World Nuclear Industry Status Report

The 2017 edition of the World Nuclear Industry Status Report (WNISR) has been released. It includes:

• a comprehensive overview of nuclear power plant data, including information on operation, production and construction.
• an assessment of the status of new-build programs in current nuclear countries and in potential newcomer countries.
• an assessment from an equity analyst view of the financial crisis of the nuclear sector and some of its biggest industrial players.
• a Fukushima Status Report with an update on onsite and offsite issues, and the latest cost evaluations of the disaster.
• focus chapters providing in-depth analyses of the nuclear industries in France, Japan, South Korea, the United Kingdom and the United States (while an annex provides country-by-country overviews of 25 other nuclear countries).
• a Nuclear Power vs Renewable Energy chapter providing global comparative data on investment, capacity, and generation from nuclear, wind and solar energy.

Here are some highlights drawn from the report:

Global overview:

• Global nuclear power generation increased by 1.4% in 2016, due to a 23% increase in China.
• Ten reactors started up in 2016, of which half were in China. Two reactors were connected to the grid in the first half of 2017 ‒ one in China, one in Pakistan (by a Chinese company) ‒ the first units to start up in the world whose construction started after the Fukushima disaster began.
• Three construction starts in the world in 2016 ‒ two in China, one in Pakistan (by a Chinese company) ‒ down from 15 in 2010, of which 10 were in China. One construction start in India in the first half of 2017, none in China or in the rest of the world.
• The number of units under construction declined for the fourth year in a row, from 68 reactors at the end of 2013 to 53 by mid-2017, of which 20 are in China.
• There are 31 countries operating nuclear power plants. These countries operate a total of 403 reactors (excluding 33 reactors in Japan, and six in other countries, classified as Long-Term Outages), 35 fewer than the 2002 peak of 438. The total installed capacity of 351 GW is down 4.6% on the 2006 peak of 368 GW. Annual nuclear electricity generation reached 2,476 TWh in 2016 ‒ about 7% below the historic peak of 2006.
• The nuclear share of the world's power generation remained stable over the past five years, at 10.5% in 2016 after declining steadily from a historic peak of 17.5% in 1996. Nuclear power's share of global commercial primary energy consumption also remained stable at 4.5% ‒ prior to 2014 the lowest level since 1984.
• The average age of the world operating nuclear reactor fleet continues to rise, and by mid-2017 stood at 29.3 years. Over half of the total, or 234 units, have operated for 31 years or more, including 64 that have run for 41 years or more.
• Only two newcomer countries are actually building reactors ‒ Belarus and UAE. Further delays have occurred over the year in the development of nuclear programs for most of the more or less advanced potential newcomer countries, including Bangladesh, Egypt, Jordan, Poland, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey. Vietnam abandoned its new-build project due to slowing electricity demand increases, concerns over safety and rising construction costs.

Lifetime Projections:

• If all currently operating reactors were shut down at the end of a 40-year lifetime ‒ with the exception of the 72 that have passed the 40-year mark ‒ by 2020 the number of operating units would be 11 below the total at the end of 2016, even if all reactors currently under active construction were completed. In the following decade, between 2020 and 2030, 194 units (179 GW) would have to be replaced ‒ almost four times the number of startups achieved over the past decade.
• If all licensed lifetime extensions were actually implemented and achieved, the number of operating reactors would still increase by only five, and adding 16.5 GW in 2020. By 2030, 163 reactors would have to be shut down and the loss of 144.5 GW would have to be compensated for.

Closures, Construction Delays and Cancellations:

• Russia and the U.S. shut down reactors in 2016, while Sweden and South Korea both closed their oldest units in the first half of 2017.
• Election of a new President in South Korea, who closed one plant and suspended the construction of two more, puts hopes of the national nuclear industry to expand and export into jeopardy.
• Thirteen countries are building new reactors, one less than in WNISR2016, as the construction of Angra-3 in Brazil was abandoned following a massive corruption scandal involving senior project management.
• There are 37 reactor constructions behind schedule, of which 19 reported further delays over the past year. China is no exception, at least 11 of 20 units under construction are behind schedule.
• Eight projects have been under construction for a decade or more, of which three for over 30 years.
• WNISR2016 noted 17 reactors scheduled for startup in 2017. As of mid-2017, only two of these units had started up and 11 were delayed until at least 2018.
• Between 1977 and 1 July 2017, a total of at least 91 (one in eight) of all construction sites were abandoned or suspended in 17 countries in various stages of advancement.

Deep Financial Crisis for Nuclear Utilities:

• After the discovery of massive losses over its nuclear construction projects, Toshiba filed for bankruptcy of its U.S. subsidiary Westinghouse, the largest nuclear power builder in history.
• AREVA has accumulated US$12.3 billion in losses over the past six years. French government has provided a US$5.3 billion bailout and continues break-up strategy.
• The large quality-control scandal at AREVA's Creusot Forge further erodes confidence in the industry.
• Share-value erosion and downgrading by credit-rating agencies of major nuclear utilities. In Europe, energy utilities Centrica (U.K.), EDF, Engie (France), E.ON, and RWE (Germany) have all been downgraded by credit-rating agencies over the past year. As of early July 2017, compared to their peak values during the past decade, the utilities' shares had lost most of their value: RWE –82%, E.ON –87%, EDF –89%, Engie –75%.
• In Asia, the share value of TEPCO as of early July 2017 was 89% below its February 2007 peak value. Toshiba saw its share value shrink to a quarter of its 2007 peak level. Chinese utility CGN over the past year and a half never recovered from the 60% loss of its share value compared to the peak in June 2015. The Korean utility KEPCO, the only major nuclear utility to reach its peak share value in 2016, has lost 37% of its value over the past year following tariff cuts, increased operating expenses and the temporary shutdown of four reactors.

Fukushima Status Report:

• Six years after the Fukushima disaster began, the Japanese Government started lifting evacuation orders in order to limit skyrocketing compensation costs. The total official cost estimate for the catastrophe has doubled from US$100 billion to US$200 billion. A new independent assessment has put the cost at US$444–630 billion (depending on the level of water decontamination). Only five reactors have been restarted.

Renewables Distance Nuclear:

• Globally, wind power output grew by 16%, solar by 30%, nuclear by 1.4% in 2016. Wind power increased generation by 132 TWh, solar by 77 TWh, respectively 3.8 times and 2.2 times more than nuclear's 35 TWh. Renewables represented 62% of global power generating capacity additions.
• New renewables beat existing nuclear. Renewable energy auctions achieved record low prices at and below US$30/MWh in Chile, Mexico, Morocco, United Arab Emirates, and the United States. Average generating costs of amortized nuclear power plants in the U.S. were US$35.5 in 2015.

Small Modular Reactors:

• WNISR2017 provides an update of the 2015 assessment of the status of Small Modular Reactor (SMR) programs around the world. While one SMR in China is scheduled for startup in 2018, global interest in the technologies has faded. Some of the most promising designs (SMART in South Korea and mPower in the U.S.) have not found any buyers. While SMRs were meant to solve the size issues (capacity and investment) of large nuclear plants, they are affected by the general decline in interest in nuclear new-build.

Nuclear Finances:

• In 2017, an increase in electricity-generation overcapacity in developed economies is expected, with demand not fully recovering, electricity prices should continue in a backwardation curve, as future prices are below current levels until 2019.
• Renewable investment is expected to continue, focusing on offshore wind for Europe, while onshore wind and solar for the U.S., and developing economies seem dominating.
• Demand on mature markets is not expected to increase fast enough ‒ if growing at all ‒ to cover the additional capacity to be installed, increasing the market oversupply.
• Hence, lower prices would put further pressure on nuclear operators in 2017 as their margins should continue to decrease given that their production is normally hedged for the year at a lower price level, reducing the profitability of the assets. Due to this, on the nuclear side, all operators expect lower profits in 2017 from a reduction in the hedging prices (at constant production levels).
• Going forward, 2017 will be an interesting year as multiple decisions (both financial and regulatory) are expected on nuclear reactor developments with Flamanville EPR (France), NuGen (U.K.), KEPCO's APR1400 (UAE), CGN's EPR (China), SCANA's and Southern Co's AP1000s (USA), Hinkley Point C EPRs (U.K.), and Olkiluoto-3 EPR (Finland). The path 2017 may bring to nuclear operators could reveal what can be expected for the sector in the coming years: whether a brighter light shines at the end of the tunnel or whether that's the headlight of an oncoming train.

Mycle Schneider, Antony Froggatt et al., 12 Sept 2017, World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2017, www.worldnuclearreport.org/-2017-.html

Full report online: www.worldnuclearreport.org/The-World-Nuclear-Industry-Status-Report-2017...

PDF: www.worldnuclearreport.org/IMG/pdf/20170912wnisr2017-en-lr.pdf

In the last issue of the Nuclear Monitor we wrote about the World Nuclear Association's lamentable attempt to undermine the World Nuclear Industry Status Report (WNISR) with the production of its own report, called the World Nuclear Performance Report. Since then, the latest version of the annual WNISR has been released.

As with previous editions, WNISR-2016 provides a detailed global overview of nuclear power, as well as a comparison between the trajectory of nuclear versus renewables. This year's edition also details the economic problems facing nuclear utilities.

Special chapters are devoted to the aftermath of the Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters. A comparison of the two disasters concludes: "Under practically all criteria, the Chernobyl accident appears to be more severe than the Fukushima disaster: 7 times more cesium-137 and 12 times more iodine-131 released, 50 times larger land surface significantly contaminated, 7–10 times higher collective doses and 12 times more clean-up workers."

Here we reprint some of the key findings of WNISR 2016.

2015 in a nutshell:

• Nuclear power generation in the world increased by 1.3% in 2015, entirely due to China.

Early closures, phase-outs and construction delays:

• Early closure decisions for eight reactors taken in 2015 in Japan, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan and the U.S.
• Nuclear phase-out announcements in California and Taiwan.
• In nine of the 14 countries building reactors, all projects are delayed, mostly by several years. Six projects have been listed for over a decade, three of them for over 30 years. China is no exception, at least 10 of 21 units under construction are delayed.
• With the exception of UAE and Belarus, all potential newcomer countries delayed construction decisions. Chile suspended and Indonesia abandoned nuclear plans.

Reactor operation:

• 31 countries operate a total of 402 reactors ‒ an increase of 11 units compared to mid-2015, but four less than in 1987 and 36 fewer than the 2002 peak of 438.
• Total installed nuclear capacity increased over the past year by 3.3% to reach 348 gigawatts (GW), comparable to levels in 2000. Installed capacity peaked in 2006 at 368 GW.
• Annual nuclear electricity generation reached 2,441 terawatt-hours (TWh) in 2015 ‒ a 1.3% increase over the previous year, but 8.2% below the historic peak in 2006. The 2015 global increase of 31 TWh is entirely due to production in China where nuclear generation increased by 30% or 37 TWh.

Share in energy mix:

• The nuclear share of the world's power generation ‒ 10.7% in 2015 ‒ has remained stable over the past four years, after declining steadily from a historic peak of 17.6% in 1996.
• Nuclear power's share of global commercial primary energy consumption also remained stable at 4.4%.

Reactor age: The average age of the world operating nuclear reactor fleet continues to rise, and by mid-2016 stood at 29 years. Over half of the total, or 215 units, have operated for more than 30 years, including 59 that have run for over 40 years, of which 37 are in the U.S.

Construction starts, delays, time, cancellations:

• Ten reactors started up in 2015 ‒ more than in any other year since 1990 ‒ of which eight were in China.
• As in recent years, 14 countries are currently building nuclear power plants. As of July 2016, 58 reactors were under construction ‒ 9 fewer than in 2013 ‒ of which 21 are in China.
• All of the reactors under construction in 9 out of 14 countries have experienced delays, mostly year-long. At least two thirds (38) of all construction projects are delayed. Most of the 21 remaining units under construction, of which eleven are in China, were begun within the past three years or have not yet reached projected start-up dates, making it difficult to assess whether or not they are on schedule.
• Between 1977 and 2016, a total of 92 (one in eight) of all construction sites were abandoned or suspended in 17 countries in various stages of advancement.
• The number of reactors under construction is declining for the third year in a row, from 67 reactors at the end of 2013 to 58 by mid-2016.
• In 2015, construction began on 8 reactors, of which 6 were in China and one each were in Pakistan and the UAE. This compares to 15 construction starts in 2010 and 10 in 2013. Construction starts in the world peaked in 1976 at 44. Between 1 January 2012 and 1 July 2016, first concrete was poured for 28 new plants worldwide ‒ fewer than in a single year in the 1970s. No construction starts in the world in the first half of 2016.
• The average construction time of the latest 46 reactors in ten countries that started up since 2006 was 10.4 years with a very large range from 4 to 43.6 years. The average construction time increased by one year compared to the WNISR-2015 assessment.

Newcomer program delays / cancellations:

• Only two newcomer countries are actually building reactors ‒ Belarus and UAE.
• Further delays have occurred over the year in the development of nuclear programs for most of the more-or-less advanced potential newcomer countries, including Bangladesh, Egypt, Jordan, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Vietnam.
• Chile and Lithuania shelved their new-build projects, whereas Indonesia abandoned plans for a nuclear program altogether for the foreseeable future.

Nuclear utilities in crisis:

• Many of the traditional nuclear and fossil fuel based utilities are struggling with a dramatic plunge in wholesale power prices, a shrinking client base, declining power consumption, high debt loads, increasing production costs at aging facilities, and stiff competition, especially from renewables.
• In Europe, energy giants EDF, Engie (France), E.ON, RWE (Germany) and Vattenfall (Sweden), as well as utilities TVO (Finland) and CEZ (Czech Republic), have all been downgraded by credit rating agencies over the past year. All of the utilities registered severe losses on the stock market.
• French utility AREVA has accumulated €10 billion (US$10.9 billion) in losses over the past five years. Share value 95% below 2007 peak value. Standard & Poor's downgraded AREVA shares to BB+ ('junk') in November 2014 and again to BB- in March 2015. The company is to be broken up, with French-state-controlled utility EDF taking a majority stake in the reactor building and maintenance subsidiary AREVA NP will then be opened up to foreign investment. The rescue scheme has not been approved by the European Commission.
• The AREVA rescue scheme could turn out to be highly problematic for EDF as its risk profile expands. EDF struggles with US$41.5 billion debt, downgraded by S&P, shares lost over half of their value in less than a year and 87% compared to their peak value in 2007.
• RWE shares went down by 54% in 2015.
• In Asia, the share value of the largest Japanese utilities TEPCO and Kansai was wiped out in the aftermath of the Fukushima disaster and never recovered. Chinese utility CGN (EDF partner for Hinkley Point C), listed on the Hong Kong stock exchange since December 2014, has lost 60% of its share value since June 2015. The only exception to this trend is the Korean utility KEPCO that operates as a virtual monopoly in a regulated market.
• In the U.S., the largest nuclear operator Exelon has lost about 60% of its share value compared to its peak value in 2008.

Nuclear power vs. renewable energy deployment:

• Global investment in renewable energy reached an all-time record of US$286 billion in 2015, exceeding the 2011 previous peak by 2.7%.
• Since 2000, countries have added 417 GW of wind energy and 229 GW of solar energy to power grids around the world. Taking into account the fact that 37 GW are currently in long-term outage, operational nuclear capacity meanwhile fell by 8 GW.
• Brazil, China, Germany, India, Japan, Mexico, the Netherlands, Spain and the U.K. ‒ a list that includes three of the world's four largest economies ‒ now all generate more electricity from non-hydro renewables than from nuclear power.
• In 2015, annual growth for global generation from solar was over 33%, for wind power over 17%, and for nuclear power 1.3%, exclusively due to China.
• Compared to 1997, when the Kyoto Protocol on climate change was signed, in 2015 an additional 829 TWh of wind power was produced globally and 252 TWh of solar photovoltaics electricity, compared to nuclear's additional 178 TWh.
• In China, as in the previous three years, in 2015, electricity production from wind alone (185 TWh), exceeded that from nuclear (161 TWh). China spent over US$100 billion on renewables in 2015, while investment decisions for six nuclear reactors amounted to US$18 billion.
• In India, wind power (41 TWh) outpaced nuclear (35 TWh) for the fourth year in a row.
• Of all U.S. electricity, 8% was generated by non-hydro renewables in 2015, up from 2.7% in 2007.
• In the European Union from 1997–2014, wind produced an additional 303 TWh and solar 109 TWh, while nuclear power generation declined by 65 TWh.

The WNISR authors summarize: "In short, the 2015 data shows that renewable energy based power generation is enjoying continuous rapid growth, while nuclear power production, excluding China, is shrinking globally. Small unit size and lower capacity factors of renewable power plants continue to be more than compensated for by their short lead times, easy manufacturability and installation, and rapidly scalable mass production. Their high acceptance level and rapidly falling system costs will further accelerate their development."

Mycle Schneider, Antony Froggatt et al., 2016, World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2016, www.worldnuclearreport.org or direct download: www.worldnuclearreport.org/IMG/pdf/20160713MSC-WNISR2016V2-HR.pdf

Twenty years after its first edition, the World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2012 portrays an industry suffering from the cumulative impacts of the world economic crisis, the Fukushima disaster, ferocious competitors and its own planning and management difficulties.

Key results of the 2012 assessment include:

• Only seven new reactors started up, while 19 were shut down in 2011. On 5 July 2012, one reactor was reconnected to the grid at Ohi in Japan and another unit is expected to generate power on the site in July 2012 too. However, it remains highly uncertain, how many others will receive permission to restart operations in Japan.
• Four countries announced that they will phase out nuclear power within a given timeframe. 
• At least five countries have decided not to engage or re-engage in nuclear programs. 
• In Bulgaria and Japan two reactors under construction were abandoned.
• In four countries new build projects were officially cancelled. Of the 59 units under construction in the world, at least 18 are experiencing multi-year delays, while the remaining 41 projects were started within the past five years or have not yet reached projected start-up dates, making it difficult to assess whether they are running on schedule.
• Construction costs are rapidly rising. The European EPR cost estimate has increased by a factor of four (adjusted for inflation) over the past ten years.
• Two thirds of the assessed nuclear companies and utilities were downgraded by credit rating agency Standard and Poor's over the past five years.
• The assessment of a dozen nuclear companies reveals that all but one performed worse than the UK FTSE100 index. The shares of the world's largest nuclear operator, French state utility EDF, lost 82 percent of their value, that of the world's largest nuclear builder, French state company AREVA, fell by 88 percent.

In contrast, renewable energy develop-ment has continued with rapid growth figures.

• Global investment in renewable energy totaled US$260 billion in 2011, almost five times the 2004 amount. Over the same period, the total cumulative investment in renewables has risen to over US$1 trillion, which compares to nuclear power investment decisions of about $120 billion.
• Installed worldwide nuclear capacity decreased again in 2011, while the annual installed wind power capacity increased by 41 GW in 2011 alone. Installed wind power and solar capacity in China grew by a factor of around 50 in the past five years, while nuclear capacity increased by a factor of 1.5. Since 2000, within the European Union nuclear capacity decreased by 14 GW, while 142 GW of renewable capacity was installed, 18 percent more than natural gas with 116 GW. 

"The market for nuclear is shrinking year by year, while renewable energy deployment continues at pace and in an ever increasing number of  coun-tries. With nuclear power becoming more expensive than a widening range of renewable energy technologies this trend will only continue", said Antony Froggatt, co-author of the report.

"The fact that plant life extension seems the most likely survival strategy of the nuclear industry raises serious safety issues. Most critically will be to what extent and for how long nuclear safety authorities will be in a position to with-stand growing pressure from nuclear utilities to keep operating increasingly outdated technology", states lead aut-hor Mycle Schneider.

Source: www.WorldNuclearReport.org.

The nuclear industry loathes the annual World Nuclear Industry Status Reports (WNISR). The authoritative WNISRs¹ provide detailed factual information on the status of nuclear power worldwide. As such, they undermine the industry's claims that nuclear power is going well and will only get better.

The industry's irritation is exacerbated by the commentary of former World Nuclear Association executive Steve Kidd, who regularly debunks industry propaganda. Last year, for example, Kidd wrote:

"We have learned one thing for certain: it's a lot easier to shut a reactor down than to build a new one. There are alternatives to nuclear for power generation and the competition is getting continuously stiffer. Hence well-researched and articulate critiques against the concept of any nuclear growth ... such as the annual World Nuclear Industry Status Report, are becoming increasingly difficult to ignore. The combination of aging operating reactors, delayed construction plans combined with escalating costs of new units and competition from renewable power technologies is becoming a compelling story to any lay reader."

In response to the growing recognition and authority of the annual WNISRs, the World Nuclear Association (WNA) has decided to strike back with the release of the World Nuclear Performance Report 2016, the first in what promises to be an annual series.²

The nuclear industry generally relies on a few cherry-picked factoids which skate around the simple fact that nuclear power has flatlined over the past decade, along with fanciful projections of future growth. And for the most part, that's just what the WNA report does.

But given that it purports to be a factual analysis of the status of nuclear power, the WNA report has to present some inconvenient facts ... such as the fact that nuclear power now generates "roughly 10% of the world's electricity". As WNISR-2015 notes, nuclear's current share is well down from the peak of 17.6% in 1996.³

The nuclear power industry is "growing", the WNA report claims. Which is a round-about way of saying that the industry isn't growing. Even including 41 operable-but-not-actually-operating reactors in Japan, there are no more operable reactors now than there were 20 years ago. And the WNA report itself states that nuclear power generation "has shown a slow decline since the turn of the century."

Nuclear reactors generated 2,441 terrawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity in 2015, according to the WNA report. But as WNISR-2015 notes, the near-identical figure of 2,410 TWh in 2014 was 9.4% below the historic peak in 2006.³

The WNA notes that nuclear accounts for "around one-third of the world's low-carbon electricity supply". Which is a round-about way of acknowledging that renewables generate more than twice as much electricity as nuclear. The WNA report is silent about the spectacular growth of renewables over the past decade.

While the WNA does its best to put a positive spin on nuclear power's precarious situation, there's also some realpolitik such as this:

"[T]he situation facing the nuclear industry globally is challenging. Established fleets in several European countries face public acceptance issues and a negative policy environment; there are tough economic conditions for operators not only in some deregulated energy markets such as in parts of the USA, but also in European countries where electricity prices have been depressed by a growing share of renewable technologies subsidised to produce regardless of whether their electricity is needed or not."

The WNA report claims that nuclear power in Europe "is appearing more attractive in the face of the EU's measures to reduce carbon emissions and the Energy Union goal to increase collective energy security." Yet every serious analysis of nuclear power in Europe projects decline in the coming decades, most recently the European Union's 'PINC' report.⁴

The WNA itself acknowledges that there are just four reactors currently under construction in western and central Europe and that all of them are behind schedule.

The WNA claims that the future of nuclear power in Japan is "crystallising" with the first reactor restarts last year. But the future of nuclear power in Japan is as clear as mud. Twelve of Japan's power reactors have been permanently shut down in the aftermath of the Fukushima disaster (including the six Fukushima Daiichi reactors). Of the 43 'operable' reactors, only two are operating. Perhaps one-third will eventually restart, perhaps two-thirds, perhaps less, perhaps more.

The WNA claims that "substantial progress" has been made towards the commercialization of small and advanced reactor designs. Which is a round-about way of saying that substantial progress has not been made towards the commercialisation of small and advanced reactor designs. Reports released last year by the French and U.S. governments give the lie to the WNA's claims.

The report by the French Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety states: "There is still much R&D to be done to develop the Generation IV nuclear reactors, as well as for the fuel cycle and the associated waste management which depends on the system chosen."⁵ The US Government Accountability Office report on the status of small modular reactors (SMRs) and other 'advanced' reactor concepts in the US concluded:⁶

"Both light water SMRs and advanced reactors face additional challenges related to the time, cost, and uncertainty associated with developing, certifying or licensing, and deploying new reactor technology, with advanced reactor designs generally facing greater challenges than light water SMR designs. It is a multi-decade process, with costs up to $1 billion to $2 billion, to design and certify or license the reactor design, and there is an additional construction cost of several billion dollars more per power plant."

More reactors came online last year than at any time in the past 25 years, the WNA report states. Yes, 10 reactors came online last year, but there were also eight shut-downs. As Steve Kidd wrote in January 2016: "The future is likely to repeat the experience of 2015 when 10 new reactors came into operation worldwide but 8 shut down. So as things stand, the industry is essentially running to stand still."⁷

The WNA report states: "Construction times for new reactors have improved over the last 15 years, with reactors coming on line in 2015 having an average construction time of around six years." But a large majority of those reactors came online in China. WNISR-2015 noted that the average construction time of the latest 40 reactors (in nine countries) that started up since 2005 was 9.4 years.³

The WNA report states that more reactors are under construction than at any time in the last 25 years. But as WNISR-2015 noted, at least three-quarters of all reactors under construction worldwide are delayed; and 16 of 18 Generation III+ reactors (AP1000, Rosatom AES-2006, EPR) are delayed.³

And the WNA report has little to say about the aging of the global reactor fleet and reactor closures. The International Energy Agency expects a "wave of retirements" ‒ almost 200 closures by 2040.⁸

The WNA report claims that 158 reactors are in the planning stage ‒ approval has been granted and/or funding has been committed by a developer. However a good number of those reactors will never the light of day. For example the WNA lists⁹ 18 planned reactors in the USA, 9 in Japan, 25 in Russia, and 24 in India. But nuclear power is in retreat in the USA and Japan, and growth has been very slow in Russia and India.

The WNA report claims that "older plants operate as well as younger plants." But the aging of nuclear plants is creating all sorts of problems. The industry faces an escalating battle to keep aging reactors running as about a quarter of components and computer systems become obsolete, according to nuclear plant owners. A recent survey of people employed in the industry found 86% thought the age of the plants was having a moderate or significant effect on efficiency.¹⁰

Funding safety upgrades for old reactors is another problem. In France, for example, it's anyone's guess how the nuclear utilities will fund new reactors as well as the €100 billion required by 2030 to upgrade the existing fleet.¹¹

References:

1. http://worldnuclearreport.org

2. World Nuclear Association, June 2016, 'World Nuclear Performance Report 2016', http://world-nuclear.org/our-association/publications/online-reports/wor...

3. Mycle Schneider, Antony Froggatt et al., July 2015, 'World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2015', www.worldnuclearreport.org/-2015-.html

4. 21 April 2016, 'The steady decline of nuclear power in Europe', Nuclear Monitor #822, www.wiseinternational.org/nuclear-monitor/822/steady-decline-nuclear-pow...

5. IRSN, 2015, 'Review of Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems', www.irsn.fr/EN/newsroom/News/Pages/20150427_Generation-IV-nuclear-energy...

Direct download: www.irsn.fr/EN/newsroom/News/Documents/IRSN_Report-GenIV_04-2015.pdf

6. U.S. Government Accountability Office, July 2015, 'Nuclear Reactors: Status and challenges in development and deployment of new commercial concepts', GAO-15-652, www.gao.gov/assets/680/671686.pdf

7. Steve Kidd, 8 Jan 2016, 'After COP-21 - where does nuclear stand?', www.neimagazine.com/opinion/opinionafter-cop-21---where-does-nuclear-sta...

8. International Energy Agency, 2014, www.iea.org/media/news/2014/press/141112_WEO_FactSheet_Nuclear.pdf

9. http://world-nuclear.org/information-library/facts-and-figures/world-nuc...

10. Paul Brown, 6 June 2016, 'Nuclear plants face crisis of ageing', http://climatenewsnetwork.net/nuclear-plants-in-crisis-over-ageing-parts/

11. World Nuclear News, 11 Feb 2016, 'EDF faces €100 billion reactor upgrade bill, says audit office', www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-EDF-faces-EUR100-billion-reactor-upgrade-b...

The 'World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2015' (WNISR) has been released. These annual reports provide a vast amount of useful information about the global nuclear industry and useful summaries of the development of renewable energy. Here we summarise some key findings.

Startups and shutdowns. In 2014, five reactors started up (three in China, one in Argentina, one in Russia) and one was shut down (Vermont Yankee in the US). In the first half of 2015, four reactors started up in China and one in South Korea, while two were shut down (Doel-1 in Belgium and Grafenrheinfeld in Germany).
Reactor operation. There are 31 countries operating nuclear power plants. A total of 391 reactors (three more than a year ago) have a combined installed capacity of 337 GW (5 GW more than a year ago). Not a single unit generated power in Japan in 2014, and WNISR classifies 40 Japanese reactors as being in Long-Term Outage (LTO). Besides the Japanese reactors, one Swedish reactor meets the LTO criteria.

Industry in decline: The 391 operating reactors − excluding LTOs − are 47 fewer than the 2002 peak of 438, while the total installed capacity peaked in 2010 at 367 GW before declining by 8% to 337 GW, which is comparable to levels last seen two decades ago. Annual nuclear electricity generation reached 2,410 terrawatt-hours (TWh) in 2014 − a 2.2% increase over the previous year, but 9.4% below the historic peak in 2006.

Share in power mix. The nuclear share of the world's power generation remained stable over the past three years, with 10.8% in 2014 after declining steadily from a historic peak of 17.6% in 1996. Nuclear power's share of global commercial primary energy production also remained stable at 4.4%, the lowest level since 1984.

Reactor age. In the absence of major new-build programs apart from China, the mean age of the world operating nuclear reactor fleet continues to rise, and by mid-2015 stood at 28.8 years (the mean age of the 41 reactors classified as LTO is 26.4 years). Over half of the total, or 199 reactors, have operated for more than 30 years, including 54 that have run for over 40 years. One third (33) of the US reactors have operated for more than 40 years.

Lifetime projections. If all currently operating reactors were shut down at the end of a 40-year lifetime, by 2020 the number of reactors would be 19 below the number at the end of 2014. In the following decade to 2030, 188 units (178 GW) would have to be replaced − five times the number of startups achieved over the past decade.

Construction delays. As in previous years, 14 countries are currently building nuclear power plants. As of July 2015, 62 reactors were under construction. Almost 40% of the projects (24) are in China. All of the reactors under construction in 10 out of 14 countries have experienced delays, mostly year-long. At least three-quarters (47) of all reactors under construction worldwide are delayed. Five reactors have been listed as "under construction" for more than 30 years.

Construction times. The average construction time of the latest 40 reactors (in nine countries) that started up since 2005 − all but one (in Argentina) in Asia or Eastern Europe − was 9.4 years with a large range from 4 to 36 years.

Construction starts. In 2014, construction began on three reactors, one each in Argentina, Belarus, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). This compares to 15 construction starts − of which 10 were in China alone − in 2010 and 10 in 2013. China did not start a single new construction in 2014, but started two in the first half of 2015 − so far the world's only starts in 2015. Historic analysis shows that construction starts in the world peaked in 1976 at 44. In the 4.5 years from 1 January 2011 and 1 July 2015, first concrete was poured for 26 new plants worldwide − fewer than in a single year in the 1970s.

Construction cancellations. Between 1977 and 2015, a total of 92 (one in eight) of all construction sites were abandoned or suspended in 18 countries in various stages of advancement.

Newcomer program delays. Only two newcomer countries are actually building reactors − Belarus and the UAE. Further delays have occurred over the year in the development of nuclear programs for most of the more or less advanced potential newcomer countries, including Bangladesh, Egypt, Jordan, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Vietnam.

Generation III Delays. Twenty-nine years after the Chernobyl disaster, none of the next-generation or so-called Generation III+ reactors has entered service, with construction projects in Finland and France many years behind schedule. Of 18 reactors of Generation III+ design (eight Westinghouse AP1000, six Rosatom AES-2006, four AREVA EPR), 16 are delayed by between two and nine years. A number of causes for delays have been assessed: design issues, shortage of skilled labor, quality control issues, supply chain issues, poor planning, and shortage of finance. Standardization did not take place, and the introduction of modularized design seems to have simply shifted the quality issues from construction sites to module factories. Serious defects found in several French pressure-vessel forgings could scuttle the entire EPR enterprise.

Operating cost increases. In some countries (including Belgium, France, Germany, Sweden, and the US), historically low inflation-adjusted operating costs have escalated so rapidly that the average reactor's operating cost is barely below, or even exceeds, the normal band of wholesale power prices. This has led to a number of responses from nuclear operators.

Nuclear power vs. renewable energy deployment. After two years of decline, global investment in renewable energy increased to US$270 billion (+17%) in 2014, close to the all-time record of $278 billion in 2011, and four times the 2004 total. Global investment decisions on new nuclear power plants remained an order of magnitude below renewables investments.

Installed capacity. In 2014 almost half (49%) of the added electricity generating capacity was new renewables (excluding large hydro), including 49 GW for new wind power and 46 GW of solar photovoltaics. Since 2000, wind added 355 GW and solar 179 GW − respectively 18 and 9 times more than nuclear with 20 GW.

Electricity generation. Brazil, China, Germany, India, Japan, Mexico, the Netherlands, and Spain − a list that includes three of the world's four largest economies − now all generate more electricity from non-hydro renewables than from nuclear power. These eight countries represent more than three billion people or 45% of the world's population.

There is much more of interest in the WNISR report, including chapters on new reactors types (especially small modular reactors) and the Fukushima disaster.

Mycle Schneider, Antony Froggatt et al., July 2015, 'World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2015', www.worldnuclearreport.org/-2015-.html

According to the World Nuclear Association's World Nuclear News, some 60 countries are considering the use of nuclear power, in addition to the 30 that already do so. The figure comes from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which held a four-day workshop to develop tools to help those countries make the decision. It said that 20 of the states it is helping could have a program in place to use nuclear by 2030.

"Nuclear is a 100-year-long-commitment," said Yury Sokolov, who is in charge of the Nuclear Energy department of the IAEA. "A national energy policy should involve a proper assessment of a country's energy needs," and after that can a possible role for nuclear power be defined, if appropriate. Sokolov is then 'forgetting' the commitment for long-lived nuclear wastes, which is, too say the least, a bit longer than 100 years.

One key element in the IAEA's current toolkit for countries interested in nuclear energy is a book which details essential steps on the path to the use of nuclear power. Among them are the establishment of an independent expert safety regulator, an appropriate legislative framework and the development of a public debate on nuclear.

So, what is the reality of these plans? In August, the World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2009 (written by M. Schneider, S. Thomas, A. Froggatt, D. Koplow) was published. Main conclusion of the report is that a nuclear ‘renaissance’ is not happening. Part of the report is a more detailed look to potential newcomer countries.

Between 2006 and 2008 alone, the IAEA has received requests for technical cooperation from some 43 Member States. The IAEA accounts for the introduction of nuclear power in 20 new countries by 2030 in its high projection and on five newcomer countries in its low projection. As detailed in the following table, not all countries that ask for assistance are actually planning to introduce nuclear power plants. Rather, the IAEA notes that some are merely “interested in considering the issues associated with a nuclear power programme”.

Tabel 1: Positions of Potential Nuclear Newcomer Countries.

Only one newcomer country, Iran, is already in the course of building a nuclear power plant.

France has been particularly active in negotiating new nuclear trade or cooperation agreements with potential newcomer countries. According to Philippe Pallier, director of the newly created Agence France Nucléaire International (AFNI), France received requests by "several tens of countries" for assistance to implement a civil nuclear power program. Agreements were signed or are under negotiation in particular in North Africa and in the Middle East, including Algeria, Jordan, Libya, Morocco, Tunisia and the United Arab Emirates. In addition, interest in nuclear energy has been demonstrated by Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Syria, and Yemen. The US government has signed a nuclear agreement with the United Arab Emirates and memoranda of understanding on nuclear cooperation with Saudi Arabia and Bahrain.

Jordan has set up a Committee for Nuclear Strategy and received initial proposals by KEPCO (South Korea), AREVA, Atomstroyexport and AECL (Canada). Construction is projected to start as early as 2012.

In Asia potential candidates for French atomic help include Thailand and Vietnam. China, Russia and South-Korea are said to have offered assistance to Bangladesh to build a nuclear power plant, a “46-year old plan”, the Financial Express notes.

In Europe Albania and Croatia are discussing the possibility of building a joint nuclear plant. Montenegro and Bosnia have been invited to join the project. The Italian utility ENEL is said to have evaluated the feasibility of the project.

Portugal is said to be reviewing a nuclear project that could serve Spain as well. However, in the past the government has rejected nuclear proposals and Spain has currently a firm nuclear phase out policy.

Lithuania invited Poland, Estonia and Latvia to build a joint “Baltic” nuclear plant to replace the remaining second Ignalina reactor that will be shut down by the end of 2009 according the country’s EU accession agreement. However, even after the shutdown of Ignalina, power consumption in the other countries would not justify the construction of a large nuclear plant. Financing is also a major issue.

Belarus, the country that was worst hit by the Chernobyl disaster in 1986, has received offers for a nuclear plant from Atomstroyexport, AREVA and Westinghouse.

Of 38 potential nuclear newcomer countries listed by the World Nuclear Association, 15 don’t have nuclear experience on research-reactor level (considered as one of the prerequisites for the operation of a commercial plant) and 20 have an electricity grid that is smaller than 10,000 MW (considered by the IAEA as the minimum grid capacity to add an additional large unit -1000MW or 10%- of any type in order to prevent grid interface problems). Seventeen countries have both research-reactor experience and larger than 10,000 MW grids.

What are the prospects of a nuclear power program in these countries?

Australia is a large uranium producer but the introduction of nuclear power always faced significant controversy. A December 2006 report to the Prime Minister, the Switkowski Report, suggested the rapid introduction of a nuclear power program in the country. An international panel of experts, including three of the authors of this report, concluded that the Switkowski Report was highly biased and that the targets were unrealistic. Nothing has happened since. Any significant follow-up over the coming 20 years in industrial terms is highly unlikely. Switkowski acknowledged in March 2009 that once the people accepted nuclear power “it would be at least another 15 years before a reactor could be built”. In fact, the newly elected Australian government will put that timeframe even further away. As Martin Ferguson, Minister for Resources and Energy has recently restated, “the Government has a clear policy of prohibiting the development of an Australian nuclear power industry”.

It has been reported that in November 2007 the Chilean President asked the Energy Minister to look into the nuclear power option. A modest effort seems ongoing, as in 2009 the government allocated CP$430 million (US$665,000) to study nuclear power. Even such a minor expenditure raised significant criticism by the environmental community in the country. There are no short or medium term prospects for a nuclear power program.

In Egypt it is already 35 years since the first nuclear power plant was proposed. The plan never materialized. More recently Egypt signed nuclear cooperation agreements with Russia and China. In December 2008 the government announced that it had selected the US company Bechtel (later transferred to Worley Parsons) to provide assistance in selecting a reactor provider and to train staff. A 1,000 MW plant is planned to start up by 2017.

Nuclear power projects in Indonesia have a 20-year history. In 1989 the National Atomic Energy Agency (BATAN) carried out the first studies. In 2007 the Korea Electric Power Corp (KEPCO) agreed to develop a new feasibility study for two 1,000 MW reactors. Cooperation agreements were also signed with Japan and Russia. Indonesia’s Minister for Research and Technology was quoted in March 2008 as stating that the country would need four 1,200 MW units by 2025 and that the first one was to go online by 2016. Construction would have to start in 2008. “Otherwise, we will be behind schedule”, he stated. Indonesia will be behind schedule. No call for tender has been announced yet. The nuclear plans have raised concerns and protests because of intense volcanic and earthquake activities in the areas envisaged to host a plant, in particular in Central Java. There is little prospect for near or medium term nuclear power plant operation and no target dates have been announced.

Israel has developed a full-scale nuclear weapons program and thus has strong nuclear capabilities. Several arguments speak against a short and medium term nuclear power program in the country. With a grid size of just 10,000 MW a nuclear plant would be clearly oversized. The country has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and is therefore technically isolated. Nuclear power plants are sometimes called pre-deployed nuclear weapons. There are few places where this perspective seems more pertinent than in the case of Israel. And finally, Israel is a major player in the renewable energy sector. An Israeli company currently plans to construct in California the world’s largest solar project, a 1,300 MW plant. A similar project with 500 MW will be started up by 2012 in Israel.

The Berlusconi Government has introduced legislation that would pave the way for the reintroduction of nuclear power in Italy. Four EPRs could be built with construction starting as early as 2013, under an agreement signed in February 2009 by the French utility EDF and the largest Italian utility ENEL. However, Italy is the only country that shut down its nuclear program after the Chernobyl accident in 1986 and a referendum in 1987 reinforced the decision. Four operational reactors and four units under construction were abandoned and no nuclear electricity was generated after 1987. Twenty years later, Italy continues to face significant decommissioning and waste management costs. There is no final repository for high-level waste and the public remains hostile. Italy had built up a significant nuclear industry and still has a strong nuclear lobby. More recently ENEL announced investments in nuclear plants outside the country, in particular in the Slovak Mochovce plant and the French Flamanville-3 unit. This strategy seems much more realistic than any short or medium term revival of nuclear power in Italy itself.

Kuwait announced plans in March 2009 to set up a national nuclear energy commission and has introduced draft legislation to achieve this. The country is in the very early stages of designing a possible nuclear power policy. With only 11,000 MW, its grid is very small. Applications in the short and medium term are unlikely.

The Indian nuclear industry has stated that it would be ready to assist Malaysia in developing a nuclear power program “if there is a genuine interest, as nuclear power production is a long term commitment". There are no short or medium term perspectives or ambitions.

In Norway a government appointed committee recommended in February 2008 that “the potential contribution of nuclear energy to a sustainable energy future should be recognized." However, as the OECD’s Nuclear Energy Agency’s Norway country profile states: “Norway does not have a nuclear power generation programme.”

The Philippines abandoned a nuclear power project in the past. A 600 MW Westinghouse reactor, Bataan-1, was ordered in 1974 and building started in 1976. The nearly complete project was abandoned by the incoming Aquino government days after the Chernobyl accident in 1986. However, payments apparently continued until 2007. In February 2008 the IAEA visited the site at the request of the Philippine government. There have been successive attempts from Members of Congress to introduce bills mandating the rehabilitation of the plan, the latest in December 2008. "The government has to assess what the new licensing requirements should be, how to modernize the two-decades old technology to current standards, and how to confirm that all aspects of the plant will function properly and safely. It is not the IAEA´s role to state whether the plant is usable or not, or how much it will cost to rehabilitate", the IAEA stated. The power plant site is close to an earthquake prone zone and the dormant Pinatubo volcano. Considering the disastrous experience with the initial investment, the absence of an appropriate nuclear framework (legislation, safety authorities, etc.) and significant opposition against the project in the country, it seems unlikely to go ahead.

Poland ordered five Russian designed reactors between 1974 and 1982. Work started on two units at Zarnowiec but all orders were officially cancelled by 1990. The current Polish government has revived the nuclear plans and stated that a first reactor should be operational by 2020. The state owned power utility PGE announced plans in January 2009 to build two 3,000 MW plants in the country. In addition, Poland has joined the Lithuanian Energy Organisation (LEO) alongside Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania with the project of a “Baltic plant” in a Visaginas called project. Originally a new plant replacing the Ignalina plant, which will close by the end of 2009, was planned to start up as early as 2015. No new realistic time frame nor financing schemes are available. No call for tender has been issued.

In Portugal “in 2004 the government rejected a proposal to introduce nuclear power but this is now being reviewed”, writes the WNA. However, Portuguese public opinion is overwhelmingly opposed to nuclear power and there are no plans. As the OECD’s Nuclear Energy Agency’s Portugal country profile states: “Portugal does not have a nuclear power generation programme.”

In Thailand there have been nuclear power plans since the 1970s, none of which ever materialized. Under the previous government, the energy minister revived plans for the construction of four nuclear reactors with a total of 4,000 MW coming online by 2020-2021. However, the incoming government has not reiterated any of these plans.

While the IAEA does not identify the countries in the various categories in Table 1, it is clear that Turkey is the only potential newcomer country that has already launched a call for tender. But in September 2008 it had received only one offer, by the Russian Atomstroyexport (ASE), amongst the six potential bidders. In principle, the procedure had to go back to the starting point, since Turkish law does not allow for the attribution of such a contract if there is only one bidder. However, negotiations have been continuing around the offer from the Russian consortium, which includes ASE, Inter RAO UES and the Turkish company Park Teknik. The bid, based on the BOO (Build-Own-Operate) model, covers the construction of four 1200 MWe AES-2006 VVER reactors to be built near Mersin in the Akkuyu district. In February 2009 the project was subject to discussions between the Russian and Turkish presidents. Financing of the project remains a key problem. It has been reported that the initial Russian offer was to sell the power from the to-bebuilt plant at a price that would represent more than three times the current wholesale power price in Turkey. A revised offer would still be more than double current wholesale levels. However,

Akkuyu was the location of an earlier abandoned nuclear project that was based on a 100% prefinancing scheme and still failed. Turkey lacked, and continues to lack, consistent nuclear infrastructure and the project received fierce opposition by the local population. The latest proposal only revived the local protests.

The United Arab Emirates (UAE), following recommendations by the IAEA, set up a Nuclear Energy Program Implementation Organization (NEPIO) and the Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation (ENEC) as a public entity with initial funding of US$ 100 million; and it has initiated steps to develop nuclear legislation. The move is following a government position paper on the “Evaluation and Potential Development of Peaceful Nuclear Energy”. By 2020, the Emirates envisages operating three 1,500 MW units, but no decision was taken as of middle of May 2009. Although the UAE has signed a far-reaching nuclear cooperation agreement with France, there is strong resistance in the US Congress to the implementation of a similar agreement signed by the previous US administration at the very end of its term on 15 January 2009. “Given the UAE’s past history as the major transshipment point for goods destined for Iran’s nuclear and missile programs, serious concerns remain about its eligibility for a nuclear cooperation agreement with the U.S.”, stated Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the ranking Republican member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. The strong bi-partisan opposition in the USA could seriously hamper any attempts by the UAE to go ahead with a nuclear power program, even if President Obama has officially authorized implementation. Also, the UAE would have to very substantially increase overall installed capacity and the grid, since a single 1,500 MW plant corresponds to about 10% of the currently installed capacity.

Venezuela passed a decree “on Development of the Nuclear Industry” as early as 1975, but never did develop a nuclear power program. In September 2008 President Chavez was quoted as saying “we certainly are interested in developing nuclear energy, for peaceful ends of course – for medical purposes and to generate electricity”. Russia and France have offered assistance in building up a nuclear program in Venezuela. However, apparently there are no concrete decisions or plans yet.

In 1996 Vietnam signed an agreement with South Korea for “Cooperation in Research into the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy”. Later cooperation agreements were also signed with other countries including Canada, China, France, Japan and Russia. In mid 2008 a nuclear law was passed with the view of constructing two 1,000 MW units starting in 2014 with a targeted grid connection of 2018. Vietnam is lacking general nuclear infrastructure and would have to invest considerably in grid expansion in order to absorb the production of the two units that represent almost 20% of the currently installed capacity.

Conclusion
It remains unlikely that any of the potential new nuclear countries can implement fission power programs any time soon within an appropriate technical, political, legal and economic framework. None of the potential newcomer countries have proper nuclear regulations, an independent regulator, domestic maintenance capacity and the skilled workforce in place to run a nuclear plant.

The head of the French Nuclear Safety Authority has estimated it would take at least 15 years to build up the necessary regulatory framework in countries that are starting from scratch. Furthermore, few countries have sufficient grid capacity to absorb the output of a large nuclear plant. This means that the economic challenge of financing a nuclear plant would be exacerbated by the large ancillary investments in the distribution network that would be required.

The countries that have a grid size and quality that could apparently cope with a large nuclear plant in the short and medium term encounter other significant barriers: a hostile or passive government (Australia, Norway, Malaysia, Thailand), an essentially hostile public opinion (Italy, Turkey), international non-proliferation concerns (Egypt, Israel), major economic concerns (Poland), a hostile environment due to earthquake and volcanic risks (Indonesia), lack of all necessary infrastructure (Venezuela). Many countries face several of these barriers at the same time.

The report World Nuclear Industry Status 2009, Commissioned by the German Federal Ministry of Environment, Nature Conservation and Reactor Safety and published in August 2009, is very interesting reading. It can be found at: http://www.bmu.de/english/nuclear_safety/downloads/doc/44832.php

Sources: World Nuclear news, 27 July 2009 / World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2009, Mycle Schneider, Steve Thomas, Antony Froggatt, Doug Koplow
Contact: WISE Amsterdam