"A Comprehensive Balance Sheet

1
"A Comprehensive Balance Sheet for Nuclear Power
Assessment. Christopher E. Paine,
Director Nuclear Program Natural Resources
Defense Council, Inc. Washington. D.C.
Presented at the The International Meeting
onNuclear Energy and Proliferation in the Middle
EastAmman, Jordan June 22-24, 2009
2

• The positive attributes include
• Reliable generation of electricity IF the plant
  is properly built and maintained
• Low-carbon electricity (but not zero emissions
  when total cradle-to-grave life cycle is
  considered)
• Reliable and plentiful fuel supply available at
  predictable cost under long-term contracts
• Fuel is a small fraction of total cost

3

• NUCLEAR BENEFITS (cont)
• Low-cost generation once the initial capital
  costs are amortized
• A long operating life (40 60 years) if plant
  is properly built and maintained, including
  necessary costly capital additions, such as steam
  generator replacements
• Low health impacts from routine plant emissions
  
• A source of electricity that is typically
  hardened against severe weather events (but
  necessary external support and transmission links
  may not be as well protected)

4
Negative nuclear power attributes include

• Very high capital costs, on both a per-project
  and per-kilowatt-of-new-capacity basis
• Large technical and industrial barriers to
  entry
• these may be overcome by reliance on foreign
  suppliers and technical experts, but such
  dependence could limit national independence and
  economic opportunity for the majority of the
  population.
• Cost-effective power currently available only in
  very large, inflexible increments (e.g.1000-1600
  MW), requiring costly transmission upgrades in
  most developing countrie (smaller
  grid-appropriate reactors may be commercially
  available in 5 -10 years)
• Lengthy nuclear project development/construction
  timeframes, 7-12 years, compared to 2-5 years for
  wind and solar projects.

5
Negative nuclear attributes, cont

• Costly spinning reserve requirements for
  replacement power in the event the reactor goes
  off-line this problem will be particularly
  acute in developing countries without significant
  excess generating capacity in their electrical
  grids
• A requirement for continuing public subsidy costs
  (for safety and environmental regulation,
  security, peaceful-use safeguards, and waste
  management)
• Continuing nuclear accident risks, including a
  small probability of a very high-consequence
  event
• Ongoing environmental requirements and costs for
  spent-fuel management and eventual disposal, for
  low-level nuclear waste disposal, and for
  reconversion or recycling of uranium hexafluoride
  tails from the enrichment process

6
Negative attributes, cont

• Environmental harms from uranium mining milling
  (in the case of nuclear power in the Arab Middle
  East, these harms would likely be displaced to
  other regions, e.g. Niger, Canada, Kazakhstan)
• In-Situ Leach (ISL) solution mining of low-grade
  domestic uranium deposits in arid countries, such
  as Jordan, can severely damage the mined aquifer
  a big risk in desert nations.
• If uranium fuel is not sourced domestically, the
  problem of foreign fuel dependence remains.
• Safe operation of nuclear power plants requires
  an industrial safety culture and effective
  regulation now lacking in many countries . If
  this deficit leads to an accident, it could
  jeopardize the operation of similar reactors
  everywhere.
• Nuclear power has high physical security
  requirements and costs in comparison to other
  generating technologies.

7
Negative attributes, cont.

• Nuclear power is a difficult technology for arid
  inland environments where it normally requires
  massive freshwater withdrawals, massive thermal
  discharges, and large evaporative losses for
  these reasons, nuclear power stations in the
  Middle East will presumably be limited to
  sea-coast locations
• Seismic risks further constrain the geographic
  scope and increases costs of deployment in
  certain areas
• Nuclear facilities can be magnets for attack in
  conflict-prone regions or in the event of war
• In the current state of world politics, a big
  nuclear build-out supported by autonomous
  national fuel-cycle facilities would create
  regional and global insecurity and pose a severe
  road block to global nuclear disarmament.

8
Conclusions Regarding Nuclear Power

• When all is said and done, if one discounts the
  technical and geostrategic mystique surrounding
  nuclear power, it is really nothing more than
  another way to boil water
• A costly way to boil water new-build nuclear is
  currently expected at 0.12 to 0.21 per kilowatt
  hour (kWh) in the U.S.A and Europe
• Nuclear power is clearly an option for ME nations
  that can meet the steep up-front capital costs,
  BUT it should be rigorously evaluated on economic
  and environmental grounds against an integrated
  portfolio consisting of
• Massive application of energy efficiency for
  demand reduction
• CSP, CPV, and wind, firmed up by geothermal and
  selective use of central station CCGT and
  distributed High-Temperature Direct Fuel Cells.

9
Cost-effective energy alternatives to nuclear
power in the Middle East

• Concentrating Solar Thermal Power (CSP) with
  thermal storage and Geothermal for
  round-the-clock base-load applications
• Wind-Power, Solar Photovoltaic (PV), and Solar
  Concentrating Photovoltaic (CPV) for intermediate
  and peak-load utility applications, and
  distributed Building Integrated PV (BIPV) for
  home and commercial applications
• Efficient Natural Gas Combined-Cycle (NGCC) and
  high-temperature Direct Fuel Cell (DFC) to
  backstop and firm-up increased market
  penetration of all forms of renewable energy
• Increased Energy Efficiency, including tough
  Efficiency Standards for buildings and electrical
  equipment and Distributed Solar Thermal rooftop
  systems for domestic hot water and industrial
  process heating and cooling, drastically reducing
  consumption of bottled propane/natural gas for
  these uses, freeing existing supplies to back
  increased market penetration of renewables
• Electricity market reforms to shift producer
  incentives toward investment in energy efficiency
  and independent clean energy production an
  open bid process for grid connection and supply

10
A 55-kilowatt solar powered pumping station was
brought online in Egypt in 1913.
11
How big is the Solar Resource of the Arab League
Nations?

• HUGE for example, with current technology, under
  3 of the land area of Morocco could power the
  entire European grid.

12
(No Transcript)
13
(No Transcript)
14
(No Transcript)
15
What would it take to make Jordan 100
self-sufficient in its electricity supply using
CSP?

• Jordans total electricity consumption (2007)
  13,000 GWh/yr
• Direct solar radiation in SE Jordan averages
  about 2600 kWh/m2/yr 2600 GWh/km2/yr
• 13,000 GWh/yr / 2600 GWh/km2/yr 5 km2
• Assuming solar thermal-to-electric conversion
  efficiency of 0.25
• 5 km2/0.25eff 20 km2
• Allow 50 in area for spacing between mirrors,
  balance-of-plant, roads, security perimeter 20
  km2 x 1.5 30 km2
• Assuming average solar plant availability is 29
  of its nameplate capacity (about 7 hours of
  usable daylight per day) 30 km2 / 0.29 103 sq.
  km. are needed to achieve CSP output of 13,000
  GWh/yr.

16
CSP Land Requirements(Capacity Basis using
eSolar Corp. Data)

• One eSolar CSP module rated at 46 MWe needs 0.65
  sq.km
• Jordans installed nameplate capacity (2007)
  2019 MWe
• 2019 MWe/46 MWe 44 eSolar CSP modules
• 44 modules / 0.29 capacity factor 152 eSolar
  CSP modules
• 152 CSP modules x 0.65 sq. km/module 99 sq. km
• Rough Conclusion An unused desert area measuring
  10 km x10 km one-tenth of one percent of
  Jordans total land area dedicated to CSP
  systems could power the entire electrical grid,
  assuming a portion of this energy can be stored
  for dispatch to the grid in the evening/night
  time hours while simultaneously meeting peak late
  afternoon loads.

17
eSolar Scalable CSP
18
(No Transcript)
19
(No Transcript)
20
Torresol Energy Power Tower(Joint Venture
between Abu Dhabis Masdar (60) and Spains
Sener (40)
21
(No Transcript)
22
The US Department of Energy (Sandia and NREL
Laboratories) stated in 2007 ... existing CSP
plants produce power now for as low as 12 per
kilowatt hour (12/kWh) (including both capital
and operating costs), with costs dropping to as
low as 5/kWh within 10 years as technology
refinements and economies of scale are
implemented. Independent assessments by the World
Bank, ADLittle, the Electric Power Research
Institute, and others have confirmed these cost
projections. The Trans-Mediterranean CSP report
from the German Aerospace Centre (DLR), published
in 2006, gives the cost of electricity from CSP
plants in Spain as 15 cents per kWh, falling to
about 7 cents per kWh by 2020 (Figure 2-24, p.
63). At that time, it is anticipated that
electricity imported from CSP plants in North
Africa will be about 5.5 cents / kWh, mainly
because North Africa has more sunshine.
23
Final Thoughts and a Policy Recommendation

• Just because heavily state-subsidized nuclear
  companies in France, Russia, Japan and Canada
  want to sell ME countries huge costly nuclear
  reactors and fuel services, does not mean that it
  is in your national economic or political
  interest to buy them
• As a matter of rational economic choice, given
  the Arab worlds immense CSP potential, you are
  not likely to need nuclear energy to power a
  low-carbon economy rigorous comparative life
  cycle analysis of low-carbon alternatives is
  essential!
• Recommendation Vigorously pursue building energy
  efficiency standards/retrofits and clean
  renewable energy opportunities, and wait 7-10
  years to see whether more efficient, flexible,
  and cost-effective nuclear reactor designs emerge
  from the nuclear renaissance.

24
Edisons View in 1931