You're reading: ​Westinghouse’s Kirst sees nuclear power as Ukraine’s best route to energy independence

When Russia launched its war against Ukraine nearly two years ago, Kyiv's dependence on Moscow was exposed in many ways.

One of the biggest areas of vulnerability involved Ukraine’s 15 nuclear reactors, which generate 60 percent of the nation’s electricity. Russia’s Rosatom was supplying nuclear fuel to all but two reactors. The remainder of the fuel came from by U.S.-based Westinghouse.

With the onset of war, Ukraine moved to lessen its dependence on Russia and signed an agreement with Westinghouse to supply nuclear fuel to up to six reactors by 2020,. Moreover, if Russia should ever stop supplying the nuclear fuel, Westinghouse has agreed to supply nuclear fuel to all 15 reactors in Ukraine.

It’s no surprise that Michael. E. Kirst, Westinghouse’s regional vice president for Europe, the Middle East and Africa, is promoting nuclear energy for Ukraine in 2016. Westinghouse is the largest nuclear fuel supplier in America and Europe and most reactors in Europe are Westinghouse-designed, including almost all of France’s 58 reactors.

Mike Kirst

Michael. E. Kirst, Westinghouse’s regional vice president for Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

But in this case, Kirst said, what’s good for Westinghouse is also good for Ukraine, especially if the nation can make the investments to improve the efficiency of its nuclear power plants.

“These reactors are only working 70 percent of available time vs the industry average of 90 percent,” Kirst said in a recent interview with the Kyiv Post. “That 20 percent gap is generation over a year’s period that is equivalent to 2,000 megawatts or two nuclear reactors.”

It’s also a bargain, he said, requiring an investment of $300 million compared to 10 times that amount for a new nuclear reactor which would take at least five years to come online.

“The cost and return on investment for Energoatom is self-evident,” Kirst said, referring to Ukraine’s nuclear power agency. “Increased generation will lead to increasing profits which can be reinvested in additional upgrades or new reactors. Our view is this should be the priority. It provides immediate assistance to Ukraine.”

Finding the money, however, is another matter. The Ukrainian government could provide it, but hasn’t. So could international institutions. Unfortunately, Kirst said, the U.S. Export-Import Bank is closed to Ukraine. “This is the primary financing arm for all large capital projects,” he said.

The long-term solution, Kirst said, is for Ukraine to raise electricity tariffs so that producers can do more than simply cover their costs, which he described as the existing situation.

“Eventually tariffs on power supplies need to increase to meet investment needs,” Kirst said. “It’s never been doing that. That’s really the long-term vision and strategy. The unfortunate part is that Energoatomhas not been getting the necessary tariffs from their own supplies to pay for the upgrades themselves.”

Westinghouse needed 15 years of “painstaking” negotiations to enter the Ukrainian market and cut into the business of RosAtom, the Russian state-owned nuclear power provider.

KIrst said Westinghouse’s progress was slowed by political reasons and “significant propaganda against the common practice throughout the world of having two suppliers in providing fuel in the same reactor. This occurs in all other markets except Russian-designed reactors.”

The company conducted a largely successful public relations campaign to “prove our fuel is safe, efficient and economic,” Kirst said.

Coal accounts for roughly 30 percent of Ukraine’s electricity generation and hydropower another 10 percent, Kirst said, making nuclear power the king for the foreseeable future.

“Hydro is not expandable. It’s contingent on the water supply that is available in the country,” Kirst said. “Coal is increasingly expensive.”

Renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, “have a role” but work “only 33 percent of the time on average. Their efficiency is by far the worst of all alternatives. Their power needs to be backed up by another supply of power, which is usually gas.”

And dependency on natural gas — especially imported Russian natural gas — is exactly what Ukraine is trying to eliminate.

“For a relatively small amount of money, increasing the efficiency and capacity of reactors in Ukraine should be the first priority,” Kirst said.

Westinghouse is providing fuel for two reactors in the South Ukraine complex, north of Mykolayiv and 150 kilometers north of Russian-occupied Crimea, and will go into four reactors in the Zaporyzhia complex, “the largest nuclear facility in Europe.”

South Ukraine is an energy source for Crimea. “The irony is American-made nuclear fuel is supplying electricity to Crimea,” Kirst notes.

Kyiv Post chief editor Brian Bonner can be reached at [email protected].