Thailand Goes Nuclear? Considerations and Costs: Sheila Bijoor sheila@palangthai.org PALANG THAI Thailand Goes Nuclear? Considerations and Costs 13 August 2007


Outline: Outline History of nuclear energy Why is nuclear energy back? Greenhouse gas emissions Generation costs New technology Nuclear proliferation Safety and security Radioactive waste Trends in Thai political history


Slide3: 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 History of Global Nuclear Power Industry


Slide4: Rohde, Robert A. Global Warming Art Project. http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Nuclear_Power_History.png Data Source: International Atomic Energy Agency. Nuclear Power Reactors in the World, Reference Data Series No. 2. (2006)


Slide5: Rohde, Robert A. Global Warming Art Project. http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Nuclear_Power_History.png Data Source: International Atomic Energy Agency. Nuclear Power Reactors in the World, Reference Data Series No. 2. (2006) 1970-1980’s: Dramatic growth in capacity


Slide6: Rohde, Robert A. Global Warming Art Project. http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Nuclear_Power_History.png Data Source: International Atomic Energy Agency. Nuclear Power Reactors in the World, Reference Data Series No. 2. (2006) 1970-1980’s: Dramatic growth in construction


Slide7: DECREASE Over 2/3 of all nuclear plants ordered after 1970 were cancelled.1 1 50 Years of Nuclear Energy (PDF). International Atomic Energy Agency. Retrieved on 2006-11-09. 2 Rohde, Robert A. Global Warming Art Project. http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Nuclear_Power_History.png Data Source: International Atomic Energy Agency. Nuclear Power Reactors in the World, Reference Data Series No. 2. (2006)


Nuclear loses popularity: - Rising economic costs - Nuclear accidents 1 Falling fossil fuel prices - Radiation Nuclear proliferation - Nuclear waste Failures 1 The Rise and Fall of Nuclear Power. Public Broadcasting Service. Retrieved on June 28, 2006. 2 Rohde, Robert A. Global Warming Art Project. http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Nuclear_Power_History.png Data Source: International Atomic Energy Agency. Nuclear Power Reactors in the World, Reference Data Series No. 2. (2006) Nuclear loses popularity 2 Three Mile Island Chernobyl


Nuclear Today: Nuclear Today 435 commercial nuclear reactors in 30 countries 210 TWh increase over the last five years In 2006, 2658 billion kWh total capacity “Nuclear Power in the World Today.” World Nuclear Association. (2007) http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf01.html


Nuclear Tomorrow: Nuclear Tomorrow As of 2007: 32 reactors under construction 25,073 MWe (electrical energy) Asia is the only region where nuclear power is growing 18 of 32 under construction are in Asia “Nuclear Power in the World Today.” World Nuclear Association. (2007) http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf01.html Data: “Nuclear Power in the World Today.” World Nuclear Association. 2007


Proposed Nuclear Reactors: Proposed Nuclear Reactors As of 2007, 214 nuclear reactors proposed worldwide -- 179,345 MWe In Asia: Over 109 nuclear power reactors in operation Plans to build about a further 110 Greatest nuclear growth in China, Japan, S. Korea, India 86 15 21 20 24 18 “Nuclear Power in the World Today.” World Nuclear Association. (2007) http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf01.html Data: “Nuclear Power in the World Today.” World Nuclear Association. 2007


Why is nuclear back?: Why is nuclear back?


Why is nuclear back?: Why is nuclear back? Energy Security Low CO2 emissions “Low” generating costs “Improved” Technology Geopolitics Safety and Security Waste Disposal


Why is nuclear back?: Why is nuclear back? Energy Security Low CO2 emissions “Low” generating costs “Improved” Technology Geopolitics Safety and Security Waste Disposal


Energy Security: What’s New: 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Energy demand is forecasted to double from 2003 to 2030. Asia has the greatest demand. Energy Security: What’s New


Growing world energy consumption: Growing world energy consumption Annual Growth of Energy Consumption Global consumption will double from 2003 to 2030. Asia has greatest increase in demand. “Prediction of energy consumption world-wide.” timeforchange.org. (2007)


Why is nuclear back?: Why is nuclear back? Energy Security Low CO2 emissions “Low” generating costs “Improved” Technology Geopolitics Safety and Security Waste Disposal


Climate Change: What’s New: 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is now a recognized objective. Climate Change: What’s New


Nuclear is better than fossil fuels: Nuclear is better than fossil fuels “Air Emissions.” US Environmental Protection Agency (2007) http://www.epa.gov/solar/emissions.htm Air Emissions of Energy Sources in USA


Nuclear is one of many options: Nuclear is one of many options “Air Emissions.” US Environmental Protection Agency (2007) http://www.epa.gov/solar/emissions.htm Air Emissions of Energy Sources in USA


Nuclear gives least reductions in CO2: Nuclear gives least reductions in CO2 Nuclear energy only accounts for 10% of future CO2 emission reductions. (prediction for 2030) Energy efficiency accounts for 86% Source: “Nuclear Pros and Cons.” http://timeforchange.org (2007) Data Source: International Energy Agency (IEA). http://iea.org


Reducing fossil fuels: Reducing fossil fuels Nuclear will not displace fossil fuel use. Why not invest in something that will? “Nuclear Pros and Cons.” http://timeforchange.org (2007)


Nuclear and fossil fuels go hand in hand?: Nuclear and fossil fuels go hand in hand? In North America, nuclear plants operate alongside coal-fired plants. Nuclear plants: Run continually, cannot be easily switched on and off Generate a base (fixed) demand Are supplemented by other fuels to meet peak demands Example: Ontario, Canada: Performance of nuclear power plant declined, so utility increased reliance on coal-fired producers. Crystal River 3 in Florida, USA. Plants 1, 2 (foreground) and Plants 4, 5 (background) are coal fired. Unit 3 (mid picture) is nuclear powered. http://www.atomicengines.com/pictures.html “What Thai Citizens Should Know About Canada’s Nuclear Power Program.” Probe International (1999) http://www.threegorgesprobe.org/probeint/Mekong/candu/9902.html#8


Why is nuclear back?: Why is nuclear back? Energy Security Low CO2 emissions “Low” generating costs “Improved” Technology Geopolitics Safety and Security Waste Disposal


Cost: What’s New: 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Limited supply and rising costs of fossil fuels are driving renewed interests in alternatives. Cost: What’s New


Generation costs: Generation costs EGAT: Nuclear has the least generating cost when compared to fossil fuels and renewables. EGAT “Power Development Plan” presentation at public hearing at Military club, April 3 2007


Governments subsidize nuclear: Governments subsidize nuclear R&D for nuclear is financed by government Costs don't get transferred to the cost of nuclear electricity. In 2005, half of 28 power plants have been under construction for 18-30 years. 1 R&D for renewable energy is mostly financed privately 2 Production costs are included in the cost of renewable electricity. http://neinuclearnotes.blogspot.com Cost of Federal Incentives for Energy Development in 2003 (USA) 1 “Nuclear Power: Myth and Reality.” Heinrich Boll Foundation. Regional Office for Southern Africa. (2006) 2 “What Thai Citizens Should Know About Canada’s Nuclear Power Program.” Probe International (1999) http://www.threegorgesprobe.org/probeint/Mekong/candu/9902.html#8


Uranium costs will increase: If nuclear power expands, reserves will deplete faster and become more costly. Most uranium is found in very poor grade ores. Recovery will be more greenhouse intensive. 2 Uranium costs will increase At current consumption rate: Resource: high-grade, low-cost ores Supplies last: 50 years Resource: conventional reserves Supplies last: 200 years 1 1 Nuclear Energy Agency, International Atomic Energy Agency “Uranium 2003: Resources, Production, Demand.” Paris: OECD. (2004) 2 van Leeuwen, Jan-Willem. “Can nuclear power provide energy for the future; would it solve the CO2-emission problem?”, http://beheer.oprit.rug.nl/deenen (2004) Wikipedia.org Uranium mining site in USA


Why is nuclear back?: Why is nuclear back? Energy Security Low CO2 emissions “Low” generating costs “Improved” Technology Geopolitics Safety and Security Waste Disposal


Technology: What’s New: 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 New generations of reactors that promise safety and efficiency are in various stages of design and development. Technology: What’s New


Advanced Nuclear Technology: Advanced Nuclear Technology New generations of reactors will have improved efficiency, cleanliness, safety, and capabilities. Gas-cooled reactor Molten-salt reactor Nuclear thermal rocket Generation IV and V Reactors: “Nuclear Reactor Technology.” Wikipedia.org. (2007) www.wikipedia.org


Technology only on paper: Technology only on paper Generation IV reactors will not be produced until 2030 (optimistic estimate). Generation V reactors still only theoretical designs. New generations will not be “idiot-proof” 1 Installed reactors will be Generation II or III, and are known to have inherent flaws or be trouble-prone. Examples of CANDU: 2 Reactor pressure tubes prone to rupture Faulty emergency coolant systems Operating errors damage fuel bundles 1 “Nuclear Power: Myth and Reality.” Heinrich Boll Foundation. Regional Office for Southern Africa. (2006) 2 “What Thai Citizens Should Know About Canada’s Nuclear Power Program.” Probe International 1999 http://www.threegorgesprobe.org/


Why is nuclear back?: Why is nuclear back? Energy Security Low CO2 emissions “Low” generating costs “Improved” Technology Geopolitics Safety and Security Waste Disposal


Nuclear reactors can be used to make bombs: Bomb material can be derived from a regular nuclear reactor by two ways: Enriching uranium-- process used to make nuclear reactor fuel. Reprocessing-- taking spent fuel rods and extracting plutonium. A baseball-sized amount can make a Nagasaki-size bomb. Nuclear reactors can be used to make bombs http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/ “Nuclear Energy.” Reaching Critical Will. (2001) http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/


Myth of peaceful power: Myth of peaceful power FACT 20 of 60 countries with ‘peaceful’ nuclear reactors conducted covert weapons research or production. 1 India’s 1974 “Peaceful Nuclear Explosion”, called “Smiling Buddha” exemplifies myth India replicated a donated research reactor and self-developed plutonium separation plant to make bomb Pakistani PM promised to build the bomb "even if we have to eat grass or leaves or to remain hungry.“ 2 EXAMPLE: India’s Smiling Buddha Indian PM Benazir Bhutto visiting nuclear site. 1 Green, Jim. No Solution to Climate Change. Friends of the Earth. 2005 2 “Canada blamed for India's 'peaceful' bomb.” CBC Archives (2006) http://wikipedia.org


IAEA has severe limitations: IAEA has severe limitations At least 8 NPT states have weapons projects in violation of NPT, or have permissible weapons activities but failed to report to IAEA. Examples: Egypt Iraq Libya North Korea Romania South Korea Taiwan Yugoslavia http://www.nkzone.org/nkzone/category/diplomacy/ Green, Jim. No Solution to Climate Change. Friends of the Earth. 2005 http://www.acfonline.org.au/uploads/res_nukesnosolsummary.pdf


Why is nuclear back?: Why is nuclear back? Energy Security Low CO2 emissions “Low” generating costs “Improved” Technology Geopolitics Safety and Security Waste Disposal


Safety and Security: What’s New: 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Safety and Security: What’s New Hundreds of accidents continue to occur, though smaller than in 1986. Nuclear terrorism is a bigger threat than ever before. New generations of technology promise to have better security.


Too many accidents: Too many accidents Chernobyl and Three Mile Island are best-known of hundreds of accidents: At least 8 accidents involving damage to or malfunction of the core of nuclear power or research reactors. At least five nuclear research reactor accidents have resulted in fatalities. There have been other serious reactor accidents which did not involve core damage or malfunction, and a number of ‘near misses’ with power reactors found to be in a serious state of disrepair. Green, Jim. No Solution to Climate Change. Friends of the Earth. 2005 http://www.acfonline.org.au/uploads/res_nukesnosolsummary.pdf


Too many accidents: Too many accidents Tokai-mura, Japan in 1999: Two workers received lethal doses of radiation; Later revealed that data and inspections had been manipulated at tens of reactors to avoid repairs and lengthy closure. Sellafield, UK in 2000: Fuel processing site found to have a fundamental failure of safety culture by Government inspectors. David-Besse, US in 2002: Corrosion came so close to penetrating the vital pressure vessel that it could have led to complete reactor core meltdown. Cruas-3, -4 , France in 2003: Flood affected damage and shutdown. Mihama, Japan in 2004: Steam explosion killed five workers. Mihama, Japan 2006: Plant shut down due to earthquake concerns. Niigata, Japan 2007: Earthquake triggers fire in nuclear plant. PHOTO: Number 3 reactor after accident at the Mihama nuclear plant in Japan. http://www.smh.com.au “Nuclear: Safety.” Greenpeace International (2006) http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/nuclear/safety


Radioactive emissions: Radioactive emissions Radioactive emissions are routinely generated across the nuclear fuel cycle. UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (1994) estimates collective effective dose to world population over 50-year period of operation of nuclear facilities is 2 million person-Sieverts. Applying the standard risk estimate to that level of radiation exposure gives 80,000 fatal cancers. Chernobyl: Applying the standard risk estimate to radiation gives 24,000 fatal cancers. Permanent relocation of 220,000 people from Belarus, the Russian Federation, and the Ukraine. Chernobyl Reactor 4 after accident http://www.sheppardsoftware.com Green, Jim. No Solution to Climate Change. Friends of the Earth. 2005 http://www.acfonline.org.au/uploads/res_nukesnosolsummary.pdf


Conventional and terrorist attacks: Conventional and terrorist attacks Nations have attacked nuclear facilities with conventional weapons. Iraq’s nuclear facilities bombed by Iran, Israel and USA. Iran’s nuclear plant bombed by Iraq in the 1980s. Iraq claims to have targeted Scud missiles at Israel’s Dimona nuclear plant in 1991. Terrorists can hijack nuclear transporters, crash into reactors, and blow up containers of radioactive waste to spread radioactivity. Barnaby, Frank and James Kemp. Too Hot to Handle? The Future of Civil Nuclear Power. United Kingdom: Oxford Research Group, 2007: 14


Trafficking of nuclear materials: Trafficking of nuclear materials The IAEA’s Illicit Trafficking Database records over 650 incidents of trafficking in radioactive materials since 1993. 100 trafficking incidents occurred in 2004. 1 Smuggling can provide fissile material for nuclear weapons and radioactive materials for use in ‘dirty bombs’. THAILAND: 2003 Cesium Capture June 13, 2003: Thai national arrested in Bangkok after he tried to sell 30 kg of cesium 137 to undercover agents. Cesium 137, could be used to make a dirty bombs. 2 1 El Baradei, Mohamed. “Nuclear Terrorism: Identifying and Combating the Risks”, March 16, 2005 2 Andreoni, Alessandro and Charles D. Ferguson. Radioactive Cesium Seizure in Thailand: Riddled with Uncertainties. James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies: July 2003 http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/week/030717.htm


No margin of error: A nuclear weapon powerful enough to destroy a city requires a mere 10 kg of plutonium. The nuclear power industry has produced 1,600 tons of plutonium (Institute for Science and International Security, 2004) – enough to build about 160,000 nuclear weapons. Even if 99% of the plutonium is indefinitely protected, the remaining 1% would suffice for 1,600 nuclear weapons. No margin of error Institute for Science and International Security, “Civil Plutonium Produced in Power Reactors” (2004) .


Why is nuclear back?: Why is nuclear back? Energy Security Low CO2 emissions “Low” generating costs “Improved” Technology Geopolitics Safety and Security Waste Disposal


Waste Disposal: What’s New: 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Waste Disposal: What’s New Nothing, really.


Fuel cycle process pollutes: Uranium mining and milling leaves radioactive slimes. Spent fuel contains radioactive substances. Reprocessing creates high-level radioactive sludge. By 2000, nuclear industry had created 201,000 tons of highly radioactive nuclear waste. Must secure waste for 10,000 - 240,000 yrs Fuel cycle process pollutes THE FUEL CYCLE PROCESS “Nuclear Energy.” Reaching Critical Will. (2001) http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/


No long-term waste solution: No long-term waste solution Not a single repository exists anywhere for the disposal of high-level nuclear waste Only a few countries have identified potential sites. http://wikipedia.org MIT STUDY: Scenario: Global nuclear output increased 3X Result: New repository storage capacity equal to the legal limit for Yucca Mountain must be created every 3-4 years. Yucca Mountain in USA (Proposed Repository Site) John Deutch and Ernest J. Moniz et al, The Future of Nuclear Power: An Interdisciplinary MIT Study, Cambridge, MA: MIT, 2003.


Slide49: 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 History of Nuclear in Thailand


Nuclear in Thailand: Nuclear in Thailand 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 NUCLEARPUSH 1966 EGAT proposes Thailand's first nuclear project. “Thailand’s Nuclear Program: 1966-1997” WISE News Communique (1997) http://www10.antenna.nl/wise/index.html?http://www10.antenna.nl/wise/473/4692.html


Nuclear in Thailand: Nuclear in Thailand 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 1974 Bhai Bay, Chonburi, 350-500 MW, proposal approved. “Thailand’s Nuclear Program: 1966-1997” WISE News Communique (1997) http://www10.antenna.nl/wise/index.html?http://www10.antenna.nl/wise/473/4692.html STALLED NUCLEARPUSH


Nuclear in Thailand: Nuclear in Thailand 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 1974 Project shelved after a drop in natural gas costs. “Thailand’s Nuclear Program: 1966-1997” WISE News Communique (1997) http://www10.antenna.nl/wise/index.html?http://www10.antenna.nl/wise/473/4692.html STALLED FAILED


Nuclear in Thailand: Nuclear in Thailand 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 1977 EGAT re-proposes and government approves. “Thailand’s Nuclear Program: 1966-1997” WISE News Communique (1997) http://www10.antenna.nl/wise/index.html?http://www10.antenna.nl/wise/473/4692.html NUCLEARPUSH STALLED FAILED


Nuclear in Thailand: Nuclear in Thailand 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 1977 Global and public opposition leads to cancellation. “Thailand’s Nuclear Program: 1966-1997” WISE News Communique (1997) http://www10.antenna.nl/wise/index.html?http://www10.antenna.nl/wise/473/4692.html STALLED FAILED FAILED


Nuclear in Thailand: Nuclear in Thailand 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 1993 Office of Atomic Energy and Peace (OAEP) proposes research reactor (5-10 MW) in Ongkarak. “Thailand’s Nuclear Program: 1966-1997” WISE News Communique (1997) http://www10.antenna.nl/wise/index.html?http://www10.antenna.nl/wise/473/4692.html NUCLEARPUSH STALLED FAILED FAILED


Nuclear in Thailand: Nuclear in Thailand 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 1993- 2003 Ongkarak plans halted multiple times due to safety and environmental problems. 1 US-based General Atomics, contracted to build, threatens legal action for stall in plans. 2 1 “Thailand’s Nuclear Program: 1966-1997” WISE News (1997) http://www10.antenna.nl/wise/index.html?http://www10.antenna.nl/wise/473/4692.html 2 “Thailand: The Final Countdown” WISE/NIRS (2002) http://www10.antenna.nl/wise/index.html?http://www10.antenna.nl/wise/573/5439.html STALLED FAILED FAILED Ongarak “Fiasco”


Nuclear in Thailand: Nuclear in Thailand “Thailand To Build First Nuclear Plant.” Energy Daily (2007) http://www.energy-daily.com/reports/Thailand_To_Build_First_Nuclear_Plant_999.html 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2007 National Power Development Plan (PDP) calls for nuclear energy by 2020. EGAT to invest six billion dollars to build 4,000 MW nuclear power plant. STALLED FAILED FAILED Ongarak “Fiasco” NUCLEARPUSH


Nuclear in Thailand: NUCLEAR Nuclear in Thailand 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 NUCLEARPUSH POLITICAL NUCLEARPUSH NUCLEARPUSH NUCLEARPUSH


Nuclear in Thailand: NUCLEAR Nuclear in Thailand 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 NUCLEARPUSH POLITICAL NUCLEARPUSH 1963-1973 Military regime led by Generals Thanom-Praphas NUCLEARPUSH NUCLEARPUSH David Wyatt, “Thailand: A short history” 1984, p 286. The COLD WAR, US influence, military rule


Nuclear in Thailand: NUCLEAR Nuclear in Thailand 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 NUCLEARPUSH POLITICAL NUCLEARPUSH 1976 Military Coup following Oct 6 massacre, Thanin Kraivixien-led government installed NUCLEARPUSH NUCLEARPUSH COUP “History of Thailand since 1973.” Wikipedia.org (2007) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Thailand_since_1973 COLD WAR Military Rule


Nuclear in Thailand: NUCLEAR Nuclear in Thailand 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 NUCLEARPUSH POLITICAL NUCLEARPUSH 1977 Military Coup led by Kriangsak Chomanand. NUCLEARPUSH NUCLEARPUSH COUP “History of Thailand since 1973.” Wikipedia.org (2007) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Thailand_since_1973 COLD WAR Military Rule


Nuclear in Thailand: NUCLEAR Nuclear in Thailand 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 NUCLEARPUSH POLITICAL NUCLEARPUSH 1991 Military Coup, led by Generals Sunthorn and Suchinda, bloody “Black May” military crackdown on protests against Suchinda as PM, Anand installed as interim PM NUCLEARPUSH NUCLEARPUSH COUP COUP “History of Thailand since 1973.” Wikipedia.org (2007) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Thailand_since_1973 COLD WAR Military Rule


Nuclear in Thailand: NUCLEAR Nuclear in Thailand 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 NUCLEARPUSH POLITICAL NUCLEARPUSH 2006 Military Coup led by Sonthi Boonyaratglin, General Surayud Chulanont installed as PM NUCLEARPUSH NUCLEARPUSH COUP COUP COUP “History of Thailand since 1973.” Wikipedia.org (2007) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Thailand_since_1973 COLD WAR Military Rule


Nuclear in Thailand: NUCLEAR Nuclear in Thailand 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 NUCLEARPUSH POLITICAL NUCLEARPUSH <500 MW NUCLEARPUSH 5-10 MW research reactor NUCLEARPUSH 4,000 MW COUP COUP COUP “Thailand To Build First Nuclear Plant.” (2007) “Thailand’s Nuclear Program: 1966-1997” WISE. (1997) COLD WAR Military Rule