鈥淚t鈥檚 a phoenix. It was declared dead, but now it鈥檚 rising from the ashes.鈥� That is the dramatic assessment of the state of the nuclear power industry by Charles Goodnight, an energy consultant based in Vienna, Virginia.
This upbeat view was echoed by most members of the World Nuclear Association (WNA) at its symposium in London last week, where many countries outlined plans for a massive expansion of nuclear power. Yet even as they trumpeted the rebirth of the industry, the excitement was tempered by problems posed by an ageing workforce, a possible shortfall in uranium supplies and worries over nuclear proliferation.
Despite such concerns, it is becoming increasingly clear that most countries now view nuclear power as the best way of meeting growing energy requirements while simultaneously combating climate change.
Advertisement
One of the nations spearheading this change is Russia. 鈥淲e are living through a nuclear renaissance,鈥� says Sergei Kirienko, head of the Russian Federal Atomic Energy Agency. The country recently announced plans to construct at least 18 new reactors by 2020. The Russian plants will be joined by others in the US, elsewhere in Europe and in Asia (see Chart).
The scale of the Russian project has surprised even those in the industry. The number of proposed plants is almost double that forecast for Russia by the WNA only last year. Russia sees nuclear power as vital for its growth. 鈥淭hese plants are needed to counter the fact that economic growth and electricity consumption in Russia, and worldwide, is accelerating faster than predicted,鈥� says Kirienko. Conventional energy-saving measures such as more efficient appliances and transportation will help somewhat, but overall energy use will increase and alternative energy sources will be needed to plug the gap, he says.
The growing demand for energy is not the only argument for nuclear energy. Many countries now see nuclear power as 鈥渃lean鈥� technology because it doesn鈥檛 emit carbon dioxide, and hence it is gaining favour as governments struggle to meet their targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. 鈥淭here鈥檚 been a big change in the past 18 months as politicians have realised that climate change is not the fantasy of mad scientists 鈥� it鈥檚 on the doorstep,鈥� says Robert Davies, marketing director at Areva, a nuclear energy consultancy based in Paris, France. 鈥淪uddenly nuclear power isn鈥檛 looking like such an evil.鈥�
However, Davies says that the biggest factor behind the global push for nuclear energy was last winter鈥檚 gas crisis, during which Russia cut off gas supplies to the Ukraine. This was a wake-up call to many governments to cut their dependence on foreign oil and gas and invest in independent energy sources. 鈥淲hen Putin turned off the gas, it did more to boost the case for nuclear power than any worthy letter about the advantages of clean fuels. It was better than any advert we could have paid for,鈥� says Davies.
鈥淭here has been a big change as politicians have realised that climate change is not the fantasy of mad scientists鈥�
That鈥檚 not to say the push for more nuclear energy will be easy. Many speakers at the symposium expressed frustration and worry that the change in attitude may have come too late. In the UK, for example, planned reactors won鈥檛 become operational for another decade, says Robert Hawley, the chairman of Berkeley Resources, a uranium exploration company based in Perth, Australia. In the meantime, existing plants are scheduled to close. 鈥淎nnual energy increases mean that there will inevitably be a dash for gas in the UK,鈥� he says. 鈥淲hat a pity this wasn鈥檛 recognised in the UK government鈥檚 2003 Energy Review, rather than in the 2006 Energy Review.鈥�
And with more than 30 countries that jointly represent two-thirds of the world鈥檚 population showing a sudden interest in nuclear power, the worry is that the industry will not be able cope with the new demands on labour and raw material. 鈥淔or 20 years we鈥檝e been asked to cut costs 鈥� we became a skinny cow. Today we鈥檙e being told to transform overnight into a fat cow 鈥� to get moving and produce more,鈥� says Ludovic Devos of Areva. 鈥淭he real question is what the pace of the renaissance is, and will the industry be able to keep up?鈥�
鈥淲hen Putin turned off the gas to the Ukraine, it did more for nuclear power than any advert we could have paid for鈥�
One significant issue is whether there will be sufficient uranium to fuel the planned expansion. 鈥淭here鈥檚 enough uranium in the ground,鈥� says Jeff Combs, president of the Ux Consulting Company based in Roswell, Georgia, which specialises in the nuclear fuel cycle. 鈥淏ut will the demand be made clear quickly enough for us to get it out?鈥�
In the near-term, until about 2030, estimated uranium reserves should be sufficient, provided suppliers are given enough warning to mine it. It currently takes around 10 years to construct an operational mine, after a uranium source has been identified. This is roughly double what it took during the last big push for uranium in the 1970s, when environmental regulations were less strict.
Whatever the concerns over uranium supplies, the biggest problem in the west will be the lack of skilled staff to run the proposed plants. The lull in the nuclear industry over the past two decades has meant that few new recruits have been hired, leaving an ageing workforce in place. 鈥淚鈥檓 in my early 40s, but when I visit European and American plants, I鈥檓 one of the young ones,鈥� says Goodnight. When his company, Goodnight Consulting, studied representative plants in the US, they found that almost 50 per cent of the workforce was due to retire in the next few years. 鈥淲hen these baby boomers do retire, we鈥檒l be hit by a massive problem all of a sudden,鈥� says Goodnight.
Just where the new engineers, chemists, and environmental scientists will come from is a puzzle 鈥� especially for the US. 鈥淭he number of people seeking engineering degrees in the US is not as high as it used to be, and not as high as it needs to be,鈥� says Stephen Tritch, president of Westinghouse Electric Company in Monroeville, Pennsylvania.
Even if recruits can be found, the challenge will be for today鈥檚 senior employees to pass on their expertise before they retire, says Goodnight. Given that there will be fierce competition for experienced staff, Goodnight worries that new plants will tempt skilled employees away from older facilities, leaving them in a vulnerable state. 鈥淭his will leave existing plants open to another Chernobyl,鈥� says Goodnight. 鈥淎nd that will put an end to any nuclear renaissance.鈥�
Power without Paranoia
Nuclear proliferation is one of the major worries associated with the renewed interest in nuclear energy.
鈥淲e saw a dramatic situation with the Iranian nuclear problem,鈥� said Sergei Kirienko, head of the Russian Federal Atomic Energy Agency, speaking at the World Nuclear Association symposium in London, last week. 鈥淯nfortunately, that won鈥檛 be the last such problem.鈥� At the same time, though, he stresses that 鈥渋t is impossible to ban newly emerging economies from having access to nuclear energy for moral or political reasons鈥�.
A case in point is Pakistan, which not so long ago was at the centre of a proliferation ring. According to Zia ul Hasan Siddiqui of the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission, the country is considering expanding its nuclear programme to satisfy its growing hunger for electricity. However, there are international embargoes on the transfer of nuclear power technology to Pakistan, so China is its only supplier.
To get around worries about proliferation, Siddiqui suggests setting up 鈥渘uclear parks鈥� to supply electricity. 鈥淚t鈥檚 a very simple idea,鈥� he explains. Western suppliers would build and operate the plants, bringing in their own fuel and taking the profits in return for the energy. 鈥淲e hope that will circumvent their concerns because our only need is energy,鈥� says Siddiqui.
