In discussions about additional nuclear power capacity the focus is usually on the nation-wide advantages and disadvantages of the construction project and the public debate concentrates on them. This time efforts were made to study the views on nuclear power also from local perspective. The addressees were inquired how, in their opinion, a nuclear power plant would impact the living conditions in the municipality where the plant would be built.

The opinions of the entire population give us a profile in which the advantages and disadvantages can be clearly distinguished. Financial benefits and generally those relating to income factors are at the top of the list. A majority (85%) estimated that the construction would have a favourable effect on the employment situation in the municipality during the plant construction period (approximately six years). It is remarkably widely believed to have an effect on permanent employment also. The views on the growth in the municipal tax revenue (60% estimated the effect to be favourable) and on the strengthening financial position of the municipality (55%) are very common [figure 12.].

Financial and employment-related benefits are, however, seen to have a relatively high social and environmental price. Construction is seen to have a negative impact on the state of nature and the environment (42% considers the effect to be negative), on the attractiveness of the municipality as a place of residence (52%), or on the safety of the living conditions of the population (50%). All in all, the municipality where the plant would be placed is seen to win rather than lose lose if the project is realised: as for the overall impact (’living conditions in the municipality on the whole’) more people consider it to be favourable (30%) than unfavourable (19%).

Since the two potential municipalities for a new nuclear power plant, Loviisa and Eurajoki (where the environmental impact analysis studying these effects is currently under way) are included in this study, it is interesting to compare the views from an internal-external standpoint. The juxtaposition shows that the ’victims’ see the project much more favourably than outsiders worrying about their destiny. The order of various factors is to a great extent very similar but the views are characterised by clear differences in scale. This is illustrated by the differences in the assessment of the overall impact of the project. Nearly two thirds of the population of Loviisa (64%) consider the impact favourable while only a small minority (14%) considers it unfavourable. The distribution in Eurajoki (72%/5%) provides even less room for assumptions [figure 13.].

Views regarding the risk effects of a new nuclear power plant were inquired also with a specific statement. Two persons out of five (41%) agrees with the statement according to which the construction of a new nuclear power plant based on modern technology would not significantly increase the risks caused by the use of nuclear power in Finland. The idea is rejected by nearly the same number of people (36%, no figure).