OPINION | DAVID HESS
Tripling nuclear while dividing it equally
Achieving a tripling of nuclear energy in order to meet climate goals ultimately means nuclear autonomy for multiple developing nations that must stand alongside established nuclear players on an equal footing. Is the world ready for it?
David Hess ©Alexy Kovynev
from 2020 by 2050, recognizing the different domestic circumstances of each Participant”. This essentially gains the backing of governments
for aspirational industry targets that have long been embodied in first the World Nuclear Association’s Harmony Programme and more recently the Net-Zero Nuclear initiative. While some have viewed these targets sceptically as overly ambitious (and some others as not ambitious enough), in my opinion they are realisable goals which can be met via a concerted effort to overcome barriers, and which the world does in fact truly need to meet if it’s going to have any chance of limiting the planetary temperature rise beneath 2°C. Whatever your thoughts on the practicality of the
“Take these pills every time a reactor is starting up in a developing country”
OP 28 WAS INCREDIBLY SIGNIFICANT for the global nuclear industry and make no mistake about it. Seeing nuclear mentioned in the final text is a clear victory which many have been hoping and fighting for, literally for decades. All the industry
representatives and nuclear advocates who have worked towards this deserve rich praise. Even while nuclear energy gets minor billing, apparently
playing only a supporting role to renewable as a climate solution in the mind of COP officials, the inclusion of nuclear energy should put another nail in the coffin of attempts to exclude it from climate policy and all- important finance initiatives. Perhaps even more significant than the final text is the signing of the nuclear energy pledge by 25 countries, at last count, who “Commit to work together to advance a global aspirational goal of tripling nuclear energy capacity
12 | January 2024 |
www.neimagazine.com
nuclear pledge, surely we can all agree that it is at least more realisable than the renewables and efficiency pledge, which grants only seven years for a tripling of installed generation and means that the annual rate of efficiency improvements is doubled every year to 2030. No pressure there! It’s notable which countries have signed the nuclear
pledge. This includes some of the world’s largest economies and established nuclear players like the USA, UK, Japan and South Korea. Some of the signatory countries are surprising as they do not currently have advanced plans for nuclear energy, such as Morocco, Moldova and Mongolia. This is yet another indication of the growing popularity of nuclear energy globally and that more and more countries wish to press ahead with introducing the technology. Even more notable are the countries that have not signed the pledge. Two of the world’s leading nuclear countries are missing. Neither Russia, which leads the world in terms of reactor exports, or China, which leads the world in terms of the number of reactors under construction, have signed. It is surely not their commitment to nuclear energy that is lacking, but rather their good will towards the nations that led the pledge. Tensions between China, Russia and other countries
have risen in recent years and perhaps what the nuclear pledge symbolises more clearly than anything else are
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
