• 4 minutes Your idea of oil/gas prices next ten years
  • 7 minutes WTI Heading for $60
  • 13 minutes Could EVs Become Cheaper than ICE Cars by 2023?
  • 3 hours Is California becoming a National Security Risk to the U.S.?
  • 6 hours UK Power and loss of power stations
  • 5 hours I Believe I Can Fly: Proposed U.S. Space Force Budget Could Be Less Than $5 Billion
  • 4 hours Anyone holding Nvidia stock?
  • 4 hours Pence says South China Sea Doesn't Belong To Any One Nation
  • 19 hours At U.N. climate talks, US Administration Plans Sideshow On Coal
  • 20 hours Plastic Myth-Busters
  • 5 hours China Claims To Have Successfully Developed a Quantum Radar That Can Detect 'Invisible' Fighter Jets
  • 18 hours OPEC Builds Case For Oil Supply Cut
  • 14 hours A Sane Take on Nord Stream 2
  • 21 hours Good Sign for US Farmers: Soybean Prices Signals US-China Trade Deal Progress
  • 1 day Soybean sale to China down 94%
  • 1 day what's up with NG?
Irina Slav

Irina Slav

Irina is a writer for the U.S.-based Divergente LLC consulting firm with over a decade of experience writing on the oil and gas industry.

More Info

Trending Discussions

There’s Still A Future For Nuclear Power

The world is consuming ever-growing amounts of energy, and consumption is set for a particularly intensive growth in electricity. Put simply, people are going to need more electricity in the years to come as we shift away from fossil fuels. This fast growth will require more generation capacity, some of which will be nuclear. In fact, according to a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the world’s nuclear power generation capacity may grow to 511 GW(e) by 2030 from 392 GW(e) in 2017, and further to 748 GW(e) by 2050.

This is the high case scenario outlined in IAEA’s Energy, Electricity and Nuclear Power Estimates for the period up to 2050 report that came out this week. In the low case scenario, global nuclear capacity would shrink to 352 GW(e) by 2030 but will inch up later, reaching 356 GW(e) by 2050. In other words, nuclear will continue taking part in the generating electricity for an increasingly electricity-hungry planet and the worst that can happen is that it loses some ground to natural gas and renewables.

The IAEA notes in the report that cheap natural gas and subsidized renewables are the top factors that act as deterrents to nuclear capacity growth, along with policies following the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. Nuclear still has a bad reputation despite the fact it is virtually emission-free. This reputation is unlikely to change anytime soon.

Additional challenges for the nuclear power industry are also present: construction costs are higher because of stricter safety standards, and as a consequence, construction times are longer and overall project costs are higher, reducing the competitiveness of new nuclear plants. The twist is that the world still needs and will continue to need nuclear energy despite the rise of renewables. In fact, some of the countries with the most ambitious environmental goals in the world are also some of the biggest nuclear power consumers. Related: Cyber Threats Are Mounting For U.S. Energy

At the same time, many nuclear plants are being closed because they have reached the end of their productive lives. More than 50 percent of reactors, the IAEA said in its report, are already scheduled for retirement in the coming years. Yet in the high case scenario, some of these might receive extensions to ensure enough electricity is being produced as demand grows by 2.5 percent annually until 2030, twice the annual growth rate of total energy demand. In the low case scenario, some 139 GW(e) existing nuclear capacity will be retired by 2030 with only 99 GW(e) of new capacity added during that period.

Nuclear is not hot, despite proponents arguing its case as a cleaner alternative to fossil fuels. But the IAEA’s report is not even the most pessimistic one. Another recent document on the subject of nuclear energy, the Nuclear Industry Status Report compiled annually by an independent French energy expert, Mycle Schneider, sees a gloomy future for nuclear.

The share of nuclear power generation in the total global mix has already fallen from 17.5 percent in 1996 to 10.3 percent last year, and it will fall further, challenged by renewables. Yet, according to this report, renewables as such are not the biggest problem. The biggest problem is that nuclear power is becoming uneconomical as the costs of alternative energy sources fall, at least in some parts of the world, such as in Europe and the United States. China has grand nuclear plant plans, but some of the nuclear projects there are falling behind schedule, Schneider points out. So, nuclear may not be going anywhere, but whether it can grow will depend on electricity demand and the ability of the nuclear power industry to improve its cost competitiveness with its rivals.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads Form Oilprice.com:




Back to homepage

Trending Discussions


Leave a comment
  • Elena on September 14 2018 said:
    Until you can flip a switch and make the sun shine at night or the wind blow on a calm day, renewables will be junk energy, always dependent on government prop-ups, bribes, and punishing mandates.
  • Science Nerd on September 15 2018 said:
    I doubt that nuclear has a future anywhere except Asia where they need clean solutions now. There is too much risk when storage has become cheap enough to make wind and solar competitive for base load.
  • Ralph Sollbach on September 18 2018 said:
    Long long ago except in France ( USA another fake democracy fighting oligarch pro Israel war is not as exceptional as France where state health care and nuclear power seem to work ). The Canadian nuclear industry was to promote immigration and was ludicrous because waste wood could undercut everything except ( UFO’s Tesla > might attract demonic entities ). Nuclear was in Canada a sign the oligarchs and Israeli Mossad planned the post 911 wars identical in evil to a stereo type Hitler. I say this because Canada mines the uranium used in depleted uranium weapons that no tank can resist or with endless inovation ever resist. Depleted uranium see u tuber Christopher Boylen has caused 100 000’s of Iraqi birth defects and will cause millions of cancer deaths thus building the bridge of facts to “ rich mans war poor mans fight “ in the Mid East to equal Hitlers official evil. That is nuclear power is part of the war crime system.
  • David Green on September 23 2018 said:
    The nuclear technology that few people seem to be either aware of or interested in uses thorium as a fuel. Thorium as a reavtor fuel uses a lot of dilution of the fuel pile. The Chinese, who have both a huge amount of nuclear power facilities and a resultant huge problem with nuclear waste have revisited Canada's original CANDU thorium technology and are working on using their nuclear waste into the diluent in the fuel pile. It is not going to be a permanent solution to the nuclear waste problem but they estimate that they can "burn" the waste and by doing so, reduce the amount of nuclear waste to about2% of the amount they have on hand at this time.

    Why do we not hear about this - especially sine thorium is about 2p þimes .ore plentiful in the earths crust as uranium and is a much "less hostile" element than uranium.....with one or more further safety pluses - it cannot be "upgraded" into weapons grade elements (i.e. uraniam 238? or plutonium) AND a Fukushima catastrophe would likely NEVER occur using tborium as the fuel pile needs to be continuously bombarded with neutrons in order to maintain the reaction process, which means that the "nuclear fire" CAN BE EXTINGUISHED!

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News
-->