Announcements 

WNA: Nuclear fuel demand to increase 

12 September 2013

Worldwide demand for uranium is expected to increase considerably up to 2030, resulting in a substantial need for additional supplies of nuclear fuel, according to a report released today by the World Nuclear Association.

The 2013 edition of the World Nuclear Association's (WNA's) biennial report on The Global Nuclear Fuel Market - Supply and Demand 2013-2030, released today in London at the WNA's Annual Symposium, projects nuclear capacity to grow up to 2030 at a faster rate than at any time since 1990.

In the WNA's 'reference scenario', world nuclear generating capacity will increase from the current level of 370 GWe (including all Japanese reactors except Fukushima Daiichi 1-4) to 433 GWe by 2020 and to 574 GWe by 2030. The annual average rate of growth over the whole period is 2.6%, sufficient to maintain the nuclear share of world electricity at close to the current 12% level to 2030. In the more optimistic upper scenario, the equivalent figures are 466 GWe in 2020 and 700 GWe in 2030. In the relatively pessimistic lower scenario, nuclear generating capacity effectively stagnates in the period to 2020 and then drops away to 341 GWe in 2030.

Uranium demand would reach 119,000 tonnes by 2030 in the upper scenario, an increase of 43% from today's level of 62,000 tU, and about 97,000 tU (a 22% increase) in the reference scenario. Provided that all uranium mines currently under development enter service as planned, the report finds that the uranium market should be adequately supplied to 2025, after which time new mines will be required.

The WNA has revised its nuclear capacity projections downwards since the 2011 edition of The Global Nuclear Fuel Market. The lower projections result from the fact that utilities aiming to commission new nuclear power plants have recently been faced with an increased level of challenges. These challenges reflect not only the post-Fukushima calls for the industry to demonstrate a higher degree of safety but, probably of more pressing concern in North America and Europe, the need to cope with stronger competition from alternative generating technologies at a time of more modest growth in expected power demand. Meanwhile, the overall outlook for the energy sector is especially uncertain due to the lack of clear policy direction on the decarbonisation of energy supply.

Contact: Jeremy Gordon, +44 (0)7749 120019

 

WNA: When words cause more harm than radiation

9 September 2013

Recent exaggerations of the leaks and movement of radioactive water at the Fukushima Daiichi accident site may have caused worse societal and health impacts than the events themselves.

While the water has led to no worker health impacts and zero detected offsite contamination; the world outside of Japan was subjected to headlines announcing a serious deterioration of site conditions, ongoing ocean pollution and even a new nuclear disaster . Apparently as a result of such reports a South Korean airline cancelled flights to the area, Tepco's stock price plunged and Tokyo's bid for the Olympic Games in 2020 was put in jeopardy. It is beyond question that the general level of anxiety within some members of the public was also heightened needlessly.

Such inflated commentary contributes to myths about the accident that experts have long sought to dispel. "Radiation exposure following the nuclear accident at Fukushima Daiichi did not cause any immediate health effects. It is unlikely to be able to attribute any health effects in the future among the general public and the vast majority of workers," concluded the Vienna-based United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effect of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) in May this year. This statement referred to radioactive releases to sea and air orders of magnitude greater than the recent leaks to ground.

Letters from radiation professionals to the Japanese public published in August pointed out that the potential health effects of radiation from the 2011 accident are minimal compared to observable effects of stress and stigmatization on Fukushima residents. Exaggerated coverage of the leaks contributed to that stress, while expert information of relevance to the people of Fukushima received virtually no attention.

News providers need to be aware that their coverage can inadvertently exacerbate the psychological effects of a nuclear incident. Even though the information available is sometimes confusing, they should strive for context and avoid reliance on self-appointed experts with a determined agenda to spread fear. Advice from competent radiation professionals, such as UNSCEAR or national authorities in any given country, can provide the necessary context to understand the likely health and environmental impacts of an event. A firm line must be drawn between events with public impact and those such as the recent leaks which have no consequences beyond the plant perimeter. Nuclear industry communicators must do their part to explain the full context of safety-related events as well as the technical details.

Nuclear power plays a vital role in the mix of many countries today. It provides affordable, reliable and clean electricity to countries home to over two thirds of the world's population. The operation of these reactors has prevented approximately 1.84 million air pollution related deaths according to scientists James Hansen and Pushker Kharecha by averting dangerous emissions from other energy sources. This takes into account estimates for the impacts of nuclear accidents. It is extraordinary that these health benefits, as well as nuclear's low carbon credentials and established role in preventing climate change, seem to be entirely forgotten in the aftermath of the recent leaks which have led to no measurable health or environmental impact.

Contact:  Jeremy Gordon, gordon@world-nuclear.org, +44 (0) 207 541 1544
 

WNA: Context is key to nuclear incident communication 

29 August 2013

"In Japan we have seen a nuclear incident turn into a communication disaster," said Agneta Rising, Director General of the World Nuclear Association. "Mistakes in applying and interpreting the INES scale have given it an exaggerated central role in coverage of nuclear safety."

A serious incident occurred last week when radioactive water leaked from a storage tank at Fukushima Daiichi. This was cleared up in a matter of days without evidence of any pollution reaching the sea, and comprehensive measures are being taken to prevent this happening again. However, news of the event has been badly confused due to poor application and interpretation of the International Nuclear Event Scale (INES), which has led to enormous international concern as well as real economic impact.

INES ratings are intended for comparison of safety-related events at nuclear power plants in context, to draw distinction between events of real significance from lesser events. Repeated revisions by Japanese authorities have led to the opposite effect: giving the impression that INES is a 'nuclear threat level' that goes up and down to predict what might come next.

"This cannot continue: if it is to have any role in public communication, INES must only be used in conjunction with plain-language explanations of the public implications - if any - of an incident," said Rising.

WNA urges Japan's Nuclear Regulatory Authority to listen to the advice it has received from the International Atomic Energy Agency. "Frequent changes of rating will not help communicate the actual situation in a clear manner," said the IAEA in a document released by the NRA.

IAEA told Japan: "One possible communication strategy, rather than using the INES scale as a communication tool to rate each event in a series of similar events, would be to elaborate an appropriate communication plan to explain the safety significance of these types of event."

Since the leak was discovered, each announcement on INES ratings has been a new media event that implied a worsening situation. "This is a sad repeat of communication mistakes made during the Fukushima accident, when INES ratings were revised several times," said Rising. "This hurt the credibility of INES, the Japanese government and the entire nuclear sector - all while demoralising the Japanese people needlessly."

"INES will continue to be used while international agreements between countries using nuclear power and the IAEA continue, but it represents only one technical dimension of communication and that has now been debased. Priority must be given to the context of a nuclear safety-related event and a focus on its effects, or not, on the public," said Rising.

Download as pdf 

For further information please contact: Jeremy Gordon, gordon@world-nuclear.org, +44 (0) 207 541 1544

IAEA International Conference on Nuclear Safety

15 July 2013

The World Nuclear Association participated in the IAEA International Conference on Nuclear Security that took place on 1-5 July in Vienna. WNA members share with governments a commitment to maintaining a high level of nuclear security and support non-proliferation objectives. WNA was instrumental in organizing the 2012 Nuclear Industry Summit in Seoul, and early in 2013, it was granted status as an Observer on the Nuclear Security Guidance Committee (NSGC). WNA will use the expertise residing within its 190 member-companies to provide industry perspective on the draft security guidelines developed at NSGC. It will further help to ensure that published guidance is implemented by industry, and that the role of NSGC is recognized internationally.

WNA welcomed the initiative of the IAEA to host the conference with a view to developing the next IAEA Nuclear Security Plan (2014-17). WNA believes this plan should offer scope for:

• Greater harmonization between States in setting their security regulations, thus helping to remove the challenge for industry of concurrent compliance with differing regulations. 
• A stakeholder forum involving international trade associations, international standards development organizations, and inter-governmental organizations to review and exchange information on good practice in the field of nuclear security; 
• A standing invitation for representative international business associations to observe and make representations to the IAEA Nuclear Security Guidance Committee on the development of nuclear security implementing and technical guides; 
• The encouragement of industry outreach and dialogue by regulatory bodies and state agencies of IAEA member states. 

A copy of the full WNA statement can be downloaded here.

WNA Annual Financial Statements

14 June 2013

The WNA Annual Financial Statements for 2012 were signed by the WNA Board of Management in April, having been prepared in accordance with applicable accounting standards and given a clean opinion by our auditor, Moore Stephens LLP. This occurred at the Board meeting that took place on 11 April 2013 alongside the WNFC conference in Singapore.

The financial statements will be presented at the Annual General Meeting on 11 September 2013.

WNA has received the following comments by Tom Ward, Partner, Moore Stephens LLP:

The World Nuclear University partnership has been managed by the WNA since its inception, though it has always been viewed as an independent organisation. All significant transaction processes (eg the running of the Summer Institute in Oxford) have been independently reviewed by the auditors of the WNA. All bank accounts pertaining to the WNU are held alongside bank accounts of the WNA in separately designated accounts (described as WNA Re: World Nuclear University) and details of balances had been confirmed to the auditors directly by the bank annually. My only criticisms are the lack of clarity over the structure of the WNU and that the WNA failed to charge the WNU for services it has provided to the WNU, in respect of the management of courses. We have identified no matters to indicate that there were any financial irregularities.

WNA was fully reimbursed for its work in administering the WNU in 2012 and WNA’s restructuring has brought management of WNU completely within WNA, settling these matters. 

Restructuring the WNA

3 April 2013

On taking up the post of Director General, Agneta Rising’s first priority was to reshape the WNA to more effectively and efficiently meet the evolving needs of WNA members.
The new DG worked together with the Chairman Tim Gitzel to evaluate WNA’s current position and determine the direction to take. With the staff’s expertise, experience and enthusiasm, they have developed the following structure:

This structure clarifies the WNA’s current activities, and establishes new commitments and increased functions based on our members’ wishes.

The WNA Secretariat welcomes its new Director General

2 January 2013

Agneta Rising was appointed as Director General by the WNA Board of Management at the end of August 2012, and officially joined the Secretariat on 2 January 2013. Rising was previously with Vattenfall, where her career focused on radiological and environmental protection. She is already well-acquainted with the organization: in May 2000 she became chairman of the Uranium Institute, and presided over its transformation into the World Nuclear Association in 2001.

Rising said: “I am very excited about and dedicated to this work for the global nuclear industry. Going forward, the WNA team will focus its work on supporting the members, building confidence and increasing visibility of the nuclear industry.”