• 4 minutes Projection Of Experts: Oil Prices Expected To Stay Anchored Around $65-70 Through 2023
  • 7 minutes Oil prices forecast
  • 11 minutes Algorithms Taking Over Oil Fields
  • 14 mintues NIGERIAN CRUDE OIL
  • 3 hours UK, Stay in EU, Says Tusk
  • 5 hours Socialists want to exorcise the O&G demon by 2030
  • 3 hours Blame Oil Price or EVs for Car Market Crash? Auto Recession Has Started
  • 13 hours How Is Greenland Dealing With Climate Change?
  • 13 hours German Carmakers Warning: Hard Brexit Would Be "Fatal"
  • 4 mins Venezuela continues to sink in misery
  • 15 hours WSJ: Gun Ownership on Rise in Europe After Terror Attacks, Sexual Assaults
  • 1 hour What will Saudi Arabia say? Booming Qatar-Turkey Trade To Hit $2 bn For 2018
  • 9 hours Maritime Act of 2020 and pending carbon tax effects
  • 1 day "Peace Agreement" Russia vs Japan: Control Over Islands Not Up For Discussion
  • 16 hours Trump inclined to declare national emergency if talks continue to stall - Twitter hides this as "sensitive material"
  • 23 hours Solid-State Batteries
  • 21 hours Orphan Wells

Climate Change Fight Needs $80 Billion Investment In Nuclear Energy: IAEA Chief

Nuclear Power

Tackling climate change and achieving the Paris Agreement temperature rise target of 2 degrees Celsius by 2030 requires a hefty investment in nuclear power, a senior official from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Dohee Hahn, said at a conference. Hahn is the director of the Division of Nuclear Power, Department of Nuclear Energy.

Hahn said that the world needs between 10 and 20 new reactors to be built every year until 2030, which will require annual spending of some US$80 billion. By 2040, the world’s nuclear capacity must reach 862 GW, up from 376 GW in 2014.

Nuclear energy is hardly the first thing that comes to mind in the discussion of climate change and measures to take to keep global temperatures in check. Yet nuclear energy is much greener than fossil fuels. The obvious problems are the radiation-related risks, which cannot be underestimated. At the same time, the advantages also must not be underestimated.

In a recent paper Foratom, the European nuclear trade organization, warned that the European Union’s plans to decarbonize the block’s economy by as much as 80 percent by 2050 are impossible to achieve without nuclear power.

In another fresh example from Europe, the front-runner for France’s next president, Emmanuel Macron, might have to review his campaign promise to reduce the country’s dependency on nuclear power from 75 percent to 50 percent by 2025. According to an adviser who spoke to Bloomberg—a cut so deep and fast is impossible to implement.

Related: Is Canada’s Oil Industry Regaining Momentum?

The situation in the U.S. is also complicated. Besides the recent bankruptcy of giant Westinghouse, some states are subsidizing nuclear plants that would otherwise go under, as a way of diversifying their clean energy sources. Many of these plants are old, on the brink of closure, but the state governments want to save the jobs they create.

While the share of nuclear in the country’s energy mix is relatively constant, the cost of nuclear power generation is growing, challenged by cheaper gas, solar, and wind power.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:



Join the discussion | Back to homepage

Leave a comment
  • Don Clifford on April 28 2017 said:
    Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors are the answer. Check YouTube, good video overviews explain the whole Thorium proposal.

Leave a comment

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