WNA s Views: 1)World Challenge on Energy & Environment. 2) Nuclear Energy Developments

Transcription

1 WNA s Views: 1)World Challenge on Energy & Environment 2) Nuclear Energy Developments WM08 Session 03 Phoenix, Arizona, USA February 24-28, ) New WNA Policy on Uranium Mining and Processing: radiation, H&S, waste, environment Sylvain Saint-Pierre Director for Environment and Radiological Protection World Nuclear Association 1

2 World Challenge on Energy and Environment Moving on from a path towards a pessimistic sunset future To acting now on a brighter path towards a sustainable and promising future 2

3 World Challenge We are in a new era where growing energy needs and environmental issues are the key challenges and they are closely interconnected 3

4 World Challenge Climate Change: Where we are and where it is going (a clear warning) Source: IPCC: summary for policy-makers (Feb07) CO2 emissions are a large part of the problem 4

5 Climate Change Yesterday s surprise in northern Arizona! 5

6 The Essence of the World Challenge Emerging countries need a lot of (CO2 free) energy now for their own developments The planet cannot afford these huge developments without clean energy A global shift towards clean energy is imperatively needed over the coming decades Emerging countries and developed countries must help each other tackling this world challenge 6

7 Highlights: Energy + CO2 Emissions WNA Statement: Nuclear Energy: Essential to Meeting the Climate Change Challenge Facts on CO2 emissions from energy sources Nuclear energy is one of the very few available large-scale sources of clean energy (no CO2) 7

8 Reality Check: World Environmental Challenge Drivers that really impact the world environment 1. Climate change => widespread LT consequences 2. Air pollution (all kinds) => current public health issues 3. Water pollution (all kinds) => current public health issues 4. Intense industrial activities (chemical, oil/gas, agriculture, fishery, forestry, etc.) => continuous and widespread LT consequences 5. Urban developments => continuous and widespread, definitive? 100 th? Exposure to radiation => localised and inconsequential n th? Nuclear waste management and disposal => 8

9 Reality Check: Implications Regulations bear important implications for the ranking of nuclear energy It may lead to use more or less nuclear energy, with more or less use of other energy sources that may carry much broader environmental implications 9

10 10 10 Today s Nuclear Power

11 WNA Nuclear Generating Capacity to 2030, MWe Net MWe net Reference Scenario Upper Scenario Lower Scenario

12 WNA Nuclear Generating Capacity to 2030, MWe Net Worldwide Operating 2007 Closures New reactors Lower Reference Upper Lower Reference Upper North America South America West & Central Europe East & South-East Europe Africa* West & Central Asia South Asia South-East Asia & Pacific* East Asia * Many of the new reactors are PBMRs of 165 Mwe net capacity. USA Operating 2007 Closures New reactors Lower Reference Upper Lower Reference Upper USA What could happen due to the energy context and with proper incentives? For example, the USA Energy Policy Act of

13 USA: Energy Policy Act of 2005 Price-Anderson Act extended 20 years Production Tax Credit $18/MWh for first 6,000 MW of new nuclear capacity Companies must submit a COL application to the NRC by Dec. 31, 2008 Stand-by support coverage Federal insurance coverage for delays caused by licensing or litigation Loan Guarantee Program 2005 Energy Policy Act authorizes loan guarantees up to 80 percent of project cost 13 13

14 USA: Updated New Build Perspective Company Location (Existing Plant) Units Dominion NuStart Energy (TVA) NuStart Energy (Entergy) Entergy Southern Co. Progress Energy South Carolina Electric & Gas Duke Energy UniStar Nuclear Florida Power and Light NRG/STPNOC Amarillo Power TXU Exelon Alternate Energy Holdings DTE Energy AmerenUE PPL Louisa County, VA (North Anna) Jackson County, AL (Bellefonte) Claiborne County, MS (Grand Gulf) Updated data (NPP unit) West Felciana Parish, LA (River Bend) Burke County, GA (Vogtle) Low = 23 Wake County, NC (Harris) & Levy County, FL High = 34 Fairfield County, SC (V.C. Summer) Cherokee County, SC (Lee) Calvert County, MD (Calvert Cliffs) TBD in FL Previous data (NPP unit) Matagorda County, TX (South Texas Project) Low = 0 Carson County, TX Comanche Peak site in TX High = 12 Victoria County in TX Owyhee County, ID Monroe County, MI (Fermi) Callaway County, MO (Callaway) Berwick, PA (Susquehanna) TBD 1 1 TBD 14 14

15 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle : Re-Dimensioning Mining Uranium Plutonium Conversion Enrichment Fuel fabrication Waste Reprocessing Nuclear Power Plant 15 15

16 Uranium Mining A New WNA Policy Statement Hold special relevance for emerging uranium producing countries that do not yet have fully developed regulations Supported by the WNA membership (covers over 90% of uranium production) and by key organizations, including IAEA and ICMM These principles have been affirmed as an outgrowth of an IAEA cooperation project It will be presented tomorrow as part of the International Forum on Sustainable Options for Uranium Production (IFSOUP) 16 16

17 Uranium Mining A New WNA Policy Statement Supporting Organizations WNA Members (covers over 90% of U production) Areva Atom ergoprom BHP Billiton Cameco Kazatomprom Navoi Nufcor-Anglo Gold Ashanti Tio Tinto Other Organizations International Atomic Energy Agency International Council on Mining and Metals Australian Uranium Association Mining Association of Canada Namibian Chamber of Mines National Mining Association Uranium One Thank you for your attention Sylvain Saint-Pierre saintpierre@world-nuclear.org