upon the importation of energy, food or water supply (amongst others) and the city would collapse in a matter of hours without these. The same principle applies to the whole of the West. It is politically unacceptable for Western politicians to advocate, say, a 20-30 percent reduction in the standard of living, which will still not be sustainable. Equally, it is unacceptable for CEE and other politicians not to promise parity with the west and therefore an increase in the use of resources.

John G Kelcey, Czech Republic

The Forum welcomes your comments, opinions, reactions and news regarding environment and sustainable development in Central and Eastern Europe and the world.

Make your voice be heard at greenhorizon.rec.org or send a letter to the editor at letters@greenhorizon.rec.org. Green Horizonreserves the right to edit selected letters for size and language before publishing.