PRESENTATION Using Nuclear Energy to Fight Climate Change

PRESENTATION Using Nuclear Energy to Fight Climate Change A Presentation on British Energy Policy Stephen Stretton www. zerocarbon 2030. org Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy (EFN) www. ecolo. org

Contents • Introduction, Climate Change and Global Energy Demand • The Potential Solutions: Low-Emissions Energy Sources • Heating, Transportation and Industry • British Energy Policy 2006 the 100 GW Nuclear Option • Conclusion &

• In February 2002 the Larsen B ice shelf collapsed. • 3, 250 km 2 of ice 200 m thick broke off. • The shelf had previously been stable for 10, 000 years.

Introduction: Greenhouse Effect • Gases such as Carbon Dioxide (CO 2) and Methane absorb reradiated heat in the ‘Greenhouse Effect’. • The combustion of fossil fuels such as coal, oil and natural gas, releases CO 2 into the atmosphere, increasing this effect. Sources: CO 2 graph shows trend shown without seasonal fluctuation. Data from Mauna Loa Observatory, Hawaii; Cover Photo © Nasa; Temperature graph from http: //www. globalwarmingart. com/

?

Strong correlation between CO 2 concentration and temperature Data from Antarctic ice cores • CO 2 concentration (global) in black • Reconstructed local temperature in red • Positive Feedback? Current CO 2 Concentration Pre-industrial CO 2 Concentration Ice Core Data. From Vostok, Antarctica; Main Source: Petit J. R. , et al. (1999); c. f. EPICA (2004); Graph: www. globalwarmingart. com

How Sensitive Is the Climate? • What is the committed temperature rise for a certain level of CO 2 concentration? • Climate models suggest increase in temperature of 1. 5 -4. 5°C associated with anthropogenic doubling of CO 2 • With positive feedback the range is 1. 6 -6. 0°C • We assume that a doubling of preindustrial levels causes an increase in temperature of 4°C

Effects of Climate Change (1) (Present Day) – Some effects already seen Oceans damaged Greenland ice melts (raising sea levels eventually by 7 m) Increases in extreme Amazon rainforest collapses, releasing CO 2 weather (e. g. Agricultural yields fall hurricanes) CO 2 released from forests Tropical diseases spread and Soils Methane World ecosystems cannot adapt released from peat bogs & Hundreds of millions at risk from Global heat oceans? hunger & drought circulation Desertification of large parts of Earth’s surface system collapses? Positive Feedback: Warming causes further release of greenhouse gases Source: Adapted from Warren, R (2006)

Effects of Climate Change (2) • Wholesale desertification of Earth possible within 100 years. • Large population centres (China and India) at risk Source: Lovelock, J (2006)

Energy demand is rising rapidly Notes • All energy (not just electricity) is expressed in terms of Giga. Watts (GW)*. • 1 Gigawatt = 0. 75 Million Tonnes of Oil Equivalent per year = 8. 8 Terawatt-Hours per Year • 1 Gigawatt is the usual size of a nuclear power station or large coal power plant * In agreement with the recommendations from the Royal Academy of Engineers Sources: Reference Scenario, IEA (2004) World Energy Outlook; A 1 T Scenario IEA (2003) Energy to 2050

“Business as usual” would lead to disaster within a few decades (2100 CO 2 concentration 920 ppm) Dangerous Threshold Passed (550 ppm) (CO 2 Now: 380 ppm) • Model committed temperature (the temperature rise expected as a result of emissions up to that point). • Note that temperature rises do not include the effect of other greenhouse gases such as methane. • For spreadsheet model and discussion of assumptions see website: www. zerocarbon 2030. org. Sources: Sceffer, M et Al. (2006), Defra (2006).

A expansion in low-carbon energy can stabilise emissions… …But temperatures may still pass “dangerous” threshold (460 ppm) (Stabilisation @ 500 ppm) Dangerous Threshold Passed Source: IEA (2003)…

Conversion to a zero carbon economy + less total energy used… Danger Avoided! (Stabilisation @ 400 ppm) Source: IEA (2003) Sustainable Development (SD) scenario with additional reductions.

All countries convert (but some delay) (450 ppm) Some danger: but most severe impacts avoided. Source: IEA (2003) Sustainable Development (SD) Scenario.

Is a solution feasible? • If we are to avoid ‘dangerous’ climate change: ● We need to act now to convert to low-emissions energy. • Emissions Target: A 90% reduction in OECD emissions by 2030? • Would others follow suit? ● ● • Moral pressure and national self-interest encourage the conversion of energy technologies. Countries are already starting to target a low-emissions economy. If they don’t convert we can sell them our cheap, clean energy.

How can we protect the planet? • International Agreement on climate is difficult (‘tragedy of the commons’). • Massive cuts in emissions (80 -90%) are required (Kyoto not sufficient). • Need a country or countries to take the lead in converting to a zero carbon economy. • Need an unconstrained technology that costs less than fossil fuels: ● ● • At present, fossil fuels are cheapest; However, low-emissions technologies have economies of scale & potential for ‘learning-by-doing’. Which technology? ● Solar – a technology for the future (but v. expensive at present). ● Nuclear?

The Potential Solutions Energy Source • Energy crops • Fossil fuels with CO 2 Sequestration • Nuclear • Renewables Main Energy Vector Wind ●Solar ●Hydro ●Tidal ●Wave ●Waste ● Liquid Fuels or Electricity

Comparing Emissions Fossil Fuel Energy Low Emissions Energy • Also: Energy Crops, Waste Incineration, Tidal & Wave • Fossil Fuels with CO 2 sequestration.

Energy Crops: Not Enough Cropland • Available cropland will diminish with global warming and population growth. • Fertile land is needed for climate regulation and growing food. • Energy Crops are NOT green!!! Source: Estimated from Socolow (2006) and IEA (2003)

CO 2 Sequestration – Costs too much • Fossil fuels burnt and CO 2 then buried in underground rock formation. • Potential solution for areas with large amounts of oil & natural gas (Middle East; North Sea? ). • But: requires extra energy to compress CO 2. • Does not eliminate emissions (~10% escape? ). • Overall, perhaps an ~85% reduction in CO 2 compared to natural gas. Sequestration is always more expensive than directly burning fossil fuels: Not a global ‘backstop’ technology. Image: CO 2 Sequestration From Wikimedia Commons

Renewables can provide only 11% of total UK energy demand *Interdepartmental Analysts Group estimation of maximum capacity available at less than 7 p/k. Wh (current price 2 -3 p/k. Wh). Apart from hydro figures from RCEP study (all large opportunities already used; small scale hydro adds <0. 1 GW). **Energy Crops Excluded for Environmental Reasons (Land Area, Indirect emissions). ***Offshore wind included but note that large rotating objects interfere with UK coastal radar.

Nuclear –the best option Modern Nuclear Reactors (e. g. Westinghouse AP 1000 European PWR, Canadian ACR) • Quick construction • Compact • Constructors take price risk • Inexpensive decommissioning • Reduced fuel consumption • Much less waste • Price competitive with gas • Little capacity constraint • Cheap, modular, mass produced reactors for China and US. Image: AP 1000 © Westinghouse 2005

Problem: Electricity is not always suitable for transport, heating & industry Energy Source • Energy Crops (0%) • Renewables (12%) • Fossil fuels with CO 2 Sequestration • Nuclear Can Only Generate Electricity What about transport, heating and industry?

Heating, Transport and Industry Domestic heating (currently mostly gas) Transport (currently oil) Industry (coal, oil & gas) How do we convert to low emissions electricity?

Converting Domestic Heating Heat pumps • Move heat from a low temperature heat source (such as the ground outside) and transfer it to a high temperature heat sink. • Powered by electricity (from nuclear or renewables). • Uses up to 80% less energy. • Using pump to heat a domestic water tank can smooth demand & store energy. A heat pump uses electricity to move heat from outside to inside a home. It works on the same principle as a refrigerator reversed. Heat pumps use 50 -80% less energy than gas boilers. Heat pumps can be installed in both new and existing houses Image: Heat Pump theory From Wikimedia

Converting Domestic Heating (2) The Zero-Emissions House Ground source heat pumps + Better house insulation + Underground air circulation + In/Out heat exchanger = 90% reduction in energy consumption Combining a heat pump with a well insulated hot water tank allows energy to be consumed overnight when prices are low. If we use non-emitting electricity (e. g. nuclear or microgeneration), CO 2 emissions from domestic heating could be reduced by 99%. Building regulations must ensure that all new houses have low emissions.

Converting Transport: Short distance Electric Cars • Technologies developing quickly, following success of Toyota Prius • Full conversion possible by 2030 Reductions in car use • Charge for road congestion • Health benefits of walking and cycling, especially for children • Better urban planning & public transport Electric cars store energy in batteries when recharged overnight (when electricity prices are low). Hydrogen fuel cell technology developing and may be in use by 2030. Hydrogen can be produced using next-generation nuclear power stations. Image: Toyota Prius From Wikimedia Commons

Converting Transport: Long Distance Rail • Improve network • Build new freight lines • Upgrade urban transit systems (Crossrail) • Reduce ticket prices Aviation • Tax aviation more heavily (noise, CO 2, congestion) • Ban night flights Travelling by rail uses much less energy than travelling by car or by plane. Image: Eurostar

Converting Industry • Imposing a carbon tax without a low-emissions alternative would encourage industry to leave. • Industry requires a secure, reliable and cheap alternative energy source. • Nuclear electricity is low cost (especially at night) and provides a secure and independent source of energy. • Some (heavy) industry cannot be converted. • There is currently no other solution than nuclear energy.

A Zero Carbon Economy? • Less Total Energy Used (Carbon tax? ) • Electricity used instead of Fossil Fuels (Transport, Commerce, Domestic Heating) • Some sectors that cannot be converted (Aviation, Road Freight, Heavy Industry) and still require oil • Possible by 2030? • Not included: excess heat energy from nuclear power plants (used in industry, heating and desalination). • Next generation (high temperature fast reactors) may be able to generate hydrogen. However, at present there are still engineering problems to be solved in hydrogen storage and distribution. Can we generate enough low-emissions electricity?

British Energy Policy 2006 and the 100 GW Nuclear Option • Background: DTI Energy Review • Main Goals: – CO 2 Reduction – Security of Supply – Economic Efficiency • Future Energy Mix? – Fossil Fuels – Renewables – Nuclear

Fossil Fuels - Use less! Gas • Imported • CO 2 emissions Oil • Imported • Required for sectors which cannot be converted to electricity (Aviation, Heavy Road Freight, parts of Industry) Coal • High availability • But high emissions of CO 2 sequestration with gas or coal? • Reduce CO 2 emissions by 80%-90%? • Gas (or Coal-gas) turbines for load following • Cost higher than burning fossil fuels directly Need a Large Scale Alternative to Fossil Fuels

Solution: 100 GW Nuclear • Use Westinghouse AP 1000, European EPR or Canadian CANDU reactor? • Build 100 GW of nuclear capacity by 2030. Figures do not include contribution from next-generation high-temperature / fast-breeder reactors. Britain should be involved in the development of these technologies for hydrogen production and uranium conservation, with full-scale construction by 2030.

Nuclear: What are the Constraints? (1) Uranium Reserves? • Concentrated in stable countries such as Australia and Canada. • Sufficient for a large expansion in the nuclear industry. • Fuel costs are only a small part of cost of nuclear – rises in Uranium price will lead to more reserves becoming economic. • Fast breeder reactors or Thorium can take over if Uranium becomes scarce. • New technologies (chemical nets) are being developed for efficiently extracting nuclear from seawater with low energy expenditure: Uranium in sea water is replenished constantly, so it is practically unlimited. • UK has large existing supplies of Plutonium (100 tonnes: 2/3 of global civil separated uranium) which can be burnt in ‘Mox’ fuel. • Globally, decommissioned nuclear weapons are also a potential source of fuel.

Nuclear: What are the Constraints? (2) Available Sites • Some nuclear reactors (first few) can be based at existing sites. • New reactors much more compact: more than one reactor can be built in each place. • For a 100 GW expansion, perhaps 50 new sites (not threatened by flooding or coastal erosion) should be found across Britain. Need public information campaign about new reactors. • Public acceptability of nuclear will increase if it is seen as a solution to the problem of climate change. Skills • Main constraint for the UK. • We need a massive program to train of the order of 100, 000 new nuclear engineers over the next few years. • Better science/maths at school (teacher pay? ). • Sponsorship programs for young engineers.

The French Experience • Major building program 1970 s – 1990 s. • Now 80% of electricity is generated by nuclear. • Realised economies of scale by using one design. • Often with duplicate units on same site. • France now has the lowest electricity prices in Europe. • Electricity is a major export good.

Energy Supply Vision 2030 *Emissions intensities include whole lifecycle (so emissions in construction are allocated across lifetime of reactor. **Does not include excess heat used in industry and homes or desalination **Also excludes any contribution from next-generation nuclear plants (hydrogen production? ) *** Entire capacity used, except energy crops (excluded for environmental reasons: land area/indirect emissions) ***Renewables (mostly wind) assumed to have approximately same emissions intensity as Nuclear. # Using gas turbines with CO 2 Sequestration (85% reduction in CO 2 eliminated relative to gas alone). ## For Aviation, Heavy Industry, Road Freight etc Also includes other unavoidable CO 2 emissions

Cost of 100 GW Nuclear • New build replaces old capacity and then displaces imports of gas. • Approximate Cost ~ £ 5 bn per year for 20 years. • Could be built in private sector (or partnership of public and private) – Some government help with initial planning and regulatory issues. Need to ensure standard designs (EPR, AP 1000, ACR) to achieve global economies of scale. • Government must reduce financial risk for private investors: – ‘Non-carbon’ obligation? – Guaranteed minimum prices. – Strong statement of intent. • Price guarantees can massively reduce financing cost but need not put the government at financial risk (since government has control over carbon taxes).

Benefits of this Plan a) Britain would have sufficient, secure, low emissions, lowcost energy for 50 years. b) Strategic independence. c) Massive reduction in CO 2 emissions. • If internationally standard designs were used, there would be beneficial effect on economics of nuclear power worldwide: – – • • Reduced uncertainty for investors. Learning by doing and economies of scale. British industry would have a low cost low carbon energy source. Governments could put up taxes on carbon without industry moving abroad. Britain would give a moral example on CO 2 emissions to the rest of Europe and world.

Summary • To prevent ‘dangerous’ climate change we need to act rapidly. • We must invest in all low-emissions technologies. • Nuclear can generate a large part of our total energy (not just the part that is currently electricity). • If UK built 100 or so low-cost mass-produced passively safe modular nuclear reactors, the world would have a safe, clean unlimited supply of power that would be cheaper than all fossil fuels. • Cars and domestic heating can be converted to run off electricity. More freight can be transported by rail. • Cuts in consumption (e. g. aviation, long distance car use) are also necessary.

Now Zero Carbon 2030 Trains Electric Cars Heat Pumps Total energy = ‘Final Energy’ net of refinery and generation losses 2030: Total energy does not include other uses for nuclear heat.

Nuclear Energy: for the Future of Earth Comments to: Stephen Stretton stephen@ecolo. org www. zerocarbon 2030. org

References Beckjord, E. et al. / MIT (2003) The Future of Nuclear Power, An Interdisciplinary MIT study, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA Budyko, M. I. (1982), The Earth’s Climate: Past and Future, Elsevier, New York Comby, B. (2006), Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy, Canadian Edition (www. ecolo. org and www. comby. org ) Defra, (2006) Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge / www. defra. gov. uk DTI (2006) 'Our Energy Challenge', Energy Review Consultation Document / www. dti. gov. uk EPICA (2004) Eight glacial cycles from an Antarctic ice core Nature 429, 623 -628 IAEA (2000) Annual Report IEA (2003) Energy to 2050 Scenarios for a Sustainable Future IEA (2004) World Energy Outlook IEA (2005) Key World Energy Statistics Harte, J and Torn M. (2006) Missing feedbacks, asymmetric uncertainties and the underestimation of future warming Geophysical Research Letters, Vol 33, L 10703, 26 th May 2006 http: //www. agu. org/journals/gl/gl 0610/2005 GL 025540/ Hoyle, F (2006) The Last Generation, Eden Project Books Lovelock, J (2006) The Revenge of Gaia, Penguin, London Nuttall, W. J. (2005), Nuclear Renaissance, IOP Publishing Petit J. R. , et al. (1999). Climate and Atmospheric History of the Past 420, 000 years from the Vostok Ice Core, Antarctica. Nature 399: 429 -436 Royal Academy of Engineering (2004): The Cost of Generating Electricity Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (2000) Energy - The Changing Climate Sceffer, M et Al. (2006) Positive Feedback between global warming and atmospheric CO 2 concentration inferred from past climate change Geophysical Research Letters, Vol 33, L 10702, 26 th May http: //www. agu. org/journals/gl/gl 0610/2005 GL 025044/ Socolow, R. (2006) et al. : Stabilization Wedges: An elaboration of the concept in Defra (2006) Warren, R (2006): Impacts of Global Climate Change at different Annual Mean Global Temperature Increases in Defra (2006) Wikipedia – www. wikipedia. org and Wikimedia - commons. wikimedia. org Wikisource Images use http: //en. wikipedia. org/wiki/GNU_Free_Documentation_License World Energy Council (2000) Energy For Tomorrow's World

EFN Aims “Environmentalists For Nuclear Energy (EFN) is an independent environmental, non-profit organization which aims at : - providing complete and straightforward information to the public on energy and the environment; - promoting the benefits of nuclear energy for a cleaner world; and - uniting people in favor of clean nuclear energy. ”

• Detail for EFN in the UK in 2007 General 1) To have available for the UK public clear information on all aspects of Nuclear Energy and its role in tackling climate change. This would include glossy booklets, web-based material, diagrams and data sources, links and news. 2) To have a UK-based mailing list for those interested in nuclear energy, in addition to the nuc-en mailing lists 3) To find a group of people capable of putting on protests in favour of nuclear energy from an environmental perspective in the summer if and when an opportunity arrives. 4) To have the ability to produce press-releases in a timely manner and appear on public debates should opportunity arise. 5) To have a 'shadow' EFN-UK website on the www. ecolo. org website (not visible, but collecting information). 6) To build an organisation capable of promoting public debate on nuclear energy.

Detail for EFN in the UK in 2007 Cambridge 1) To organize 1 or 2 major events in Cambridge (Bruno, Jim Lovelock? ) on Nuclear Energy. Further technical talks from people in the industry. 2) To set up a discussion group in Cambridge. The subject of the group would be all aspects of Nuclear Energy in the context of climate change mitigation. Could share infrastructure with Cambridge Zero Carbon Society (next slide)

Cambridge Zero Carbon Society “Policies and Technologies for a Zero Carbon Economy” Cambridge Zero Carbon Society discuss and evaluate the policies and technologies necessary for the conversion to an economy and society with zero net-emissions of carbon dioxide and much reduced emissions of other greenhouse gases. We encourage the use of sustainable energy sources in a way that is economically and physically viable, maximising the efficiency of energy capture and use, and recognising the finiteness of all types of energy resource. We encourage understanding and transparency regarding energy and the environment amongst individuals/civil society, governments, companies, universities and other organisations.

Websites www. ecolo. org/uk/ (or similar) EFN-UK shadow website www. zerocarbonnow. org/cam: Cambridge Zero Carbon Society www. zerocarbon 2030. org Report: “A zero carbon economy with nuclear energy”

EFN in the UK in 2007 • Basic organization: grow to 3 -5 over next year. • Cambridge / London groups to grow out of major talks given there in March and informal contacts. • A demonstration / festival of some sort in midsummer ( e. g. Early August, or 2, early July+mid August) • Annual conference in autumn (September). • Potential for events to coincide with the press-released launch of report(s)?

Nuclear Energy: for the Future of Earth Comments to: Stephen Stretton stephen@ecolo. orgwww. zerocar bon 2030. org EFN: www. ecolo. org