Repeatedly in recent years there have been calls for a revival of civilian nuclear power. Yet that renaissance never seems to come. Indeed, of the more than 200 countries in the world, only 30 use nuclear power. Last month, a total of 439 nuclear power plants with a net installed capacity of 373.038 gigawatt-electric (GWe) were connected to various national electricity grids, about 1.2GWe more than at the beginning of 2006.
About 16 percent of total energy needs (up to 25 percent in highly industrialized countries) are now met by electric energy. Nuclear fission’s contribution to total electric energy has decreased from about 18 percent more than 10 years ago to about 14 percent in 2008. On a worldwide scale, nuclear energy is thus only a small component of the global energy mix, and its share, contrary to widespread belief, is not on the rise.
Last year, for example, nuclear power plants provided 2,560 terawatt hour-electric (TWhe) (2,560 billion kilowatt-hour) of electric energy, about 1.6 percent lower than during 2008 and almost 4 percent lower than during the record year of 2006, when 2,658 TWhe were produced. Early results for the first four months of this year for the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries, collected by the International Energy Agency indicate that so far the results for this year are as low or lower than during the last year.
FALLING OUTPUT
During the next five years, on average, about 10 new nuclear reactors are expected to become operational every year. However, this assumes that all of them are constructed according to schedule and the nuclear industry has rarely met its promised construction deadlines. According to the World Nuclear Association (WNA), 17 new reactors should have become operational between 2007 and last year. However, only five came onstream during this period — three in 2007 and two last year.
Moreover, four reactors were de-commissioned last year and a larger number of reactors in Japan and Germany are not in use, owing to various technical stoppages. At least one hundred older and smaller reactors will most likely be closed over the next 10 to 15 years.
Furthermore, during the past 10 years, only about two-thirds of worldwide demand for nuclear fuel — about 61,690 tonnes of natural uranium equivalent are needed for this year — was met from resources obtained from mining. The remaining 18,140 tonnes came from so-called secondary uranium sources — mainly inventories held by utilities and governments, re-processed nuclear fuel and stockpiles of depleted uranium. The supply from these sources will drop by roughly 9,070 tons at the end of 2013, when the Megatons to Megawatt Program between Russia and the US — which recycles highly-enriched uranium from Russian nuclear warheads into low-enriched uranium for nuclear power plants — comes to an end.
Current projections indicate that uranium shortages in the coming years can be avoided only if existing and new uranium mines operate according to plan. Indeed, extrapolations of global supply that foresee an increase in uranium mining are based on claims about the ability to expand output in Kazakhstan. So far, uranium mining in Kazakhstan has increased roughly as expected, from 3,950 tonnes in 2005 to 7,730 tonnes in 2008 to 12,700 tonnes last year.
However, it remains to be seen if the uranium mining in this country can indeed increase further to 16,330 tonnes this year and to 27,220 tons by 2018. According to the WNA’s latest estimates, from last month, the expected uranium extraction figure for this year has actually been decreased to 13,610 tonnes.
URANIUM MINING
The view that the amount of energy derived from nuclear power worldwide will continue its slow decrease during the coming years is further supported by the 2008 annual report of the Euratom Supply Agency, which coordinates the long-term uranium needs of nuclear power plants within the EU. According to the agency’s forecast, uranium demand in Europe will fall from 19,730 tonnes this year to 15,770 tonnes by 2018 and about 14,510 tonnes by 2024.
These numbers indicate that the EU, currently producing about one-third of the world’s nuclear electric energy, is heading for a reduction in nuclear-energy production of up to 20 percent over the coming 10 years. One can also expect that the current worldwide economic crisis will not help to accelerate the construction of nuclear power plants and new uranium mines.
In summary, the hard facts about nuclear energy are inconsistent with the possibility of a worldwide renaissance of nuclear energy. Indeed, they point toward a continuing slow phase-out of civilian nuclear energy in most of the large OECD countries.
It thus seems unavoidable that energy consumers, especially in many rich countries, will have to learn to exchange their current worries about the distant future consequences of global warming for the reality of energy shortages during periods of peak demand. Such shortages could result either in chaotic supplies and power outages or in a coordinated policy of energy rationing.
In the absence of a nuclear-energy revival, most of us will be forced to reduce our direct energy consumption. Let us hope that we can learn to adapt to simpler — though perhaps still satisfying — lifestyles.
Michael Dittmar is a physicist at ETH, Zurich, and works at CERN in Geneva, Switzerland.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS