IAEAInternational Atomic Energy Agency

Nuclear Power and Climate change The mitigation potential of nuclear energy

H-Holger Rogner

Planning & Economic Studies Section (PESS)

Department of Nuclear Energy

Today’s popular climate change mitigation ladder

Efficiency improvements

RenewablesNew and advanced technologies

Clean fossil (coal technology)

Carbon capture & storage (CCS)

Next generation of nuclear power

Three take-away messages

Nuclear power is good for the climate

Nuclear power is not a quick-fix mitigation option

Nuclear power can make a substantial mitigation contribution in any serious long-term mitigation strategy

But there must be a (socio-political) will to do so!

4

Current status of global nuclear power

436 nuclear power plants

48 under construction

USA 104 (1) France 59 (1) Japan 53 (2) Russia 31 (8) Canada 22 India 17 (6) China 11 (13)

Structure of global electricity supply

Coal41.0%

Oil5.8%

Natural gas20.1%

Nuclear 14.8%

Renewables2.3%

Hydro16.0%

Global electricity generation in 2006: 18,930 TWh

Carbon free energy – is there such a thing? There is no technology without risks and

wastes

All greenhouse gases matter – not just carbon

CO2 fossil fuel use

56.6%

CO2 (other)2.8%

CO2(deforestation,

decay of biomass, etc.)

17.3%

CH414.3%

N2O 7.9%

F-gases1.1%

Total GHG emissions(6 Kyoto gases) in 2004:49.0 Gt CO2-eq

Source: (IPCC, 2007)

Full Chain Greenhouse Gas Emissions, g C / kWh

9099

157

121

195

215

181

216

278

217

247

359

16

21

31

28

24

31

25

48

79

14

7

11

2005-20

1990's (low)

1990's (high)

NATURAL GAS

2005-20

1990's (low)

1990's (high)

OIL

2005-20

1990's (low)

1990's (high)

COAL

2005-20

1990's (low)

1990's (high)

LIGNITE

0 50 100 150 200 300 350 400250

Other chain steps

Stack emissions

2.5

5.7

2.5

2.57.69.8

13.1

8.4

16.6

1.14.46.3

64.6

8.2

27.3

76.4

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

low

high

NUCLEAR

Coast (UK)

Coast (Be)

Inland (Be)

Inland (Ch)

Coast (Jp)

WIND

low

high

BIOMASS

Run-of-river (Ch)

Reservoir (Ca)

Reservoir (De)

Reservoir (Br)

HYDROELECTRIC

2010-20

1990's (low)

1990's (high)

SOLAR PV

Other chain steps

Stack emissions

2.5

5.7

2.5

2.57.69.8

13.1

8.4

16.6

1.14.46.3

64.6

8.2

27.3

76.4

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

low

high

NUCLEAR

Coast (UK)

Coast (Be)

Inland (Be)

Inland (Ch)

Coast (Jp)

WIND

low

high

BIOMASS

Run-of-river (Ch)

Reservoir (Ca)

Reservoir (De)

Reservoir (Br)

HYDROELECTRIC

2010-20

1990's (low)

1990's (high)

SOLAR PV

Other chain steps

Stack emissions

Full Chain Greenhouse Gas Emissions, g C / kWh

Nuclear power is good for the climate

Nuclear power: Very low lifecycle GHG emissions make the technology a potent climate change mitigation option

[15]

nuclear

[8]

[12][10]

[16]

[8]

gC

O2-e

q/

kW

h

0

200

400

600

800

1 000

1 200

1 400

1 600

1 800

lignite coal oil gas CCS

Fossil electricity generation(life cycle emissions)

[16] [15]

[13]

[8]

[4]Standard deviation

a Mean

Min - Max

[sample size]

gC

O2-e

q/k

Wh

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

hydro wind solarPV

bio-mass

storage

Non-fossil electricity generation(life cycle emissions)

Global CO2 emissions from electricity generation & emissions avoided by hydro, nuclear & renewables

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Gt

CO

2

Source: IAEA calculations based on IEA data

Hydro – avoided emissions

Electricity generation (actual)

Nuclear – avoided emissions

Non-hydro renewables – avoided emissions

Mitigation potential of selected electricity generation technologies in different cost ranges

Source: IPCC, 2007

Decarbonising the Economy

CLIMATE CHANGEG l o b a l R i s k s, C h a l l e n g e s & D e c i s i o n sCOPENHAGEN 2009, 10-12 March

Wastes in Fuel Preparation and Plant Operation

Source: IAEA, 1997

Flu

e g

as

des

ulp

hu

riza

tio

n

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5A

sh

Gas

sw

eete

nin

g

was

te

Ra

dio

ac

tiv

e

wa

ste

(H

LW

)

Oil Nuclear SolarPV

Naturalgas

WoodCoal

Million tonnesper GWyr

As

hF

lue

gas

d

esu

lph

uri

zati

on

To

xic

wa

ste

As

h

Externalities of different electricity generating options

Source: EU-EUR 20198, 2003

Natural gastechnologies

Nuclearpower

Wind

Biomasstechnologies

Existing coaltechnologiesno gas cleaning

New coaltechnologies

LOW HIGH

LOW

HIGH

Greenhouse gas impacts

Air

po

llu

tio

n (

PM

10)

and

oth

er i

mp

acts

Nuclear power is not a quick-fix mitigation option

Planning, Infrastructure Start up phase is

significant in length and effort, some 5 -20 years before the shovel hits the ground

Nuclear energy is more than just electricity generation

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1,000

1,100Reactor type

1LWR

HWR

1 District heating, seawater – brackish water desalination

2

LMFR

2 Petroleum refining

3

AGR

3 Oil shale and oil sand processing

5 Hydrogen and water splitting

Use / Application

5

44 Refinement of hard coal and lignite

HTGR

5

IAEA: Evolution of low projection

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

GW

(e)

history

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

IAEA: Evolution of high projection

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

GW

(e)

history

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

One size does not fit all

Countries differ with respect to energy demand growth alternatives financing options weighing/preferences

accident risks (nuclear, mining, oil spills, LNG…), cheap electricity, air pollution, jobs, import dependence, climate change

All countries use a mix. All are different. Nuclear power per se is not “the solution” to

the world’s energy problems, climate change and energy security

It surely can be an integral part of the solution!

Material requirements (life cycle)

Iron Copper Bauxite

kg/GWhe kg/GWhe kg/GWhe

Hard coal 2,700 8 30

Lignite 2,314 8 19

Gas combined cycle 1,239 1 2

Nuclear (PWR) 457 6 27

Wood CHP 934 4 18

PV 5 kW poly 4,969 281 2,189

Wind 1.5 MW at 5.5 m/s 2,066 52 35

Wind 1.5 MW at 4.5 m/s 4,471 75 51

Hydro 3 MW 2,057 5 7

Source: Voss, 2007

Nuclear Power and Climate Change

Clearly, there are issues surrounding the technology that need continued attention Finance

Maintaining and improving safety performance standards

Waste disposal / spent fuel management

Non-proliferation and physical security

BUT: If you are serious about protecting the climate – you cannot ignore nuclear energy

Nuclear energy needs public tolerance and political support

And remember

“… when nature goes bankrupt,

there won’t be a bailout”.

WWF: Cracking the Climate Nut at COP 14,

Global Climate Policy Position Paper, December 2008.

IAEA

…atoms for peace.