In northwestern Belarus, just 40 kilometers from Vilnius, two massive cooling towers dominate the landscape—the Ostrovets Nuclear Power Plant (BelNPP). On the surface, nuclear energy is often presented as a low-carbon solution, but this specific plant raises serious safety and environmental concerns. Lithuania and international experts have repeatedly warned that the project was implemented with severe violations of safety standards, posing a direct threat to both human life and the environment.

A Dangerous Location

The choice of Ostrovets as the site for BelNPP defies fundamental nuclear safety recommendations. Following the Fukushima disaster, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) advised against building nuclear plants within 100 kilometers of major cities. Yet, Belarus constructed BelNPP a mere 40 kilometers from Vilnius, the capital of a neighboring country. This decision places up to a third of Lithuania’s population, along with residents of the Belarusian Grodno region, within a high-risk zone in the event of a nuclear accident.

If an accident were to occur, millions of people could find themselves in a potential exclusion zone. The consequences would be catastrophic, not only for Belarus but also for Lithuania, Latvia, and Poland. Given the historical memory of Chernobyl, where radioactive contamination spread indiscriminately across borders, the international community cannot afford to ignore these risks.

A History of Technical Failures and Cover-ups

From the very beginning, BelNPP’s construction was marred by technical failures and a troubling lack of transparency. In 2016, a reactor vessel was dropped from a height of four meters, a critical failure that should have led to thorough investigations. Instead, the Belarusian authorities, in conjunction with Rosatom—the Russian state-owned corporation responsible for the plant—chose to replace the damaged vessel in secret, avoiding public scrutiny.

Additional incidents, including structural collapses and transformer explosions, further highlight the plant’s questionable safety culture. Despite repeated calls for transparency, Belarusian authorities have failed to implement all the safety recommendations from the EU’s stress tests. Neighboring countries, fearing the worst, refuse to purchase electricity generated by BelNPP, viewing it as an unacceptable risk.

Environmental Risks: Water and Radioactive Waste

Beyond the immediate nuclear risks, BelNPP also poses significant environmental threats. The plant relies on water from the Neris/Viliya River for cooling, a waterway already facing ecological damage from deepening projects. Increased water temperatures due to the plant’s operations could further disrupt the river’s ecosystem, affecting biodiversity and water quality for communities downstream.

Furthermore, nuclear plants produce radioactive waste that remains hazardous for hundreds of years. As of now, Belarus has not provided a clear or transparent plan for nuclear waste disposal. The most probable scenario is that spent fuel will be stored on-site, turning Ostrovets into a long-term radioactive storage facility. Poorly managed routine operations, let alone potential accidents, could expose the region to radiation hazards.

Legal Violations and Calls for Action

In 2019, the countries under the Espoo Convention—an international treaty on environmental impact assessments—determined that Belarus violated procedural requirements by selecting Ostrovets as a nuclear site without proper consultation. This ruling effectively delegitimized the plant’s construction on legal grounds.

Given these violations, the international community must take a firm stance. A moratorium should be placed on any expansion of BelNPP until all safety concerns are addressed. Additional reactors were planned, but until full compliance with safety protocols is verified, further development must be halted.

The Global Risk of a Regional Disaster

Nuclear energy is a matter of national sovereignty, but when a nuclear reactor threatens neighboring countries, those nations have a right to intervene. The Chernobyl disaster showed that radioactive contamination does not respect borders. If an incident occurs at BelNPP, the radioactive cloud could reach Vilnius, Minsk, Riga, Warsaw, and beyond. This is a shared threat requiring a shared solution.

Steps Towards Safety and Sustainability

1. International Monitoring: Independent experts from the IAEA, the EU, and Belarusian civil society must have permanent access to BelNPP. Transparency is the first step toward accountability.
2. Implementation of Safety Measures: All EU stress-test recommendations must be fulfilled, including additional cooling systems, equipment upgrades, and personnel training at the highest global standards.
3. Consideration of Plant Closure: If BelNPP cannot be brought up to proper safety standards, the possibility of shutting it down must be seriously discussed. Lithuania decommissioned its Ignalina NPP as part of its EU accession, prioritizing safety over economic gains. Belarus must also consider safety above political and economic factors.
4. Investment in Renewable Energy: Belarus justified BelNPP’s construction with claims of energy independence. However, true energy independence lies in renewables—solar, wind, and bioenergy. If the billions spent on BelNPP had been directed toward solar farms in Belarus’s contaminated Polesia lands or wind energy projects in the Grodno hills, the country could have developed a cleaner, safer, and more sustainable energy future. 

The Bottom Line: We Cannot Ignore BelNPP

Ostrovets NPP must not be left without scrutiny. This is not merely a political dispute—it is a moral responsibility to safeguard future generations. The world cannot afford another nuclear catastrophe, and the time to act is now. Whether through enforcing safety protocols, halting expansion, or shifting toward renewable energy, decisive action must be taken.

 

 

 

 

Credits

Shutterstock

Unsplash

Google Map