Forward View
some new projects unviable. Plans to reorganise the electricity market as a whole could create a more stable environment for investors in nuclear (and indeed renewable) energy.
Sweden Sweden’s prime minister said this week that the country had no plans to review its nuclear policy. Sweden currently relies on 10 nuclear reactors for around 50 per cent of its electricity supply. In a 1980 referendum, Swedes voted to phase out nuclear power, but in 2009 the centre-right alliance government reversed course and agreed to allow existing reactors to be replaced when they are no longer serviceable. Indeed, the debate in Sweden often centres upon whether or not to build new plants or to simply squeeze more power out of existing units. Te latter option essentially implies allowing the rods to get hotter and generate more power, thereby potentially increasing the risk of meltdown. Some have suggested that the meltdown in Japan might thus cast new reactors in a more favourable light.
Finland Finland will review the safety of its nuclear reactors. Te country operates four nuclear reactors that provide a quarter of its electricity. Finland was one of the first to revoke its decision to phase out nuclear power and is arguably at the vanguard of the European nuclear renaissance in its construction of a third generation European Pressurised Reactor (EPR), at Olkiluoto. Te EPR has suffered several delays, however, and attracted a good deal of criticism already, prior to events in Japan (see Finland: 31 August 2010: Demonstrators Block Roads to Protest Against Nuclear Power Plant Construction in Finland).
Switzerland Switzerland is one of the few European states to follow Germany’s lead and act immediately to revise its policy. Te country suspended the approvals process for three new nuclear power stations in March, so safety standards can be revisited. Switzerland’s five existing nuclear reactors generate about 40 per cent of the country’s electricity but some will have to be retired in coming years. Decisions on sites for new plants were due to be made in mid-2012. In 1990, a referendum saw a 10- year moratorium imposed on nuclear facilities but this was dropped following another vote in 2003. Only last month, Swiss voters narrowly approved the building of a new plant in Muehleberg to replace the old one there, which is 20 per cent owned by E.ON.
Poland Poland has reaffirmed its intentions to press ahead with the construction of two new NPPs, located near the south of the country. Plans to begin construction of a 3,000-MW NPP around 2016 are still in the relatively early stages.
12
www.engineerlive.com
Te Polish government is seeking technology transfers and commercial agreements with firms from the United States, France, South Korea and Japan. Te country depends on coal for its electricity, partly because of the country’s natural resource endowments but also because of a reluctance to allow dependence on Russian gas imports to increase. Nuclear power is seen as a means to maintain energy independence while reducing per-unit emissions.
Czech Republic Te Czech Republic’s prime minister says his country will go ahead with plans to develop its nuclear energy programme despite Japan’s nuclear crisis. Petr Necas says the government will complete a multi-billion- dollar tender to build two more nuclear reactors at the Temelin nuclear power station, adding that “there’s no reason to change it”. State energy policy in the Czech Republic and in Eastern Europe in general is broadly less sensitive to public opinion than in the West. Indeed, the potential for Germany to halt its nuclear programme will be seen by CEZ as an opportunity to increase power exports.
Outlook and Implications European governments are well aware of the trade-off between embracing greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets and the risks that come with operating a nuclear power plant. Despite the deepening crisis in Japan and Germany’s knee-jerk reaction, most European countries do not appear keen to significantly change course yet. Even in Germany, Angela Merkel has made clear that she is not considering shutting down all of Germany’s reactors only to import nuclear power from elsewhere to be a viable option (indeed, there is strong evidence that the shut-down of the seven oldest reactors during the three-month moratorium has more to do with appeasing anti-nuclear voters in the upcoming local elections than with rationally considered long-term energy strategy). Other bodies have joined the defence for nuclear power, notably officials at the OECD, who describe nuclear power as ‘essential to Europe’s energy supply’. Even if governments and international agencies
are committed to delivering nuclear power, however, they must first convince their electorate that such technology is safe. In this area, the EU is taking a strong lead: all 27 states have agreed to subject the bloc’s 143 reactors to a series of stress tests, which will determine their ability to withstand earthquakes, floods and other disasters. Much like the financial stress tests imposed upon
European and America banks, the key criterion for the tests having a meaningful impact is that they must be sufficiently rigorous that not all plants pass. Any other outcome will simply be labelled a whitewash. ●
For more information, visit
www.ihsglobalinsight.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68