OVERVIEW OF NUCLEAR ENERGY IN THE ASIA/PACIFIC REGION

Transcription

1 OVERVIEW OF NUCLEAR ENERGY IN THE ASIA/PACIFIC REGION Joonhong Ahn and W. E. Kastenberg Department of Nuclear Engineering, and The Center for Nuclear and Toxic Waste Management University of California, Berkeley Introduction While nuclear electricity capacity in the United States has not increased for more than a decade, nuclear energy capacity is steadily increasing in Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. Large-scale nuclear development has started in China and is about to start in Indonesia. Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan adopted nuclear technologies mostly from the United States, and have been keeping good and close relationships with the United States. Nuclear policies, the development of new technologies, and public perception of nuclear energy in the United States have been directly influencing the Asian countries. The United States is still influential, besides its technological superiority, in such a way that the apparent inactiveness in the United States makes nuclear energy strategies less convincing worldwide. The United States derives important benefits from nuclear power plants as a stable and environmentally benign energy source. In the United States, deregulation in the electric power industry will create a very competitive market for electricity. In California, an electricity spot market will begin accepting bids on January 1, This move towards deregulation has caused much speculation about the future of nuclear energy in the United States, most of which is negative; it is believed by some that nuclear power plants cannot survive in a competitive market, so that many of them are expected to shut down. Although it may be difficult for nuclear power to compete in such an environment, deregulation will also provide a great opportunity. Economics of nuclear power will be tested explicitly in a real competitive commercial market. Those nuclear power plants that survive will be considered to be the best choice among other sources of electricity from the view points of economics and environmental impact, Yucca Mountain not withstanding. Thus, discussing the future of nuclear energy in the Asia/Pacific region is currently very interesting and important. Such points of interest mentioned above will be discussed in more detail in this paper. Unless references are given explicitly, discussions on the Asian part in this paper are based on information compiled in the report [1] for the three-year project by Tokai University on Nuclear Safety in the Asia/Pacific

2 Region, submitted to Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute, the sponsoring agency of the project. Geographical Area of Interest In thins paper, the Asia/Pacific region refers to Japan, South Korea, China (including Hong Kong), Taiwan, the United States, and the original member states of ASEAN, which are Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand. Three important regions/country are not discussed in this paper: Indochinese countries: Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia are accelerating economic growth, and will join ASEAN in the next 5 years (Vietnam is already a member of ASEAN.). There is still a clear distinction between the original ASEAN countries and the Indochinese countries with respect to industrialization and political systems. Far-east Russia and North Korea: They are both interested in nuclear energy. Especially after a serious energy crisis in the early 1990 s, nuclear power plant construction was considered in Khabarovsk and Vladivostok, for which site characterization studies, public opinion polls, and financial scheme studies were performed. In the course of negotiation with the United States, North Korea will have PWRs. Canada: This country is an important player because the CANDU reactor could play an important role in nuclear energy development in this region. About one-third of Korea s nuclear capacity is shared by this reactor type [2]. A combination of PWRs and CANDUs as is realized in Korea will open an opportunity for a new type of fuel cycle scheme [2]. These countries have important implications for the rest of the Asia/Pacific region, especially when we consider some sort of international organization for cooperation and/or mutual inspection in this region. However, to make the argument simplified, in the present paper, we focus on the region where we can find actual nuclear energy development now, or in the next decade. But, future studies should include them. Nuclear Energy in the Unites States There are 109 nuclear power reactors (72 PWRs and 37 BWRs) operating in the United States (US) which have an installed capacity of 100,459 MWe. The average Unit Capability Factor (the percentage of maximum energy generation that a plant is capable of supplying to the electrical grid, limited only by factors within the control of plant management) has been steadily increasing from 62% in 1980 to 82% in The US Industry target is 87% by the year These power reactors supply about 22% of the US electrical needs. As noted above, there has been no new orders for nuclear plants in over two decades and the prospects for new orders on the short term are virtually nil. What has brought us to this point, and what is the longer term view? Chauncey Starr, writing in Nuclear News [3], cites three reasons for the current situation: 2

3 1. the drive for efficient use of (energy) resources in the production of goods and services reduced the anticipated growth in electricity demand and thus created a temporary energy excess, 2. a major increase in natural gas resources due to improved geophysical techniques for locating reserves and horizontal drilling for opening gas bearing seams has resulted in a natural gas bubble that may last decades, and 3. metallurgical development in gas turbine/generator designs allowing for the development of 250-MWe low-cost units capable of 60% thermal efficiencies. As a result of these developments, the need for large central power stations has temporarily vanished, and capital intensive nuclear power plants with low fuel cycle costs are not competitive. For the longer term, the US nuclear utilities face the following challenges and issues: 1. Deregulation of the electric utility industry poses an uncertain economic future for the next decade. In California, for example, the State Legislature has instituted a 5 year transition period to a full competitive market by the year Federal legislation regarding deregulation is being considered, and many state legislatures have acted on, or are considering, opening electricity markets on a competitive basis. Emission controls for fossil fuel plants, in an attempt to deal with climate change and greenhouse warming, may impact the economic balance between nuclear and non-nuclear generation, further adding uncertainty. Nuclear power will have to survive both the transition and the competitive pressure after the transition. 2. High-level radioactive waste disposal remains an outstanding issue in the US. In all probability, the US Department of Energy will not comply with the July 1996 court ruling that requires it to begin taking over the management of spent fuel from the utilities by January 31, Institutional and technical issues regarding the proposed geologic repository at Yucca Mountain abound, and pending legislation (the 1997 waste bill passed by the US Senate in April and sent to the House for consideration this summer or fall) calling for a temporary storage facility faces almost certain veto by the current Administration. The current state of affairs, with spent fuel residing in spent fuel pools or in dry cask storage on-site, may become intolerable, from a public acceptance viewpoint. If the US continues the once through fuel cycle fuel policy, and there is a new generation of nuclear power plants, additional geologic repositories may be required. 3. On a national and international level, proliferation issues continue to be a vexing problem. These issues are characterized by institutional and technical uncertainty, and solutions which are purely technical or purely institutional tend to create conflict. A case in point is the conversion of excess weapons plutonium to mixed 3

4 oxide or MOX fuel for use in LWRs versus vitrification and disposal in responce to arms control treaties. On the plus side, and as noted above, the operation of existing nuclear power plants continues to improve and has made sales in other countries (e.g., Taiwan). The US nuclear industry has also continued to improve designs from a safety viewpoint. The Advanced Light Water Reactor (ALWR) Program in the US, for example, will meet the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission s Policy Statements on Advanced Reactors, which should lead to an order of magnitude improvement in safety [4]. Current research on advanced nuclear fuel cycles has the potential to improve resistance to proliferation and may allow for new reprocessing schemes. Extended fuel burn-up has the prospect for improving plant economics and reducing the volume of high-level waste. With a view towards energy security, US policy may lean towards nuclear plant life-extension until we resolve the issues delineated above. Energy Demand in Asia The Asia/Pacific region is characterized by its diversity. In addition to cultural diversity, the region consists of different degrees of economical development, i.e., industrialized countries, newly industrializing economies (NIEs), and developing countries. Each country has its own particular energy demand/supply situation. For example, Indonesia produces and depends on petroleum as her major energy resource. Oil will be reserved, however, as her valuable exports in order to obtain financial resources for economical development. Soon Indonesia will become a net importer of oil [5]. China relies heavily on coal [6]. As economic development in the coastal area progresses much faster than in the in-land areas, China faces energy transportation problems. Pollution from coal burning is already a serious problem domestically and internationally. China s large population is still living in a stage considered to be of low standard. The population will naturally want a much-better (and so more energy consuming) life. Rapid Increase in Energy Demand In Figure 1, the Asian increase in primary energy demand in the last 15 years and the prospect for the next 15 years are depicted. Energy demand in the Asian part of the region increased by 4% annually. In 2010, energy demand will be twice as large as that in Crude oil consumption was greater than production in the Asian part of the region already in 1980 and in 1992 (Figure 2), but this is primarily due to large oil consumption in Japan. A major increase will occur in China over the next 15 years. By 2010, China will consume more oil than Japan. ASEAN countries will consume about the same amount of oil as Japan will. About 70% of the oil consumed in the 4

5 Asian part of the region will be supplied from the outside, mostly from the Middle East. Demand for electricity will also increase very rapidly. It will increase by 8.2% annually until 2000, and by 7.3% until 2010 (Figure 3). Demand will be almost quadrupled in 20 years. Million Ton Oil Equiv Year Figure 1 Primary energy demand in Asia [7]. coal oil natural gas nuclear+hydro Million Ton % 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Import from other regions Consumption Production Import Figure Year Prospects of oil production and consumption in Asia and dependency on the rest of the world [7]. 0% 5

6 Billion kwh Year Figure 3 Prospect of electricity demand in Asia without Japan [7]. Consequences of Increased Energy Consumption Economic activities in the countries in the region are more and more closely linked with each other. One country s energy crisis will directly influence another country s economic growth. For example, after the Kobe earthquake in January 1995, export of electric appliance parts from the Kobe port stopped, causing the production of air-conditioners in Malaysia to slow down. As energy demand in Asia increases, securing oil will become more competitive worldwide. As more fossil fuel is burned, more carbon dioxide, SOx, and NOx will be released to the environment. Acid rain and the greenhouse effect will be of particular concern. Carbon dioxide generation will increase 4% annually (cf. 2%, world average) for the next two decades, and in 2010, a quarter of world-wide carbon dioxide will be generated by the Asian part of this region. Considering such consequences, introducing nuclear energy seems the most logical choice, which is actually being seriously considered by several countries in the region. The following questions might, then, be addressed: 1. Are the non-nuclear developing countries in Asia ready for nuclear energy socially and/or technologically? 2. What is needed most there? And how can the current nuclear countries, including the US, respond to such needs? 3. How will nuclear energy growth influence the world politically in the future? In the remainder of this paper, the first and second points are discussed further, based on some statistics showing the economic development stages of Asian countries. The third point should be discussed at least after we have seen actual nuclear reactor construction in countries other than Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. But, if nuclear energy is developed on a large scale, we can foresee that the restructuring of international safeguards organizations might be necessary. 6

7 Is Asia Ready for Nuclear Energy? Figure 4 shows the correlation between electricity consumption and the gross domestic products (GDP) on the per-capita basis. The GDP per capita can be considered as a measure for industrialization. The electricity consumption per capita represents a standard of living, and so roughly a standard of education, or a country s technology level. With more wealth obtained by industrialization, people can enjoy more comfortable lives as electricity replaces manual labor, and more money will be invested for development of technology and human resources Taiwan Hong Kong Brunei Japan Singapore Malaysia S. Korea 1000 Thailand India China Philippines Indonesia Sri Lanka S. Korea, 1960 Figure GDP/capita (1990 US$) Relation between GDP and electricity consumption on the percapita basis [8]. In the top-right part of Figure 4, we find industrialized and NIES countries, such as Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, and Korea. Then, we see the developing countries, Malaysia, Thailand, the Philippines, and Indonesia in this order from right to left. China is a little off the diagonal lines due to her very large population. Noteworthy here is that industrialized/nies countries trajectories with time are parallel to the diagonal lines in this diagram starting at the left bottom corner. Thus, we can use GDP per capita as a measure of a country s technology level. Figure 5 shows the increase in GDPs per capita as a function of time. From the years when Japan, Korea, and Taiwan introduced nuclear energy, we can estimate at what economical development stage nuclear energy might be introduced in other countries. Commercial nuclear power plant operation started in the late 1960 s in Japan. The decision for nuclear energy utilization was made about fifteen years earlier than that (immediately after the Atoms for Peace address by President Eisenhower at the 7

8 United Nation s General Assembly in 1956). If we arbitrarily pick 1960 as the starting year, then the GDP per capita was on the order of 3,000 US dollars (1985 value). Korea and Taiwan have about the same length of history for nuclear energy research and development. The Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute and the nuclear engineering departments in major universities in Korea were established in the 1960 s. Both Korea and Taiwan introduced the first commercial nuclear power plants in 1978 [2][9]. Their GDPs per capita exceeded the $ 3000 US level in the 1970 s USA Japan US$/capita Taiwan Korea 6000 Malaysia 4000 Thailand Indonesia 2000 Philippines 0 China Year Figure 5 Increase in GDP per capita in 1985 US dollars ( Malaysia reached that stage in the 1970 s, but did not introduce nuclear energy. This was because there were abundant resources of natural gas and oil available. It is, however, well recognized in Malaysia that she will be a net importer of oil early in the next decade. Although there is no current plan for introducing nuclear energy, Malaysia has a comprehensive nuclear energy research institute with a research reactor. Thailand exceeded $ 3,000 US level in Research and development for nuclear energy in Thailand has been carried out for more than 25 years, mainly by the government research institute and Chulalongkorn University. Although a plan for a commercial nuclear power plant was canceled in 1980 (because an oil field was found in her territory), introduction of nuclear energy has been considered very seriously by the Thai government in the last five years or so. Indonesia is about to reach the $ 3,000 US level. Comprehensive efforts have been accumulated for research and development by the National Atomic Energy 8

9 Agency. The Agency s research institute covers almost all aspects of nuclear energy ranging from reactor physics and nuclear fuel design to radioactive waste management and reactor safety assessment. Indonesia will be the first country in ASEAN that has a commercial reactor [5]. China still needs time to reach the $ 3,000 US level, but is capable of developing commercial nuclear energy based on the experience obtained through the development of weapons and naval reactors. The first commercial reactor was developed by China without external help based on the naval reactor technology. China has a very ambitious nuclear program; it seems ambitious now, but will turn out to be necessary if the current economic growth continues for the next generation [6]. An important point here is that when nuclear energy was introduced, Japan, Korea and Taiwan were not as industrialized as now. It is not necessary for countries to be fully industrialized to introduce nuclear energy. Rather, countries can build up their capability for organizing, developing, and managing complex technologies and social systems required for such technologies through the development of nuclear energy. With around the $ 3,000 US per capita of social wealth, a country can initiate nuclear energy development. In this regard, Asia is well ready for nuclear energy. In addition to availability of technological, scientific, managerial and financial resources for construction and management of nuclear systems, the following points will be crucial for putting nuclear energy in place: Public acceptance, Radioactive waste management, Public awareness of the potential risk of global warming, and Acceptance of mandatory inspection by international bodies as safeguards for nuclear nonproliferation. These issues were not so crucial when the current nuclear countries started their nuclear programs. The first two issues could affect plans for nuclear energy introduction negatively. The countries that have already been benefited from nuclear energy are primarily responsible for finding solutions for such issues. The third point could affect nuclear energy development favorably. The fourth point will be a necessary condition for a country to start the development of nuclear energy, imposed by the international community. It is not clear as to whether or not the fourth point is positive or negative. The current once-through fuel utilization scheme is not efficient from a material utilization point of view, and so may generate more high-level radioactive wastes than otherwise. But, for better fuel material (uranium and plutonium) utilization, the conventional fuel cycle scheme with aqueous processes for the separation of fissile materials (i.e., reprocessing) tends to be more proliferating. As more countries aquire nuclear power capacity, a fuel utilization scheme with better efficiency and robustness for proliferation is cleary more desirable. The current nuclear countries can make a significant contribution in this area 9

10 Viewpoints for Nuclear Energy in the Asia/Pacific Region Asia will soon face the limits of energy supply, environmental pollution and population. Nuclear energy will be a logical choice. Asia is economically ready for nuclear energy. Asia must build a multiple network of political, economic and human resources, based on multi-lateralism. At the point of introduction, choices may be limited for nuclear reactors and fuel cycles for newly emerging nuclear countries, but eventually fuel cycles with better material utilization and proliferation robustness will be urgently sought. Reprocessing and spent fuel storage would be central issues both technologically and politically. Management and disposal of radioactive wastes will not be an issue technologically in the beginning for newly starting countries. However, without a convincing plan for the destination of radioactive wastes, it would be difficult to obtain public acceptance for introducing nuclear energy [10]. The current nuclear countries can make significant contributions by: finding solutions for radioactive waste disposal sharing experience in safety, training and education, and developing advanced fuel cycle schemes, which have high utilization and offer higher degrees of proliferation resistance. In this regard, cooperation should be considered in the area of human resources development to make sure that the nuclear safety culture that has been cultivated in the last four decades is shared by the entire nuclear community. References 1. Nuclear Safety in the Asia/pacific Region, Report submitted to Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute, General Research Organization, Tokai University, Japan, Vol. 1 in 1994, Vol. 2 in 1995, and Vol. 3 in N. Z. Cho, Policies and Technology Development for the Nuclear Fuel Cycle in Korea, this Proceedings. 3. C. Starr, The Future of Nuclear Power, Nuclear News, March A. S. Rao, Development of Advanced Light Water Reactors, this Proceedings, and also, Ray A. Hunter, U. S. Nuclear Interest in the Asian Region, this Proceedings. 5. S. Soentono, Nuclear Power Development in Indonesia, this Proceedings. 6. Y. Xu, Policies of Nuclear Energy Development in China, this Proceedings. 7. For 1980 and 1992, IEA, Energy Balances of OECD Countries, Energy Statistics and Balances of Non-OECD Countries; For 2000 and 2010, Interim Report by International Energy Committee, Ministry of International Trading and Industry, Japan, IEA, Energy Statistics and Balances of Non-OECD Countries

11 9. M.-C. Shieh, Nuclear Fuel Cycle Policy and Nuclear Development in Taiwan, this Proceedings. 10. K. Ogawa, Public Acceptance and Public Opinion, this Proceedings. 11