Positioning the nuclear sector in a greener world

1945

1958

1983 Dungeness B

2008

2008

For every 22 tonnes of uranium used, more than one million tonnes of CO2 emissions are averted 2008

World demand for energy has grown by 2.7% annually in the last 20 years Coal Oil Natural Gas Nuclear Hydro Source: BP Statistical Review of World Energy None of these can be eliminated or market needs could not be met

The market has responded and found more reserves of key energy resources Source: BP Statistical Review of World Energy, WNA Years 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Oil Natural gas Uranium Coal Years reserves

The world GHG emissions flow chart shows that CO 2 accounts for 77% of all emissions Source:World Resources Institute

Higher Global Warming Potential (GWP) than CO 2 Source: US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) Compounds with the highest GWPs are either prohibited or in very limited use 1 Carbon dioxide CO2 21 Methane CH4 310 Nitrous oxide N2O 1300 Hydrofluorocarbons HFCs 1700 Hydrochlorofluorocarbons HCFCs 6500 Tetrafluoromethane CF4 9300 Chlorofluorocarbons CFCs 23900 Sulphur Hexafluoride SF6 GWP Gas Symbol

Electricity generation and transport account for over half of all greenhouse gas emissions 0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Electricity generation Source:World Nuclear Association 100% 28% 22% 10% 10% Transport Industry Residential and other Total GHG Emissions Approx 40 bn tonnes Methane Nitrous Oxide Other CO 2 There is increasing interest in Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) – but at least another decade until this is commercially available?

World CO2 emissions USA China + Taiwan EU Canada Australia Saudi Arabia World average Source: Wikipedia

Per capita CO2 emissions World average Source: Wikipedia

Greenhouse gas emissions have reduced as technology has improved…nuclear still in front Greenhouse gas emissions 0 100 200 300 400 500 Coal Gas Solar Hydro Wind Nuclear Grammes CO2 per equivalent KWh Old technology New technology Source:IAEA Solar panels and wind turbines consume CO2 during manufacture Hydro – reservoirs emits methane especially in hot climates

Higher Uranium prices made marginal mines attractive and enabled market growth Source: Cameco

Uranium prices have risen much less than oil prices over 20 years Source: Cameco and BP

Uranium and crude oil prices 1988 - 2008 Source: Cameco/BP

There will be over 800 reactors in operation if all planned and proposed are built Growth in Nuclear Reactors Worldwide 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Numbers Operating 2008 Under construction Planned Proposed 439 36 99 232 Source:World Nuclear Association

Geographic spread of reactor growth Source:World Nuclear Association

Nuclear industry lifecycle costs 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Mining Enrichment Fuel Fabrication Plant Operations Build and Decomm’n Plant Conversion Waste Mgmt Lifecycle cost, PJ/1000 MWe Source:World Nuclear Association

Uranium mine near Kakadu National Park, Australia

Yellowcake

Enrichment

Enrichment

Fuel fabrication

Plant operations

The UK Government’s View – on nuclear power Having reviewed the arguments and evidence put forward, the Government believes that the energy sector, nuclear and otherwise, faces challenges in meeting its need for skilled workers and in the capacity of the manufacturing supply chain to support new construction. Indeed, a nuclear renaissance, here and around the world, presents opportunities for companies to grow and for individuals to have rewarding careers. We conclude, therefore, that the skills and supply chain situation does not provide a reason to prevent energy companies from investing in new nuclear power stations. We believe that the situation is manageable and that building new nuclear power stations does not present a significantly greater challenge than the alternatives. Source: UK Government White Paper, 2008

Having reviewed the arguments and evidence put forward, the Government believes that the energy sector, nuclear and otherwise, faces challenges in meeting its need for skilled workers and in the capacity of the manufacturing supply chain to support new construction.

Indeed, a nuclear renaissance, here and around the world, presents opportunities for companies to grow and for individuals to have rewarding careers. We conclude, therefore, that the skills and supply chain situation does not provide a reason to prevent energy companies from investing in new nuclear power stations.

We believe that the situation is manageable and that building new nuclear power stations does not present a significantly greater challenge than the alternatives.

International Nuclear Event Scale 7. Major Accident 6. Serious Accident 5. Accident, wider consequences 4. Accident, local consequences 3. Serious Incident 2. Incident 1. Anomaly 0 Deviation (No Safety Significance) Source: IAEA Log scale

International Nuclear Event Scale The world’s worst nuclear events…. 7. Major Accident 6. Serious Accident 5. Accident, wider consequences 4. Accident, local consequences 3. Serious Incident 2. Incident 1. Anomaly 0 Deviation (No Safety Significance) Source: IAEA Chernobyl, 1986 Mayak, 1957 Windscale, 1957 Three Mile Island, 1979 Log scale

International Nuclear Event Scale 21 events at Sellafield/Windscale 7. Major Accident 6. Serious Accident 5. Accident, wider consequences 4. Accident, local consequences 3. Serious Incident 2. Incident 1. Anomaly 0 Deviation (No Safety Significance) Source: IAEA Windscale, 1957 Log scale 5 Accidents 15 Serious Incidents

Having reviewed the arguments and evidence put forward, and in the absence of any proposals from industry, the Government has concluded that any new nuclear power stations that might be built in the UK should proceed on the basis that spent fuel will not be reprocessed and that plans for, and financing of, waste management should proceed on this basis. We are not currently expecting any proposals to reprocess spent fuel from new nuclear power stations. Should such proposals come forward in the future, they would need to be considered on their merits at the time and the Government would expect to consult on them. The UK Government’s View – on nuclear waste Source: UK Government White Paper, 2008

Having reviewed the arguments and evidence put forward, and in the absence of any proposals from industry, the Government has concluded that any new nuclear power stations that might be built in the UK should proceed on the basis that spent fuel will not be reprocessed and that plans for, and financing of, waste management should proceed on this basis.

We are not currently expecting any proposals to reprocess spent fuel from new nuclear power stations. Should such proposals come forward in the future, they would need to be considered on their merits at the time and the Government would expect to consult on them.

Volumes of waste from modern nuclear reactors are manageable… Annual waste from 1000 MWe reactor 0 50 100 150 200 250 Low level Medium level High level m3 waste Source: World Nuclear Association

Existing waste strategies… There is about 270,000 tonnes of existing spent fuel in storage, much of it at reactor sites Current annual arisings of spent fuel are 12,000 tonnes (HLW) Currently about 3,000 tonnes is reprocessed annually The preferred option is now to deal high level waste in special glass, and store it in long-term underground sites with stable geology (and after 40 years, even high level waste is only one thousandth of its original radioactivity…more manageable) Finland and Sweden have well advanced plans Russia and Australia have proposals The USA has proposed a central storage facility in Nevada but this is beset with regulatory issues and much opposition Reprocessing is falling out of favour Storage appears to be the answer – but many unresolved issues remain Source: World Nuclear Association

There is about 270,000 tonnes of existing spent fuel in storage, much of it at reactor sites

Current annual arisings of spent fuel are 12,000 tonnes (HLW)

Currently about 3,000 tonnes is reprocessed annually

The preferred option is now to deal high level waste in special glass, and store it in long-term underground sites with stable geology (and after 40 years, even high level waste is only one thousandth of its original radioactivity…more manageable)

Finland and Sweden have well advanced plans

Russia and Australia have proposals

The USA has proposed a central storage facility in Nevada but this is beset with regulatory issues and much opposition

Reprocessing is falling out of favour

Storage appears to be the answer – but many unresolved issues remain

World demand for energy will continue to grow Coal Oil Natural Gas Nuclear Hydro Source: BP Statistical Review of World Energy Nuclear energy will continue to have a role in meeting the world’s energy needs in a responsible and low carbon emission manner