Titit Nuklir Iklim, ekonomi

1
Titit NuklirIklim, ekonomi keamanan
energi.Case Finlandia.

• Lauri Myllyvirta, Pelangi

2
Tenaga NuklirIklim, ekonomi keamanan
energi.Case Finlandia.

• Lauri Myllyvirta, Pelangi

3
Nuclear powerClimate, economics
energysecurity. Case Finland.

• Lauri Myllyvirta, Pelangi

4
Alasan-alasan

• Cheap nuclear?
• Nuclear solution to climate change?
• Nuclear security of supply?
• Who wants nukes and why?
• The debate in Finland
• Campaigning ideas

5
Economics of nuclear

• OM costs very low (around 15-20 USD/MWh)
• High upfront costs and long lead time tend to be
  prohibitive in competitive markets (gthigh cost of
  capital)
• Overall economics sensitive to liability of
  operators, degree of market liberalization and
  subsidies

6
(No Transcript)
7
Whats cheap nuclear made of?

• Historic and current subsidies
• Non-competitivedistorted markets
• No or inadequate liability for
• Accidents
• Decommissioning waste
• Huge grid investments
• Adjustment backup power

8
Historic subsidies

• RD and building of nuclear entirely publicly
  funded
• In the US and EU15 500-1000 bln
• Protected and distorted market, de facto monopoly
  in many countries
• Grid investments etc. paid by all consumers

9
Ongoing subsidies

• Tax breaks, direct public spending
• E.g. US 0.6 bln/yr, EU15 2.2 bln/yr
• Export credits, cheap loans
• Case Finland investigated by EC as illegal public
  subsidy
• Decomm costs borne by governments
• E.g. UK plans to pay up to 6 bln
• EU25 might face liabilities up to 600 bln from
  existing plants

10
Nuclear climate mitigation?

• Mature, commercial technology
• Life cycle emissions lower than some RES
• Large centralized units, fits the present
  centralized markets investment schemes
• Baseload power

11
Theoretic potential

• Currently 17 of worlds electricity, 4 of
  final energy
• Produces only baseload electricity
• Estimated resources (up to 5 times current price)
  of uranium last 70 years at current consumption
• Nuclear renaissance would quickly deplete cheap
  uranium

12
Theoretic potential

• What if you replace ½ of worlds fossil-fueled
  electricity generation by nuclear, other things
  equal?
• Capacity triples
• Construction rate must grow more than 10-fold to
  achieve by 2050
• Cut world GHGs by 9
• Cut world energy sector CO2 by 16

13
Drawbacks Rebound

• Large unit with low operation costs
• Decreases incentive for conservation
• Often leads to promoting wasteful energy use,
  e.g. electric heating

14
Drawbacks Adjustment power

• Economics of nuclear require running plants
  continuously, irrespective of variations in
  consumption
• Requires adjustment power with low upfrontfixed
  costs, spinning reserve
• lock-in to fossils
• In Finnish scenarios new nuke increased coal use

15
Drawbacks New technologies

• Large unit increases uncertainty in the market
  and hampers demand of new technologies
• Market interest in RES plummeted in Finland after
  NPP decision
• Nuclear is usually a political alternative to
  demand-side measures, RES and responsible
  energyclimate policy

16
Drawbacks Centralized

• Deployment of new energy technologies requires
  decentralized and competitive energy markets
• Nuclear easily maintains centralization and
  delays market reforms

17
Nuclear mitigation - conclusion

• Could probably be used as a part of a portfolio
  to cut GHG emissions
• Strong measures would be needed to tackle
  negative impacts and prevent lock-ins
• Taxes, energy market regulation,
  feed-in/generation portfolio laws, soft support
  measures for new technologies
• Not likely to happen, no scenario where nukes
  would lead to sustainable emission levels has
  been presented

18
Watch out
19
Nuclear security of supply?

• Fuel price risk low, fuel easy to store
• Fuel less centralized than fossils, in more
  stable countries
• Good track record in some countries

20
Nuclear security of supply?

• Centralization, vulnerability to grid/plant
  failure
• Limited fuel resources
• Long lead time, not responsive to changes in
  demand
• Usually a political alternative to more efficient
  and sustainable solutions

21
Who wants nukes and why?

• Big power companies
• DG and efficiency hard to cash in on
• Old philosophy and approaches hard to abandon
• Individual users and small dynamic companies tend
  to take over
• Energy-intensive industries
• Avoid competition for electricity

22
Who wants nukes and why?

• Everyone opposed to freedecentralized energy
  market
• Attitudes big is beautiful
• Nuclear industry
• Operators can always count on public subsidies
• Desperate for contracts cheap bids available

23
Debate in Finland - Industry tactics

• Use pleasant and skilled female spokespersons
• Capitalize on climate change energy security
  concerns
• Nuclear is the only realistic way to reduce GHG
  emissions
• Widely held belief, no. 1 obstacle in Finnish
  climate discussion

24
Industry tactics

• Restrict choices to fossils or nuclear
• RES and nuclear can live side by side
• Win the waste debate first

25
Finnish debate - Counterarguments

• Renewablesefficiency
• How to demonstrate feasibility?
• Adverse impacts on climateenergy policy,
  especially RES and efficiency
• Very technical argument
• Safety, proliferation, waste
• International reputation

26
Why was the debate lost?

• Failure to engage like-minded experts and
  businesses
• NGOs tried to assume an expert role
• Not credible
• Moralemotional arguments were forgot
• Lacking differentiation of roles of NGOs
• Public fears about nuclear were heavily and even
  dishonestly exploited in earlier debates

27
Campaigning ideas

• Chernobyl
• Dont think about a nuclear accident in Finland
• This train is operated with the excellent
  precision and skill of GOI. Would you like us to
  operate a dangerous, high-tech nuclear plant in
  your hometown?

28
Campaigning ideas

• Waste
• Liability for wastedecomm, mandatory insurance,
  no subsidies
• Can turn nuclear into a non-issue
• Engage local people
• In Finland targeted heavily by companies and the
  government

29
Terima kasih atas tidak tidur selama presentasi!

• Lauri Myllyvirta