World Lagging in New Nuclear Plants: IEA
Nuclear power has a bad press in Europe owing to design flaws, mechanical failures, lengthy schedule delays, high capacity prices and cost-overruns that have bedevilled projects in that region. There are also memories of major nuclear disasters. But it is nevetheless a low-carbon energy source and alternatives are also costly, argues the International Energy Agency in a report published May 28. Without more nuclear, the world could produce billions of tons of additional carbon emissions, it says.
Nuclear is the second-largest low-carbon power source in the world today, accounting for a tenth of global electricity generation. It is second only to hydropower at 16%. In the past 20 years, wind and solar PV capacity has increased by about 580 gigawatts in advanced economies. But over the next 20 years, nearly five times that amount would need to be added. Such a drastic increase in renewable power generation would create serious challenges in integrating the new sources into the broader energy system, says the IEA.
However, the future of nuclear power is uncertain as ageing plants are beginning to close in advanced economies – particularly US, Europe and Japan – partly because of policies to phase them out but also as a result of economic and regulatory factors. Without policy changes, advanced economies could lose a quarter of their nuclear capacity by 2025 and as much as two-thirds of it by 2040, according to the IEA's report, Nuclear Power in a Clean Energy System, published May 28.
Some countries have opted out of nuclear power in light of concerns about safety and other issues. Many others, however, still see a role for nuclear in their energy transitions but are not doing enough to meet their goals, according to the report.
With its mission to cover all fuels and technologies, the IEA hopes that the publication of its first report addressing nuclear power in nearly two decades will help bring the topic back into the global energy debate. The report is being released during the 10th Clean Energy Ministerial in Vancouver, Canada.
The new report finds that extending the operational life of existing nuclear plants requires substantial capital investment. But it says the cost is competitive with other electricity generation technologies, including new solar and wind projects, and can lead to a more secure, less disruptive energy transition.
Market conditions remain unfavourable, however, for lengthening the lifetimes of nuclear plants. An extended period of low wholesale electricity prices in most advanced economies has sharply reduced or eliminated profit margins for many technologies, putting nuclear plants at risk of shutting down early.
In the US, for example, some 90 reactors have 60-year operating licenses, yet several have already retired early and many more are at risk. In Europe, Japan and other advanced economies, extensions of plants’ lifetimes also face uncertain prospects. If other low-carbon sources, namely wind and solar PV, are to fill the shortfall in nuclear, their deployment would have to accelerate to an unprecedented level.
Clean energy transitions in advanced economies would also require $1.6 trillion in additional investment over the same period, which would end up hurting consumers through higher electricity bills. “Policy makers hold the key to nuclear power’s future,” Birol said. “Electricity market design must value the environmental and energy security attributes of nuclear power and other clean energy sources. Governments should recognise the cost-competitiveness of safely extending the lifetimes of existing nuclear plants.”