[sacw] Nuclear Industry Faces Slow Slide to Oblivion

[Harsh Kapoor]

FYI
South Asians Against Nukes
=============================
NEWS FROM THE WORLDWATCH INSTITUTE

FRIDAY, MARCH 5, 1999 AT 12:00 AM (MIDNIGHT) EST

CONTACT:
Chris Flavin, Vice President of Research, 202-452-1999, cflavin@w...
Nicholas Lenssen, Energy Analyst, 303-499-4103, nlenssen@e...
Mary Caron, Press Director, 202-452-1992 x527, mcaron@w...

NUCLEAR POWER NEARS PEAK

As the 20th Anniversary of Three Mile Island Approaches,
the Nuclear Industry Faces Slow Slide to Oblivion

Christopher Flavin and Nicholas Lenssen

Two decades after the world's first major nuclear accident at Three Mile
Island,
the nuclear industry is experiencing a meltdown of historic proportions.
After
growing more than 700 percent in the 1970s, and 140 percent in the 1980s,
nuclear generating capacity has increased less than 5 percent during the 1990s
so far. (See Figure 1.) In the last decade, nuclear power has gone from being
the world's fastest growing energy source to its slowest, trailing well behind
oil and even coal. In 1998, world nuclear generating capacity fell by 175
megawatts.

As the world approaches the 20th anniversary of the Three Mile Island accident
on March 28, global nuclear capacity stands at 343,086 megawatts, providing
just
under 17 percent of the world's electricity. Both of these figures will likely
turn out to be close to the all-time historical peak-and less than
one-tenth the
4,500,000 megawatts that the International Atomic Energy Agency predicted back
in 1974. The Worldwatch Institute projects that global nuclear capacity will
begin a sustained decline by 2002 at the latest, and the U.S. Department of
Energy projects that it will fall by half in the next two decades.

Nuclear power's biggest problems are economic: it is simply no longer
competitive with other, newer forms of power generation. The final 20 U.S.
reactors cost $3 to $4 billion to build, or some $3,000 to $4,000 per kilowatt
of capacity. By contrast, new gas-fired combined cycle plants using the
latest
jet engine technology cost $400-$600 per kilowatt, and wind turbines are being
installed at less than $1,000 per kilowatt.

Even France, which gets more than three-quarters of its electricity from
nuclear
power, now has a moratorium on nuclear plant construction, and other European
countries are debating how quickly to shut their plants down. The only
countries still building nuclear power plants are nations such as China,
Japan,
and possibly Iran, where the electric power industry is still a government
sanctioned monopoly that is protected from competition.

To view Figures 1 and 2, go to the Worldwatch web site at the link below:
http://www.worldwatch.org/alerts/990304.html

By the end of 1998, 429 nuclear reactors were operating worldwide, one less
than
five years earlier. Construction is taking place at 33 new reactors. Of
these,
seven are likely to be completed by the year 2001, while another fourteen may
never be completed. Although global capacity is likely to rise for another
year
or two, it will almost certainly decline precipitously in the following
years as
the construction pipeline dries up, and the closure of older, uneconomic, or
unsafe reactors accelerates.

In the aftermath of the 1979 Three Mile Island accident, the U.S. nuclear
market
was the first to deteriorate. No new nuclear plants have been ordered since
then, and where nuclear generating capacity is now lower than it was a decade
ago. Not only have U.S. power companies stopped building nuclear power
plants,
they have closed six reactors since 1996 that had become too expensive to
operate. Meanwhile, seven of Canada's 21 reactors have been "laid up" due to
safety concerns and are unlikely to operate again.

For North American nuclear power, though, the worst may be yet to come. Wall
Street analysts and the Washington International Energy Group project that as
many as one-third of US and Canadian reactors are vulnerable to shut down
in the
next five years. The main reason is cost: nuclear energy cannot compete in
increasingly competitive power markets.

Western Europe stayed with its nuclear expansion plans longer than the U.S.
did,
but since the 1986 explosion at Chernobyl sent a cloud of radioactive dust
across Europe, the public has turned against nuclear power. Since then,
construction has started on only three new reactors. France, long known as the
most pro-nuclear country, now has a moratorium on nuclear plant construction,
and the Environment Minister, Dominique Voynet, has called for making the ban
permanent. A December 1998 poll found that only 7 percent of French citizens
thought that nuclear power should be the top energy priority, compared to more
than 60 percent who said the priority is renewable energy. The state-owned
utility, Electricite de France, which has in the past put virtually all its
efforts into nuclear power, has begun to invest in "pint-size" microturbines,
and in the development of wind power, both in France and in Morocco.

In Germany, the discussion is not over whether to build more nuclear
plants, but
on how quickly to shut down the existing reactors. While the previous German
government shut down all the nuclear power plants in eastern Germany, the
Social
Democrat/Green government elected in October 1998 plans to phase out the 19
remaining reactors that produce 30 percent of the country's power. As of
February 1999, the Government had agreed that the first reactor will be closed
by 2002, though the country's electric utilities are still fighting the plan.

Asia remains the last stronghold for the nuclear power industry, with 88
reactors operating and 26 under construction, though even there, a slowdown is
evident. Japan, which obtains 35 percent of its electricity from the atom,
only
has two reactors under construction, with work starting on one of them in
1998.
In fact, the plant at Higashidori in Aomori was the first new one approved in
ten years. Citizens groups have nearly stopped construction of new plants,
and
some communities have passed referenda prohibiting additional units. Although
the government plans to add some 20 new reactors by 2010, officials
acknowledge
privately that the plans are unrealistic. South Korea, meanwhile, has six
additional plants still under construction, but there too, the nuclear
industry
faces growing public opposition.

China has the world's most ambitious nuclear program today, with plans to go
from the three reactors it operates now to more than 50 reactors by the year
2020. The country currently has six reactors under construction, with plans to
add four more. Whether the Chinese government will achieve these ambitious
aims is uncertain, given the high foreign exchange requirements of imported
reactors and the lack of a sizable indigenous industry. Moreover, China is
likely to face growing pressure to make its power industry more competitive,
which would likely complicate nuclear development efforts. Efforts to develop
nuclear industries in Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam have all been abandoned
in the last few years.

Around the world, it is nuclear power's high cost that has most damaged its
market prospects. Most nuclear power plants have been built by monopoly
utilities, and the costs were passed through to consumers, regardless of how
high they were. But with governments around the world now opening electric
power markets to the winds of competition for the first time, nuclear power
must
stand on its own. This development is the final blow to the nuclear
industry.
It is only in the few remaining protected power markets-mainly in the Far
East-that any additional plants are being ordered.

One indication of nuclear power's economic status is the price it has been
commanding on the open market. The Pilgrim plant in Massachusetts was sold
for
$80 million, though $67 million of that was for fuel. Also last year, CBS
decided to sell what was once the world's largest nuclear company,
Westinghouse
Nuclear. The company sold for just $1.2 billion. By contrast, Exxon is
valued
at $172 billion, and Microsoft at $278 billion.

Orders for new reactors have largely dried up. (See Figure 2.) The few
remaining nuclear companies, including France's Framatome and Germany's
Siemens,
are surviving on maintenance work, and government-sponsored contracts to
refurbish Eastern Europe's decrepit reactors. If new business does not
turn up
soon, there may be little nuclear construction capacity left. In light of
the
long lead times in nuclear construction, the decline of nuclear power in the
early decades of the new century has become virtually inevitable. The U.S.
Department of Energy, successor-agency to the U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission, now
projects a sharp decline in nuclear power generation in the next two decades.

Nuclear industry supporters argue that given recently heightened concern about
fossil fuel-induced climate change, the timing is tragically ironic. Existing
nuclear plants do displace the emission of large quantities of greenhouse
gases
from coal-fired plants, but few governments are seriously considering nuclear
power as an alternative to fossil fuels.

Instead, they have responded to climate change by investing in new energy
technologies such as solar energy and wind power. As a result, renewable
energy sources are now expanding rapidly. Last year, while nuclear capacity
fell, wind power capacity rose by 2,100 megawatts. These provide tiny
amounts of
power today, but are already growing at the kind of double-digit rates that
nuclear power enjoyed in the 1970s. And the new technologies are not
threatened
by the kind of physical or economic meltdowns that have done in the nuclear
power industry.

-END-

Worldwatch website at (www.worldwatch.org)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/act
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com