"We curse the peaceful atom"
In 1989-90, something unthinkable by today's standards happened: residents of several regions halted the construction of nuclear power plants, which by then were in their final stages.
How did this happen? Were those who opposed it wrong? Is the creation of nuclear power plants justified in modern Russia? What could replace them, and why aren't alternatives widely embraced by the authorities? And what does Nemtsov have to do with it?
The silence exploded
The Tatarstan Nuclear Power Plant (TNPP) is one of the projects that was fiercely opposed. Protests in Tatarstan were preceded by the Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident, which shook the country. Then came the devastating 1988 earthquake in Armenia, where the nuclear power plant survived, but had it not, something terrible could have happened. To top it all off, there were a series of tremors in Tatarstan itself in 1989, near the nuclear power plant under construction.
All this frightened people and sparked protest. But the main factor was, perhaps, the changes in society at the time. Democracy was young and bold. For the first time in many years, people felt they had a say, and this feeling propelled them forward.
At the beginning of the Tatarstan Nuclear Power Plant's construction, no one doubted the project would be realized. It was stated that Tatarstan needed electricity for new large enterprises. A site was chosen—40 kilometers from Nizhnekamsk, near the village of Kamskiye Polyany, on the site of the village of Belyakhcha, which was evacuated and later demolished due to the nuclear power plant. The project envisioned the construction of four power units with a total capacity of 4000 MW.
In February 1982, after two years of preparatory work, the major construction project officially began. "The silence of the snow-covered surroundings exploded with the roar of earthmoving machines," wrote the newspaper Sovetskaya Tataria. And on the site of the village of Kamskiye Polyany, 8 kilometers from the future nuclear power plant, construction began on a "new socialist city of power engineers" for 40 residents. Private homes and gardens were demolished, and residents announced the that the city will be closed, with “Moscow supplies.”
After the Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident, despite all the fears, construction in Tatarstan continued vigorously. Artists dedicated paintings to it. Construction peaked in 1988. By that time, 288 million rubles in capital investment (in the prices of the time) had been spent, and 96 million rubles worth of construction and installation work had been completed.
By 1989, construction had begun on the reactor compartments and turbine halls of the first and second power units, and excavations had been completed for units 3 and 4. Administrative buildings, a railway, a fire station, and a 16-kilometer-long dam for the plant's artificial reservoir were built.
Kamskiye Polyany was granted urban-type settlement status and developed with high-rise buildings. Nuclear specialists arrived from all over the country. The launch of the first power unit was scheduled for 1992.
“Nuclear scientists - get out of the Kama glades”
Meanwhile, Tatarstan was being shaken. Several small earthquakes occurred in the second half of the 1980s. In 1989, tremors were felt in at least January, April, and November. "The bed shifted, the windows rattled, it took my breath away," have described Residents of Naberezhnye Chelny, 60 km from the nuclear power plant, were unaware of what was happening. The horrific images of the devastated Spitak in Armenia were fresh in their memories. Some residents of Tatarstan were gripped by panic, and rumors of an impending strong earthquake spread.
More and more people spoke out against the launch of the station. The first rallies completed in Kazan in 1987. By 1989, a powerful anti-nuclear movement had formed.
Kazan geologists stated that the Kama deep fault runs through the region, and active tectonic processes are ongoing. Kazan University professor Boris Burov called the nuclear power plant project "baseless and poorly executed," the construction "clumsy," and considered the recent earthquakes a dire warning. Environmentalists declared that nuclear power plants are uneconomical, unprofitable, and produce hazardous waste.
The nuclear power plant construction zone, where large-scale production facilities, including chemical ones, are concentrated, was called a "powder keg." It was noted that the nuclear power plant is located at the confluence of major rivers, downstream of a hydroelectric dam. An accident at the nuclear power plant or a dam failure would lead to a catastrophe.
Komsomolskaya Pravda, a newspaper with a circulation of 12,5 million, covered the issue three times that year. Roundtables, signature drives, pickets, and rallies were held.
In September 1989, a protest march took place from Kazan to Kamskiye Polyany. One of the organizers was physicist Albert Garapov, chairman of the Tatarstan Anti-Nuclear Society. Participants protested not only against the Tatarstan Nuclear Power Plant, but also against the Bashkir Nuclear Power Plant, which was also under construction at the time.
On September 30, march participants held rallies in Naberezhnye Chelny and Nizhnekamsk. They carried posters reading "Nuclear workers out of Kamskiye Polyany," "We demand an end to the criminal construction of the Tatar Nuclear Power Plant," "We curse the peaceful atom," and peace signs.
The newspaper "KAMAZ Worker" described the participants as follows: members of the "Perestroika" club, the Tatar Public Center (designated an "extremist organization" in 2022 and liquidated by court order), "greens," "some guys who looked like hippies," USSR People's Deputy Yuri Kotov, and representatives of party committees and the district committee. The authorities "did not interfere in any way" with the rally, the newspaper noted.
One of the march's participants was Svetlana, a resident of Tatarstan; for her, it was a memorable event.
"A friend, an environmental activist, told me about the march. I was categorically against the construction of a nuclear power plant—we all knew what happened in Chernobyl."
At first, I wasn't planning on going on the march, as it involved walking a long distance—I was afraid I wouldn't be able to handle it. But then I decided I couldn't stay away from such an important cause. In the end, we mostly traveled by bus.
We arrived in Kamskiye Polyany, where activists had set up a tent camp. A meeting with Moscow nuclear workers took place there, right outside, in the open air. A small area with microphones was set up, and there were many journalists. The well-groomed Muscovites had to fend off questions. Their arguments sounded unconvincing, and it seemed they hadn't expected such an onslaught. Everyone stuck to their guns. Afterward, detailed articles appeared in republican and national media. When the construction was frozen, we were overjoyed at such a victory. I'm still proud to have gone to that march. I sometimes cite it as an example of what's possible during democratic change.
During the march, the idea of holding a nationwide "warning" strike was born. Leaflets calling for it were distributed. The strike took place on October 20th. It's difficult to assess its scale today, but according to members of the Anti-Nuclear Society, it forced the government to act. On October 26th, the USSR Council of Ministers decided to halt construction of the Tatar Nuclear Power Plant. Construction was halted in April 1990.
In 1992, the building was unfinished handed over KAMAZ, which attempted to establish its own production there under the leadership of former nuclear power plant director Farit Fayrushin, but the plans never came to fruition.
The devastation is total chaos
The nuclear fuel hadn't arrived in time, so the facility posed no danger. The unfinished building became a favorite haunt for stalkers, hosting annual themed games. "Absolutely mind-blowing. I was here before it was scrapped, and it felt like a full-on quest," "5 stars, absolutely stunning, what a mess, absolutely amazing!"—these are the comments on Google Maps.
According to those who visited this place, the nuclear power plant was not guarded by anyone, therefore total devastationIn 2017, in the group Tatar Nuclear Power Plant On VKontakte they wrote that “thousands of dump trucks are taking away sand [of which the dam is made] every day, someone is selling it all off,” and the nuclear power plant itself “has already been dismantled piece by piece, all the scrap metal has been taken away, someone is making billions selling all this stuff.”
Fuel didn't arrive in time, but people did. By 1990, Kamskiye Polyany's population, according to various estimates, ranged from 12 to 17. Construction ceased, the people were no longer needed, and there was no work. Those who remained survived as best they could. The settlement became a depressed area for many years and a problem for Tatarstan. Attempts were made to create jobs here—for example, at the instigation of the republic's government, a gambling zone with a casino—"Tatarstan's Las Vegas"—was opened, but three years later it was forced to close due to a new federal law. Now Kamskiye Polyany has an industrial park, where local authorities are luring investors. Many locals work shifts in other cities.
Many people still regret the NPP's failure to be completed and believe that environmentalists misled the people of Tatarstan. For example, former employees of the plant. Alexey now lives in Nizhnekamsk and still speaks with resentment about the protests of those years. The young nuclear worker came to work at the NPP on assignment, full of hope and focused on career advancement. When his dreams were dashed, he stayed in Tatarstan because he had already started a family and never worked in his field again.
The KAMAZ Museum published excerpts from a book by Yevgeny Batenchuk, the head of the Kamgesenergostroy enterprise and a leading figure in the republic at the time. Under his leadership, KAMAZ, Naberezhnye Chelny, and, later, the Tatar Nuclear Power Plant were built.
"Not only I, but also many experts, share the opinion that people were misled, and that significant economic damage was inflicted on our country under the guise of environmental protection. I am confident that we will soon remember with regret this ill-conceived (and perhaps even maliciously planned) action and will change the situation in the energy sector. <> We, who spoke out against the pseudo-ecologists, were not published—for some reason, pluralism and democracy worked in the same direction—destructively."
The issue of resuming construction of the nuclear power plant has been raised several times. In 2013, it was included in the government's list of nuclear power plants planned for construction or expansion by 2030. In 2016, the project supported Chairman of the Tatarstan Parliament. Meanwhile, the head of the parliamentary committee on economics, Rafis Burganov notedWhile the republic doesn't have an energy shortage, "the problem is where to put our energy." Later federal government documents make no mention of plans to recreate the project.
The Anti-Nuclear Society of Tatarstan held protests again stockAnd continues to do so regularly. The next picket will be held on April 27—against Rosatom's plans. build In Tatarstan, an experimental nuclear power plant for hydrogen production costing 300 billion rubles.
"Atomophobes" or good fellows?
In 1990, a few months after construction of the Tatarstan Nuclear Power Plant ceased, construction of the similar Bashkir Nuclear Power Plant was halted. This, too, was due to public pressure and protests. Due to "atomophobia," as говорил Vladimir Dmitriev, director of the BashNPP, said: "The USSR State Committee for Environmental Protection reported to the USSR Council of Ministers at the time that it was impossible to "construct the BashNPP using a design developed on the basis of outdated regulatory documents and without taking into account the results of an environmental impact assessment." Later, another reason was cited: a lack of funding amid the crisis and collapse of the Soviet Union. By that time, the plant had already been under construction for 10 years, along with the 16-strong settlement of Agidel, a nuclear workers' settlement (now a city).
Unlike in Tatarstan, the unfinished construction was mothballed and guarded. And the issue of continuing the project was raised much more frequently. The republic's leadership even reached an agreement with Rosenergoatom on the possible resumption of construction; in 2010, signed cooperation agreement. But no specific decisions were made.
Residents of Ufa have spoken Environmentalists opposed the renewal, arguing that the region was producing too much electricity.
In 2013, the cost of all buildings of the unfinished station was assessed 20-30 billion rubles. The authorities have repeatedly tried to somehow use these areas. Now plan include Agidel in the Alga special economic zone.
The Chernobyl disaster also halted the construction of Unit 5 of the Kursk Nuclear Power Plant. It was designed to use the same reactor as the one at Chernobyl. It was supposed to be completed and launched in 1992, but was put on hold. In 2012, Rosatom finally I refuse from the construction completion plans. The power unit's readiness, according to various sources, ranged from 70 to 90%.
Andrey Ozharovsky, an expert with the Radioactive Waste Safety program, believes that the people who succeeded in halting the nuclear power plant's construction are doing a great job.
"Thanks to them, we avoided enormous problems. We reduced the risk of radiation accidents and disasters. The plants were planned to be built using the extremely outdated VVER-1000 design, developed in the 1960s, which doesn't meet either post-Chernobyl or post-Fukushima requirements, no matter what Rosatom claims."
Even if accidents and disasters had not occurred, the operation of a nuclear power plant would inevitably generate enormous amounts of radioactive waste. At the end of their operational lifespans, which would now be approaching, these nuclear power plants would become enormous dumps of radioactive waste. Dismantling and decommissioning a nuclear power plant is an extremely expensive procedure.
Nuclear boilers, the first referendum and Nemtsov
In 1990, the Voronezh Nuclear Power Plant, which had been under construction within the city limits since 1983, was mothballed. It was intended to be the first of its kind in the world and could provide 80% of Voronezh's heating and hot water needs. However, after Chernobyl, environmental unrest erupted, leading to public debate. walked for several months at various venues: universities, community centers, and public squares. And then, in 1990, the first city festival in Russia took place. referendum, in which 96% of voters opposed the plant. One of the initiators of the referendum was Stanislav Kadmensky, head of the Department of Nuclear Physics at Voronezh State University. The outcome of the vote was largely determined by the position of him and other Voronezh scientists, residents recall. Kadmensky has not backed down from his position even years later.
That same year, the Voronezh Council of People's Deputies halted construction of the facility, which was 65% complete.
The station's unusual building became a legendary unfinished building. It was called a "monument to democracy," and there were proposals to turn it into major cultural center and hold contemporary art exhibitions there, or open a rock climbing center and aquaparkBut in 2020, the "monument to democracy" started demolishing, and the dome blew up - symbolic.
A similar fate befell the second nuclear power plant, the Gorky station. It, too, was nearly completed. In 1988, public support began to call for construction to be halted. Articles appeared in the local press, demonstrations and rallies took place, and calls for a referendum were made. Physicist Boris Nemtsov became involved in the environmental movement. This is what led him into politics. Here's how Nemtsov came to be. recalled that time:
"The Communists decided to build a nuclear boiler plant. That is, they would install a reactor, pump water through it, and the hot water would flow under enormous pressure to heat the city. The very idea seemed utterly insane to me. Not because I'm against nuclear power—as a physicist, I can't be—but because I thought it was absurd to combine high technology with rotten public utilities. Sakharov was also very much against it, saying it was absurd, that nothing like it existed anywhere in the world. It was an experiment on a city with a population of one and a half million.
"Mom came and said, 'Son, our city is going to explode, let's act.' But what should we do? It was still the Soviet system, the communists. Mom said, 'You're a scientist, write a letter to the newspaper about why you're against this nuclear boiler plant.' I wrote a letter to the newspaper 'Nizhny Novgorod Worker.' They published it, which surprised me. But what surprised me even more was that I received thousands of responses from people. They started coming to my institute, waiting to talk."
In March 1990, Nemtsov won the election and became a people's deputy of the RSFSR. "People themselves hung up my portraits, handed out leaflets, and said that this was the man who would save us from the nuclear threat," he said. In August 1990, the Nizhny Novgorod Regional Council of People's Deputies, taking into account public opinion, decided to halt construction of the plant.
Nuclear power plant wanted to build and 7 kilometers from Arkhangelsk. Residents protested. The forest was cleared at the chosen site, a pit was dug, and no further progress was made.
Nuclear energy is expensive.
But the "trick" failed at the Rostov Nuclear Power Plant. Residents protested, formed a human chain, and threatened a citywide strike and a blockade of the plant. In 1990, construction was suspended. Regional Governor Vladimir Chub during his election campaign He pledged, which would not decide on resuming construction without a referendum. However, after his election, with the approval of the Volgodonsk City Duma deputies, work began on reopening the nuclear power plant. In 2001, the first power unit was launched, followed by the second a few years later. Construction began on the third and fourth. People protested against the expansion of the nuclear power plant. In 2009, activists statedRosatom manipulated public opinion when organizing city hearings, and media access for NPP opponents was hindered, if not completely banned. There was also no such powerful wave of anti-nuclear movement as in the late 1980s. "Laws are being passed to make it harder for people to fight for their rights," the activists said.
Residents of the region were deceived twice: they were also promisedthat with the start of the nuclear power plant's operation the electricity tariff for the population would be reduced, but this did not happen.
Commentary by expert Andrey Ozharovsky:
"I don't see electricity getting cheaper for residents in the regions where nuclear power plants have been built. It's a myth, and I understand whose interests it serves. In Belarus, under pressure from Rosatom, the first power unit of a nuclear power plant was commissioned several years ago. Belarusians were fed promises: as soon as we build a nuclear power plant, everything will become cheaper. Electricity in the country has since gone up in price. The ideal experiment—a small country, a small economy. In my view, this is ironclad proof that nuclear energy is expensive."
Building a new plant is a huge investment, which is unlikely to ever be recouped through the electricity the plant sells. Yes, in Russia, nuclear energy is subsidized by the state, and nuclear power plants generate the most expensive electricity of all possible sources.
Wind and Sun
Ozharovsky believes that there is currently no need to build new dangerous nuclear power plants in Russia.
"We're not seeing any growth in electricity consumption or industrial production. There's also no need to operate old and dangerous nuclear power plants, since, at least in the European part of the country, there's excess generating capacity. A sensible government could easily rein in Rosatom and prepare to decommission at least the oldest and most dangerous reactors. Let me remind you that Russia is the only country in the world that still operates those same dangerous RBMK-1000 reactors, one of which exploded 38 years ago at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant. But Rosatom is a state-owned corporation with enormous lobbying power, so they simply push through subsidies, push through priority for themselves, and thus trample on opportunities to develop renewable energy in Russia, which deeply saddens me."
Russia is lagging far behind in the use of renewable energy sources, primarily wind and solar power. Yet, in some regions, more than half of their primary electricity could come from renewable sources, says the expert.
Because Rosatom forces the government to spend money on its expensive, unnecessary, and dangerous nuclear power plants, solar and wind energy are in their infancy. The Kola Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences has concluded that two of the four reactors at the Kola Nuclear Power Plant could be shut down if wind turbines were built. This would immediately reduce the danger.
Rosatom's biggest blunder is replacing spent reactors with new ones. Replacement reactors are being built at the Leningrad and Kursk Nuclear Power Plants. This shouldn't be done—it's a waste of money and an added danger. We need to increase the share of wind and solar power. Nuclear energy's share of the world's energy supply is declining, and the industry is only stumbling along in countries where it's subsidized, like Russia.
When will the times of wind and sun return in Russia? Probably when it's once again possible to hold a protest march or a real city referendum on a controversial issue. When people will have a direct influence on government decisions.
