(Reuters) – Slovenian lawmakers on Thursday voted to cancel a referendum on building a new nuclear plant after environmental groups and experts filed complaints questioning its legality at the constitutional court.
The new JEK 2 plant was due to be constructed next to Slovenia’s existing Krsko nuclear power plant, which is jointly owned by Slovenia and Croatia and meets about 20% of the electrical energy demand in Slovenia and 16% in Croatia.
Sixty-nine MPs in the 90-seat parliament voted to cancel the public referendum, one was against and one abstained from voting. The referendum had been due to take place on Nov. 24.
Earlier this month, Slovenia’s parliament decided to call the referendum with the question: “Do you support the implementation of the JEK 2 project, which together with other low-carbon sources will ensure a stable supply of electricity?”
But public criticism of both the question and the project led the parliamentary groups to withdraw their support for the referendum.
Lawmakers said there were valid doubts about whether voters could make an informed, autonomous and responsible decision on such an issue.
“I am personally satisfied that there will be no referendum,” Slovenia’s President Natasa Pirc Musar was quoted as saying by state STA news agency. “I will always emphasize that significantly more information is needed for such a referendum.”
But observers say the cancellation of the referendum next month does not mean it might not take place at a later time.
The government has said it will work on the preparation of a special law on JEK 2, and that the state-owned GEN Energija will continue working on the development of the project, which has been estimated to cost between 9.6 billion euros ($10.37 billion) and 15.4 billion euros.
Slovenia and Croatia agreed in 2023 to prolong the lifespan of the Krsko plant by 20 years until 2043. The thermal power capacity of Krsko is 1,994 Megawatts (MW) with net power output of 696 MW.
($1 = 0.9261 euros)
(Reporting by Daria Sito-Sucic; Editing by Christina Fincher)
Comments