We are looking for a Structural Engineering Expert, a Mechanical Engineer and a Power Plant Engineer. The last day of applying is February 26th.

Find more details of the positions and instructions how to apply here.

Fennovoima’s alternative suppliers are the French company Areva and Japanese company Toshiba. Fennovoima selected Areva and Toshiba as its plant supplier candidates back in 2008. Since then, technical development work has been carried out with both suppliers.

The plant supplier will be selected during 2012-2013.

The scope of the bids received today does not include preparatory infrastructure works like earthmoving, excavation and off-shore construction that are carried out before the Hanhikivi 1 nuclear power plant construction begins. Fennovoima will be responsible for the works not included in the scope of the bids.

Read the whole press release.
 

Our Financing Expert will be working with various financing tasks in the power plant project as well as participating in the tasks related e.g. to financing structuring and documentation.

Furthermore, the new employee will join our plant contract negotiation team in their area of responsibility. Precise job description and areas of responsibility will be adjusted based on experience and expertise.

The applications are asked to be left no later than February 5th.

Read more information here.

A change of paradigms is happening swiftly at the same time both in the economic and energy politics ‒ the Commission is strongly extending its authority in the name of stabilizing the economy in both sectors. The only difference is that the power structures are changing in the energy policy without wide media coverage.

The euro crisis has opened the eyes of many EU decision-makers: without a common EU energy policy also the solutions for solving the economic crisis will only be half measures. Many people acknowledge that one of the reasons behind the economic crisis, for example in Italy, is a failed energy policy. Italy closed down its nuclear power plants due to a referendum result in the 1980’s. The country was left at the mercy of ever-increasing prices of imported energy, its competitiveness weakened… and the rest of the story we can read in our daily newspapers.

EU will need huge energy investments in the years to come to strengthen the market functionality and speed up other investments. This year, the Union has made many far-reaching decisions in the energy sector. Tens of billions of euros have been earmarked for developing the electricity and gas networks. In the new EU research framework energy has become a key priority. In addition to this, EU is forming common licensing procedures for energy projects and is aiming at building a uniform external energy policy. Mid-winter gas crises between Russia and Ukraine are still very well remembered in Brussels.

However, power structures change all the time. EU decision-making is hampered often in the name of subsidiarity principle. The necessary harmonization of energy policy is being hindered repeatedly by populist actions in Member States. The fact that many Member States are exercising subsidy and tax competition to enhance the uptake of renewables is frustrating the EU Commission. Also the endeavors to create capacity markets in some Member States are in the worst case wrecking the possibilities for creating a truly European energy market.

The number one “EU energy soloist” prize in 2011 will go by a wide margin to Germany. Germany’s bilateral gas co-operation with Russia and the decision to abandon nuclear energy are destroying EU’s emission targets for a decade. Germany’s decision ‒ in practice a decrease of 5 % of the EU’s electricity generation capacity without even hinting about it to surrounding countries ‒ is causing bad blood amongst Germany’s neighbors.

The consensus of many energy experts in Brussels is that Germany’s “green” decision will lead to coal renaissance, extra emissions running up to hundreds of millions of CO2 tonnes and an escalating decline in EU’s industrial competitiveness.

However, Germany’s radical nuclear power shutdown may become a blessing in Brussels. Many other Member States have started to emphasize the need for a more European approach in speeding up energy investments and integrating energy markets. The EU Commission has taken up the gauntlet. The EU energy roadmap 2050 released last week is by far the first long-term EU energy vision that strives to strengthen consensus about low-emission energy investments. Nuclear energy has a strong role in the roadmap since every third light bulb in Europe is illuminated by nuclear.

One has to hope that EU will reach an agreement about market-based approach to enhance energy investments in the beginning of next year. This would be essential both to handle the EU economic crisis and to put an end to populism in energy decisions in some Member States.

Sami Tulonen
Aula Europe

Several different factors will be studied in Hanhikivi peninsula. The first studies have now been started: water temperature, salinity and opacity are monitored at sea.

Seabed soundings for cooling water tunnels’ design, harbor planning and for applying water permits are started as soon as possible. During this year, studies for water and shore area beds will be started.

Next year, several additional studies continue. In the area, there will be investigations of groundwater conditions, bedrock and rock studies as well as various water area studies. In addition, studies related to fishing industry in the area will be carried out and several environmental monitoring processes will be started.

Fennovoima will hire expert consultants for carrying out the assessments and studies. The schedules of the studies will be specified as the planning proceeds.

>> Read more about the site.

M.Sc. (eng) Matti Laaksonen has been nominated as Fennovoima's Commercial Manager. His background is in management of maintenance functions in Fortum.

M.Sc. Mari Leinonen was nominated as the company's Controller. She joined Fennovoima from Oy Teboil Ab where she worked as a Business Accounting Manager.

M.Sc. (eng) Janne Liuko started as Fennovoima's Project Engineer. His recent employer was Fortum where he worked as a Product Manager of various nuclear services and products. Prior to that, Janne has also worked in Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority Finland STUK.

M.Sc. (eng) Jussi Näveri is Fennovoima's other new Project Engineer who joined the company from Fortum. There he worked as a Design Engineer.

M.Sc. Patrik Wikberg has been nominated as Fennovoima's Investment Analyst. Prior to Fennovoima Wikberg worked in KPMG Corporate Finance.

>> We have no job openings at the moment. If you want, you can however leave a general application.

Read more information and fill an application through this page.

If any of these jobs are not for you, you can also fill an open application.

>> Read more about Fennovoima and our nuclear power plant project.

For the basis of the site selection, assessments were carried out during some four years. In the beginning of Fennovoima project in summer 2007, the company had almost 40 alternative sites. The number of alternatives was decreased gradually based on assessments and in December 2009 Fennovoima ended up having two alternatives, both located in Northern Finland: Pyhäjoki and Simo municipalities.

In the final site decision, safety, technical feasibility, environmental matters, construction costs and schedule were the main factors examined as well as the ability of the site region to support a project that will bring thousands of people to work and use services there. Hundreds of details were assessed within these key factors.

As a result of the assessments, it was concluded that both Simo and Pyhäjoki are feasible for accommodating a nuclear power plant and that the plant can be implemented safely and in an environmentally feasible manner on both sites. The regions of both municipalities are suitable also in respect of their socio-economic structure and regarding the general attitude of the people. The choice was not based on one single factor. Pyhäjoki was selected as the preferred choice on the basis of an overall consideration assessing the site as a whole.

Several technical features in Pyhäjoki were more favorable. Due to technical benefits it is more feasible to construct a nuclear power plant to Pyhäjoki. Assessments show that the bedrock in Pyhäjoki is more solid. This means that operations like excavation works are easier to carry out. In Pyhäjoki, seismic design values are lower than in Simo. This has an impact on the design of the structures, systems and equipment of the plant. The length needed for cooling water tunnels is about one kilometer shorter in Pyhäjoki. In addition to these technical features, Pyhäjoki's benefit is that there are very few permanent residents and summer houses near the power plant site, which means that the construction will cause less disturbance for the neighborhood.

Fennovoima continues now the planning work together with the municipality, authorities and the plant suppliers and prepares applying for various licences and permits. For example, more detailed bedrock, environmental and water studies will be carried out on the Hanhikivi peninsula. Simultaneously, other preparations for the future phases of the project are carried out together with Pyhäjoki and Raahe region.

First preparatory works on Hanhikivi will be started in the end of 2012 at earliest. The construction schedule will be elaborated after the plant supplier has been selected. Fennovoima sent bid invitations for Areva and Toshiba in July 2011 and the plant supplier will be chosen in 2012-2013.

Attachment: Pyhäjoki located on a map of Finland and information about the municipality

For more information:

Tapio Saarenpää, CEO, tel +358 20 757 9209
Tiina Tigerstedt, PR and International Communications Manager, tel +358 20 757 9211
Laura Klefbohm Communications Officer, tel +358 20 757 9219

Materials

Fennovoima will now study and assess the given verdicts in detail. The process of selecting the site will take a few weeks. Fennovoima will publish its decision of the location of its nuclear power plant when it has completed its decision process.

Fennovoima has two alternatives for the location of its nuclear power plant: Pyhäjoki and Simo. The location will be chosen on the basis of extensive assessments. The focus will be especially on safety, environment, technical feasibility, construction costs and the readiness and ability of the municipality and its region to receive a big construction project.

>> Read the Environment Impact Assessment.