Nuclear Power: Benefits and Risks

IAEA

International Atomic Energy Agency

Nuclear Power:

Benefits and Risks

H-Holger Rogner

Head, Planning & Economic Studies Section (PESS) Department of Nuclear Energy

IAEA

Technology options towards a

sustainable energy future

_{Improved Energy Efficiency throughout the}

energy system

_{More Renewable Energy}

_{Advanced Energy Technologies:}

clean fossil fuel technologies including carbon

capture & storage (CCS)

IAEA

Nuclear power and sustainable

development

– A controversial issue?

_{Exhaustive debate at CSD-9}

_{Agreement to disagree on nuclear’s role in}

sustainable development

_{But unanimous agreement that choice}

belongs to countries

_{There is no technology without risks and}

interaction with the environment.

_{Do not discuss a particular technology in}

isolation.

_{Compare a particular technology with}

alternatives in a system context and life cycle (LCA) basis.

IAEA

Pro: Nuclear & Sustainability

_Brundtland1) _{about keeping}

options open

_{Expands electricity}

supplies (“connecting the unconnected”)

_{Reduces harmful emissions}

_{Puts uranium to productive use}

_{Increases human & technological capital Ahead in internalising externalities}

1) _{development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of} future generations to meet their own needs

IAEA

Contra: Nuclear & Sustainability

_{No long-term}

solution to waste

_{Nuclear weapons}

proliferation & security

_{Safety: nuclear risks are excessive Transboundary consequences,}

decommissioning & transport

_{Too expensive}

IAEA

Economics – Nuclear power

_{Nuclear power plants} are cheap to operate _{Stable & predictable}

generating costs _{Long life time}

_{Supply security}

(insurance premium) _{Low external costs (so}

far no credit applied)

_{High upfront capital costs} can be difficult to finance _{Sensitive to interest rates Long lead times (planning,}

construction, etc)

_{Long payback periods}

_{Regulatory/policy/market} risks

IAEA 0 5 10 15 20 25 Nuclear Coal Natural gas Oil/oil products Hydropower Onshore wind Offshore wind Solar PV US$/MWh 188

Range of levelized generating costs of

new electricity generating capacities

IAEA

Externalities of different electricity

generating options

Source: EU-EUR 20198, 2003 Natural gas technologies Nuclear power Wind Biomass technologies Existing coal technologies no gas cleaning New coal technologies LOW HIGH LOW HIGH

Greenhouse gas impacts

A ir p o ll u ti o n ( P M1 0 ) a n d o th e r im p a c ts

IAEA

Cost structures of different generating

options

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Nuclear Coal Natural gas

Fuel O&M Capital

IAEA

Impact of a doubling of resource prices

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Nuclear Coal Natural gas

U S $ p e r M W h Base costs

IAEA 74% 22% 6% 9% 26% 78% 94% 91%

Nuclear Coal Gas Oil

Fuel O&M

Fuel as a percentage of marginal

generating costs

USA - 2005

Source: Global Energy Decisions Updated: 6/06

IAEA

Environment – Nuclear power

_{Low pollution} emissions

_{Small land} requirements

_{Small fuel & waste} volumes

_{Wastes are managed Proven intermediary}

storage

_{No final waste}

repository in operation _{High toxicity}

_{Needs to be isolated for} long time periods

_{Potential burden to} future generations

IAEA

Mitigation – Role of nuclear power

Life cycle GHG emissions of different electricity generating options

g C O2 -e q [8] [12] [10] [16] [8] 0 200 400 600 800 1 000 1 200 1 400 1 600 1 800

lignite coal oil gas CCS

[15] [16] [15] [13] [8] [4] Standard deviation a Mean Min - Max [sample size] g C O2 -e q 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

hydro nuclear wind solar PV

bio-mass

storage

Nuclear power: Very low lifetime GHG emissions make the technology a potent climate change mitigation option

IAEA

Range of carbon dioxide reduction costs for

electricity technologies

-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 US$/t CO2 Supercritical Coal Geothermal Nuclear Large Hydro Biomass Steam Wind

Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Small Hydro

CCS

Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)

Solar Thermal

Solar PV 280 - 465

Note: This graph is for illustrative purposes only, actual costs are site specific

-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 US$/t CO2 Supercritical Coal Geothermal Nuclear Large Hydro Biomass Steam Wind

Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Small Hydro

CCS

Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)

Solar Thermal

Solar PV 280 - 465

IAEA

Impact of CO

₂

penalty on

competitiveness of nuclear power

A relatively modest carbon penalty would significantly improve the ability of nuclear to compete against gas & coal

Comparative Generating Costs Based on Low Discount Rate nuclear low nuclear high 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

CCGT Coal steam IGCC

U S c en ts p er k W h

No carbon price Carbon price $10/tCO₂

Carbon price $20/tCO₂ Carbon price $30/tCO₂

IAEA

Nuclear Fuel:

Small volumes, high energy contents

_{1 pellet produces} the energy of 1.5 tonnes of coal _{Each pellet} produces 5000 kWh

IAEA

Wastes in fuel preparation and plant

operation

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

Flue gas desulphurization Ash

Gas sweetening Radioactive (HLW) Toxic materials

Oil Nuclear Solar

PV Natural gas Wood Coal Million tonnes per GWe yearly

IAEA

Geological nuclear waste disposal

NATURAL BARRIERS

Stable rock around the repository Stable groundwater in the rocks

Retention, dispersion and dilution processes in the rock

Dispersion and dilution processes in the biosphere _Seals

Access shafts or tunnels Disposal tunnels or caverns ENGINEERED BARRIERS Solid waste material

Waste containers

Buffer and backfill materials Seals Container Waste Buffer or backfill

IAEA 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 FRA NC E LITH UAN IA SLO VAK RE P. BEL GIU M SW ED EN UKR AIN E BULG AR IA ARM EN IA SLO VEN IA KO REA , RE P. O F HU NG ARY SW ITZE RLA ND GE RM ANY CZE CH REP . JAP AN FIN LAN D SPA IN TAIW AN , CH INA_USA UK RU SSIA CAN AD A RO MA NIA ARG ENTI NA ME XIC O SO UTH AFR ICA NETH ERLA ND S BRA ZIL PAK ISTA N IND IA CH INA % o f e le c tr ic it y f ro m n u c le a r p o w e r

Nuclear share of electricity (2006)

USA 19% Rep. Korea 40% China 2% Belgium 54% France 78% Switzerland 37% Japan 30% Russia 16% S. Africa 4%

IAEA

Structure of global electricity supply

Coal 40.3% Oil 6.6% Natural gas 19.7% Nuclear 15.2% Renewables 2.2% Hydro 16.0% Global electricity generation in 2005: 18,235 TWh

IAEA

Structure of OECD North America electricity

supply

Electricity generation in 2005: 5,128 TWh Coal 44.7% Oil 4.5% Gas 17.6% Nuclear 17.8% Hydro 12.9% Biomass 1.6% _{Other Ren} 0.8%

IAEA

Structure of Latin American electricity supply

Electricity generation in 2005: 905 TWh Coal 3.4% Oil 9.3% Gas 14.7% Nuclear 1.9% Hydro 68.4% Biomass 2.1% Other Ren 0.2%

IAEA

Nuclear power today:

On 1 January 2008, 439 nuclear power plants

(NPPs) operated in 30 countries worldwide, with a total installed capacity of 371 900 MWe.

“Where does nuclear power go from here?” 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 G W e in st a ll e d

IAEA

_{Energy efficiency improvements Economic restructuring}

_{Significant drop in electricity demand Excess generating capacity}

_{Electricity market liberalization &}

privatization

_{Oil (traded fossil energy) price collapse Advent of the high-efficient cheap gas}

turbine technology (GTCC)

IAEA

_{Little regard for supply security}

_{Regulatory interventions after Three Mile}

Island

_{High interest rates Chernobyl}

_{Break up of the Soviet Union}

All the above together: New nuclear build out of favour (poor economics and lack of demand)

IAEA

Development of regional nuclear

generating capacities

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 G W e North America 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 G W e

Eastern Europe & CIS

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 G W e Western Europe 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 G W e Asia

IAEA

Development of regional nuclear

generating capacities

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 G W e 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 G W e

IAEA

Annual

Incremental

Nuclear Capacity Additions

and

Total

Nuclear Electricity Generation

-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 1 9 6 6 1 9 6 8 1 9 7 0 1 9 7 2 1 9 7 4 1 9 7 6 1 9 7 8 1 9 8 0 1 9 8 2 1 9 8 4 1 9 8 6 1 9 8 8 1 9 9 0 1 9 9 2 1 9 9 4 1 9 9 6 1 9 9 8 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 4 2 0 0 6 In c re m e n ta l n u c le a r p o w e r c a p a c it y a d d it io n s i n G W e -300 0 300 600 900 1,200 1,500 1,800 2,100 2,400 2,700 T o ta l n u c le a r p o w e r g e n e ra ti o n i n T W h

IAEA

Global energy availability factor of

nuclear power plants

Equivalent to the construction of 34 NPPs of 1,000 MW each 66.8 70.1 71.3 70.5 71.2 73.7 75.4 74.3 75.7 78.4 79.6 82.2 81.9 79.6 81.1 81.1 82.6 80.4 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 1990 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 2000 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 P e rc e n t

IAEA

Summary of nuclear power today:

_{A proven technology that provides clean}

electricity at predictable and competitive costs

_{Provides 15% of global electricity supply}

_{More the 13,000 years of accumulated reactor}

experience

_{Operation of nuclear installations have safety}

as highest priority

_{Lessons learned from past mistakes or}

accidents have been acted on

IAEA

_{The industry is alive and vibrant}

_{Market liberalization served as a wake-up call The industry is heavily engaged in innovation The political climate towards the technology}

has begun to change in many countries

_{All credible long-term (>> 2030) demand &}

supply projections show steep increases in nuclear power

IAEA

_{But most importantly the global energy}

map today is

distinctly different

from the

situation of the mid 1980s

_{Fossil fuel prices Energy security}

_{Climate change considerations Demand}

_{Aging generating capacities}

IAEA

Rising expectations

_{Upwardly revised nuclear}

projections 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 410 420 430 2002 2004 2006 G W e i n s ta ll e d

Projection of nuclear power for 2030

Year of projection (WEO, IEA)

_{Plans for expansion in}

a number of countries

_{Entry into force of the}

Kyoto Protocol

_{Proven technology that provides clean electricity}

at predictable and competitive costs

_{The industry’s safety record is second to none Increasingly favorable commentary from both}

IAEA

IAEA

IAEA: Evolution of low projection

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 G W (e ) history 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

IAEA

IAEA: Evolution of high projection

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 G W (e ) history 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

IAEA

Nuclear power around the globe

Countries with operating NPPs Countries with operating NPPs & plants under construction

Countries with a phase out policy Countries with operating NPPs

IAEA

One size does not fit all

_{Countries differ with respect to}

_{energy demand growth alternatives}

_{financing options}

_{weighing/preferences}

_{accident risks (nuclear, mining, oil spills, LNG…), cheap}

electricity, air pollution, jobs, import dependence, climate change

_{All countries use a mix. All are different.}

_{Nuclear power per se is not “the solution” to}

the world’s energy problems and climate change but

IAEA

IAEA

IAEA

The Oklo Mine had a fission reaction… 2 Billion Years Ago

IAEA

Scientific American, July 1976

• 15 natural reactors

discovered

• 16,000 MW-years

• Used 5 tons uranium

• 5 tonnes waste

• 1.5 tonnes of Pu

IAEA

FP MA + FP

Spent fuel (Pu + MA + FP)

Natural uranium ore

Time (years) R e la ti v e r a d io to xi c it y FP MA + FP Spent fuel (Pu + MA + FP)

Natural uranium ore

Time (years) R e la ti v e r a d io to xi c it y

IAEA

FP MA + FP

Spent fuel (Pu + MA + FP)

Natural uranium ore

Time (years) R e la ti v e r a d io to xi c it y FP MA + FP Spent fuel (Pu + MA + FP)

Natural uranium ore

Time (years) R e la ti v e r a d io to xi c it y INNOVATION: Burning of HLW in Fast Reactor in Reducing Radio Toxicity

Plutonium and minor actinides are

responsible for most of the long term

hazards

IAEA

Do not drive into the future by

looking in the rear view mirror:

_{Yesterday’s technology is not tomorrow's Innovation ongoing}

_{With each new investment cycle technology}

IAEA

Innovation: Nuclear power generation

Generation I Early prototype reactors Generation II Commercial power reactors Generation III Advanced LWRs & HWRs Generation III+ Evolutionary designs with improved economics and safety for near-term deployment – Shippingport – Dresden, Fermi I – Magnox – LWR-PWR, BWR – CANDU – VVER/RBMK – AP1000, ABWR, System 80+ – ACR – EPR Generation IV – Highly economical – Enhanced safety – Minimal waste – Proliferation resistant

Gen III Gen III+ Gen IV

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 Generation I Early prototype reactors Generation II Commercial power reactors Generation III Advanced LWRs & HWRs Generation III+ Evolutionary designs with improved economics and safety for near-term deployment – Shippingport – Dresden, Fermi I – Magnox – LWR-PWR, BWR – CANDU – VVER/RBMK – AP1000, ABWR, System 80+ – ACR – EPR Generation IV – Highly economical – Enhanced safety – Minimal waste – Proliferation resistant

Gen III Gen III+ Gen IV

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

IAEA

IAEA

Integral Primary System Reactor (IRIS)

_{Simplifies design by eliminating loop piping and external}

components.

_{Enhances safety by eliminating major classes of}

accidents.

_{Compact containment (2 times less power but 9 times}

less volume, small footprint) enhances economics and security.

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

IAEA

_{The genie is out of the bottle}

_{Preventing the misuse of nuclear materials for}

non-peaceful purposes needs special attention

_{It is an area where IAEA has a strict mandate Non-proliferation is a political problem}

_{NPT regimes needs strengthening}

IAEA

Nonproliferation and Nuclear Security

Nuclear Security: The prevention and

detection of and response to theft,

sabotage, unauthorized access, illegal transfer or other malicious acts involving nuclear material, other radioactive

substances, or their associated facilities.

Nuclear Nonproliferation: To curb and

prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, their delivery means, and related materials and technologies. Owner Controlled Area Protected Area Vital Area

Access Control Points

Protected Area Double Fence

IAEA

Elements of nuclear safety:

Defense in Depth

IAEA

A history of mistaken forecasts

“The energy produced by breaking down

the atom is a very poor kind of thing.

Anyone who expects a source of power

from the transformations of these atoms is

talking moonshine.”

Lord Ernest Rutherford

1933

IAEA

A history of mistaken forecasts

“It is not too much to expect that our

children will enjoy in their homes [nuclear

generated] electrical energy

too cheap to

meter

.”

Lewis Strauss

Chairman

US Atomic Energy Commission

1954

IAEA

Bjorn Wahlström

IAEA

Nuclear

power

projections

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000 20,000 22,000

2005 IAEA IEA WETO IEA WETO

T W h 2030 2050 Maximum mean global temperature change < 2o_C

IAEA

Typical nuclear electricity generation

cost breakdown

O&M 20% Investment 60% Fuel cycle 20% Decommissioning 1-5% 1% Conversion 6% Enrichment 3% Fuel fabrication 5% Back-end activities 5% Uranium Source: NEA

IAEA

_{Safety is an integral part} of plant design &

operation

_{Nuclear power has an} excellent safety record _{Lessons learned from}

past accidents

_{Safety culture, peer}

reviews & best practices _{No room for}

complacency

_{Nuclear power is} dangerous

_{It can never be made} safe

_{Safe is not safe enough Nuclear plants are}

atomic bombs

_{No public acceptance}

Reality Perception

IAEA

Nuclear power safety

_{Safety is a dynamic concept}

_{Upgrading of older generation reactors & life}

time extensions

_{Advanced reactor designs with inherent}

safety features

_{The impact of these ongoing efforts are}

:

Improved availability worldwide

Lower radiation doses to plant personnel and

IAEA

Typical barriers confining radioactive

materials

IAEA

Unplanned scrams per 7000 hours

critical

Source: WANO 2006 Performance Indicators

Units reporting 1.8 1.0 0.6 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.5 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 1990 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 369 404 417 428 419 405 428 425 429

IAEA

Industrial accidents at NPPs per

200,000 person-hours worked

Source: WANO 2006 Performance Indicators

Stations reporting 1.04 0.58 0.33 0.33 _0.31 0.28 0.21 0.26 0.24 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1990 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 169 192 203 200 203 201 210 208 209