(May 26, 2000) The Kyoto Protocol demands from the industrialized countries greenhouse gas reductions of 5.2% until the end of the first budget period (2008-2012) compared to emissions in 1990, and proposes a range of so-called "flexible mechanisms" to reach this goal.
(530.5173) Global 2000 - These "flexible mechanisms" allow countries that have binding emission reduction targets (Annex 1 of the Kyoto Protocol: most OECD countries, most Central and East European countries as well as the former Soviet Union countries like Russia, Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania), to achieve those targets with other instruments than through national policies and measures.
These mechanisms are emission trading, Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)(see WISE News Communique 526.5143: "Clean Development Mechanism: A new nuclear subsidy?") and Joint Implementation (JI). CDM and JI are both so-called project-based mechanisms. Annex 1 countries ("donor country") are allowed to conduct projects in other countries. If the other country is an Annex 1 country as well, it is called JI, if it is a developing country, it is called CDM.
The donor country is then allowed to count for the generated emission reductions at home. There are a few differences between CDM and JI projects: the CDM projects have to assist developing countries in achieving sustainable development--this is not explicitly the case for JI projects. The CDM projects are supervised by an executive board. JI projects must only have the approval of both parties involved. The CDM projects can be counted from the year 2000 on, JI projects only from the beginning of the first budget period, which means from 2008 onward.
What is still open for discussion are criteria and guidelines for the projects and the question of what kind of projects would be allowed as eligible projects under the Kyoto Protocol. For the CDM the discussion about excluding nuclear projects as eligible projects is already going on but not for JI. An analysis of the Annex 1 countries shows that nuclear projects have to be banned under the JI as well as under the CDM.
Why?
Even if the probability of building nuclear power plants in most Western countries is not high in the near future, the situation looks different in the Central and East European and former Soviet Union countries, being part of the Annex 1 countries and being possible countries for JI projects.
The K2/R4 project, for example: the financing of this project (construction of two nuclear reactors) in the Ukraine has been discussed for years--and luckily not been resolved yet. If finishing those two 1,000-MW reactors would be eligible as a JI project (built by Siemens, Framatome or Westinghouse) this would mean a completely new financing mechanism. If the Ukraine could "prove" that not building K2/R4 would mean that they need to build a new fossil-fired power plant as substitute, K2/R4 will be generating theoretical emission reductions that could either be sold at the international market or used to reach the reduction target of the donor country (Germany?, France?,...).
A first assessment shows that up to 14.4 million tons of CO2 "savings" per year (to compare: Austria has to save up to 16 million tons of CO2 equivalent in the first budget period) could be generated. This calculated amount is based on the CO2 emission from a coal fired plant of the same capacity and does not include indirect CO2 emissions from uranium mining. A deal could be between a country X, the Ukraine and the consortium Siemens/Framatome for example: The country X would pay Siemens/Framatome to build K2/R4, in exchange it would get x tons theoretical emission reduction to use for reaching its own target.
But not only finishing old Soviet projects seems to be problematic in this context. Also eligible upgrading projects with a five to 10 year lifetime extension would mean rewarding unsafe nuclear power plants, prolonging the risk and creating additional waste. Knowing that most of the nuclear power plants in those countries have been connected to the grid between 1970 and 1990, they will reach the end of the lifetime from 2010 onwards--the first budget period. In Russia alone, there is almost 20,000-MW installed capacity. This could mean up to 144 million tons of CO2 offset per year. Knowing that one ton of CO2 could bring between US$5 and US$50, this would mean revenue from US$720 million to US$7.2 billion yearly.
The consequence of not ruling out nuclear projects under JI as well as under CDM are clear: creation of an incentive to build new nuclear power plants, prolonging the lifetime of old nuclear power plants with higher safety risks, taking money away from alternative and clean sources of energy, and producing more and more waste.
Even if the Kyoto Protocol cannot be used to ban the construction of nuclear power plants, it shouldn't be used to give a new incentive for a nuclear revival. The decision if this will happen or not will be taken by our governments at the next Conference of the Parties in November 2000 in The Hague, The Netherlands (the so-called COP-6 meeting). It is, therefore, most important that the anti-nuclear movements lobby their government now to achieve that all nuclear projects are explicitly ruled out of the flexible mechanisms.
Source and Contact: Dr. Corine Veithen at Global 2000 (FOE Austria), Flurschuetzstr. 13, A-1120 Vienna, Austria
Tel: +43-1-812 573020; Fax: +43-1-812 5728
Email: corine.veithen@global2000.at
WWW: www.global2000.at