Global warming

Rougeau's vision may have seemed over optimistic to some of the more cynical old hands in his audience but cause for optimism was given by Dr Robert Watson, chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Director of Health and Environment Sector at the World Bank. As Rougeau commented after listening to Watson catalogue the evidence in support of anthropogenic climate change and its likely effects, the message is initially depressing and alarming but there are answers, and as Watson indicated, CO₂-free nuclear power has the potential to be one of those answers as the world seeks to move out of the fossil fuel age.

Picking up on the opportunity offered by Watson, Ivan Vera of the Nuclear Energy Agency of the OECD offered three possible nuclear paths to 2050, based on research at the OECD/NEA relating to nuclear power developments and climate change. These paths range from complete phase out, with all its negative impact on the environment, through to sustained growth in nuclear power share as a route out of the fossil fuel age. There is also, of course, a third way, in this case a progressive reduction in nuclear generation, followed by a revival as the advantages of nuclear are recognised.

Competition — the hype

Competition is providing both opportunity and challenge for the nuclear industry — the question is how best to take advantage of it according to Caroline Varley of the International Energy Agency. Continuing a theme from last year's meeting, Ms Varley was very upbeat about the impact of competition for nuclear generators. 'Nothing ventured, nothing gained', she said, stressing that competition will enhance the focus on the real issues now facing the industry.

Marvin Fertel of the Nuclear Energy Institute was even more upbeat announcing that 'competition is the best thing to happened to nuclear energy in the past two decades', and arguing that the changes in the US nuclear industry will result in 'a stronger and a more competitive nuclear business and one that operates its plants even more safely and reliably'. Fertel saw positive signs for nuclear energy gaining policy support and further enhancing its value and competitiveness as recognition of its environmental benefits increased.

Competition — the reality

After the hype on the benefits of competition delegates were treated to a dose of reality from Scandinavia where a competitive market already exists. Göran Lagerstedt of the Swedish Power Association presented a broad overview of the competitive Nordic electricity market and the role nuclear power has played within this. Emphasising the Swedish situation he discussed operating strategies, modernisation of NPPs, extension of plant life, power upgrading, decommissioning and investment in new plants. The reality of competition, according to Lagerstedt, is that it is good for nuclear and that the NPPs in Sweden and Finland are already competitive in the open market and have a positive future outlook.

Getting technical

From the dream of a deregulated future where things can only get better delegates were introduced to some of the technologies and fuelling issues which may come into play.

Uranium
A presentation of the UI's biannual market report was made by Gérard Pauluis, chairman of the drafting group, which focused upon the ample supplies of fuel available to 2020 but noted the large part played by potentially unreliable secondary sources.

More details on some of the uranium projects and resources which will feed the vision were supplied by speakers in a uranium mining session. Ukrainian Deputy Energy Minister Anatoly Chernov provided lots of geological background and resource figures in line with the latest 'Red Book' estimates but resisted the temptation to give actual production numbers.

Production numbers also provided a bit of a problem for Wallace Mays of World Wide Minerals whose Dornod facility in Mongolia has just been put on standby. The project, which produced about 860 tU between 1988 and 1994 now awaits an improvement in uranium market conditions and the resolution of WWM's affairs in Kazakstan. To conclude Mays demonstrated that he has not become jaded by the travails of the uranium roller coaster by giving an enthusiastic, upbeat and well received slide show on the attractions of Mongolia.

From Mongolian ore grades of around 0.1% U we were taken by Bernie Rosner on a guided tour of the problems of working with 15% ore grades at McArthur River in Saskatchewan's Athabasca basin. Details of the mining technology were provided by Brian Jamieson in 1997 and Rosner's main topic here was the transport of the ore slurry, produced underground, to the mill 80 km away at Key Lake. With such high grade material the key to safety is the design of the transport package which are IAEA Industrial Package Type II containers designed to ALARA principles. Cameco's Athabasca Basin projects were also described by Stan Frost in a presentation on waste rock and tailings management.

From the 'northern parts of the northern hemisphere' Peter Waggitt of Environment Australia took us south to discuss how the role of Supervising Scientist, originally created by the Fox Enquiry of 1975, has changed and grown from its secretive and unsuccessful early days as a surrogate regulator respected by no-one into a highly effective, trusted and transparent environmental auditor of the Northern Territory uranium mining business.

Reactors
Reactor technology for the coming millennium covers both the continued life of currently operating plants and the design of plants to meet new market needs. Looking at the latter in the particular context of developing countries, Jürgen Kupitz of the International Atomic Energy Agency focused on the important role of small and medium sized reactors (SMR) which need to address issues including: enhanced safety; better economics; reduced environmental impact and better resource utilisation. Kupitz contrasted the evolutionary SMRs such as the AP-600, VVER-640 and the Indian AHWR with the revolutionary Eskom Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) whose basic design considerations are that it must match or improve upon the capital and operational cost of the utilities' existing large coal burners while generating retail power at about 2 US cents/KWh.

In contrast to the revolutionary PBMR, collaboration between ABB Combustion Engineering and the Korean nuclear industry stresses the benefits of evolution. Regis Matzie and Ki-In Han outlined work on the Korea Next Generation Reactor (KNGR) programme. KNGR is based on the existing Korean Standard Nuclear Plant (KSNP) which has already realised significant construction cost savings. The next phase of the collaboration is the export of KSNP based design.

Plant refurbishment and backfitting is another aspect of technology for the coming decades. Wolf-Dieter Krebs described the involvement of Siemens in backfitting and upgrading projects in the Netherlands and Czech Republic. Plant refurbishment with a view to exceeding designated reactor lifetime is seen as a key element in Siemens' conviction that 'nuclear power will regain its competitive position and will be recognised as the true answer to environmental concerns such as the greenhouse effect and acid rain'.

Fuel
Cost and efficiency savings can also be made by continuously upgrading fuel assemblies. Jean-Paul Lannegrace of Framatome identifies the main requirement as increasing burnup, whilst complying with increased safety standards. Achieving higher burnups requires substantial research and development investment but this should lead eventually to reduced fuel costs. International partnership programmes between utilities and suppliers can reduce costs for individual companies, benefit all parties involved and make sound sense.

The point that fuel design development effectively supports utilities' efforts to reduce operating costs was also made by Gunnar Vesterlund of ABB Atom who looked at ways to meet the challenges of a deregulated electricity market, specifically focusing on LWR fuel development. Despite extended improvement in nuclear fuel designs, development potential still remains and Vesterlund stressed that. it is therefore important for the nuclear industry, in the current competitive climate, to recognise that continued fuel development efforts are in its best interests.

An updated overview of developments in the US and European LWR fabrication markets was provided by Ken Anderson of CKA Associates. Whilst US fuel fabrication prices appear to be stabilising, albeit at considerably lower levels that in recent years, in Europe prices have fallen by more than 40% overall (in dollar terms) and it is expected they will fall a further 5—10% before stabilising, due to further direct competition. This provides a short term challenge for vendors to profit at these lower price levels in face of a real decline in revenues.

Communicating Radiation

Nuclear power generation contributes a fraction of 1% of the average person's annual radiation dose and with this in mind Morris Rosen of the IAEA asked whether todays regulatory requirements are reasonable or sensible. Speaking on radioactive waste management, Rosen concluded that a negative public perception of radioactive waste hazards has seriously limited waste management options and made the issue of low level waste controversial. Building public understanding by communicating the realities of radiation and its health effects is therefore an essential next step for the nuclear industry.

Speaking in a separate session but undoubtedly giving scientific support to Rosen's view was Professor Bernard Cohen of the University of Pittsburgh, who gave an overview of his research into the validity of Linear No-Threshold (LNT) theory of radiation carcinogenesis at low doses. Cohen believes that there is no theoretical support for LNT while evidence in support of hormesis — the theory that small doses enhance immune system defence — can be adduced from his investigation of lung cancer mortality rates as a function of mean radon level. His results for both males and females, including data corrected for possible confounding factors, indicate an opposite relationship between the variables to that predicted by LNT forcing the conclusion that LNT fails by seriously overestimating the cancer risk in low dose exposure.

The bad public image of low dose radiation may come from overestimating the risk, as Cohen showed, or from overestimating the exposure. Doug Chambers of SENES Consultants presented the findings of a UI sponsored study into long term population dose due to radon from uranium mill tailings. This was undertaken using data from currently operating facilities in an effort to assist the United Nations Scientific Committee on Effects of Atmospheric Radiation (UNSCEAR) in updating its estimates of this year. Earlier in the day Stan Frost had described Cameco's tailings management measures as virtually eliminating the release of radon and Chambers certainly supported this assertion with a table showing zero emissions from Key Lake and Rabbit Lake. The major conclusion drawn is that 'UNSCEAR's central estimate of the long term population dose due to radon emissions is too large, by a factor of approximately 150'.

Bananas and Karate
Today, transport is one of the focal points for anti-nuclear protests and as Alastair Thomas of BNFL point out, it is a key strategic component of the international nuclear fuel industry. Picking up Rosen's emphasis on the need to communicate and demystify the nuclear business, Jack Edlow demonstrated his technique for communicating the commonplace nature of nuclear materials transport. If you can understand the transport requirements of gold, eggs, paint and bananas then you know all that's necessary for the shipment of radioactive materials, said Edlow.

Richard Christ of Nuclear Cargo also emphasised the importance of communication and a high level of education and training for staff involved in nuclear transports. 'They need to know everything from criticality to karate', he said, referring to his company's experiences in transporting MOX fuel from Dessel in Belgium.

Realistically, according to Eric Lindemann of Washington Nuclear, the best the industry can hope for is public acquiescence on transport as continued shipments demonstrate the commonplace nature of the activity. To achieve this Machiavelli's advice to aim high of the mark must inform a continued emphasis on safety and openness said Lindemann as he wrapped up an entertaining digest of press coverage of recent transports.

Waste

Reijo Sundell of Teollisuuden Voima Oy (TVO) agreed with Edlow that 'simple is best' as he recounted TVO's successful experience in constructing and operating the VLJ-Repository for low and medium level radioactive waste at Olkiluoto. We don't need to be 'complicated' when dealing with low and medium level waste. Waste is often presented as the Achilles heel of the nuclear industry but Jean-Jacques Gautrot of Cogema, echoing a constant message of the symposium, assured us that answers do exist. The key to the waste management challenge is to reduce waste volumes and toxicity so as to lessen impact on future generations. Recycling of both plutonium and uranium, combined with standardised waste packaging was presented as the answer by Gautrot, who stressed that the nuclear industry now had the additional responsibility of ensuring that nuclear programmes were not stymied by the waste issue.

Technically the industry has grounds for optimism, it has the answers but the challenge to communicate those answers remains as tough as ever.