960408

Future of nuclear power

still has expert steamed up

LONDON: Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, premature death, deformities, centuries of pollution, cancer.

Besides the popular perception of the negative effects of nuclear power, many energy experts say it is hopelessly uneconomic and unable to compete with the most modern forms of power generation such as gas turbines and diesel generators.

Yet nuclear power is expected at least to hold on to its share into the next century.

On April 19 and 20, leaders of the Group of Seven industrial countries and Russia meet in Moscow to discuss nuclear issues.

Their talks will cover the future of nuclear power and its safety, on the 10th anniversary of the world's worst nuclear accident at the Chernobyl power plant in Ukraine.

On April 26, 1986, one of the Chernobyl reactors became unstable after safety tests went wrong. According to the environmental lobby group Greenpeace, the reactor reached 100 times normal power and exploded.

"The nuclear power industry is being squeezed out of the global energy market place for environmental and financial reasons. The promise of the "atoms for peace' myth was never realised. Nuclear power is dirty, dangerous, uneconomic and has not provided any energy security or independence," a Greenpeace report says.

The industry continues to grow, with Asian countries such as South Korea, Japan and China adopting it as enthusiasm in North America and Europe wanes.

The World Energy Council sees the possibility of nuclear power accounting for more than three times its current share, about six percent, by the end of the next century.

"For the future, we have to talk in scenarios. No one path is more likely than another," said Michael Jefferson, deputy secretary-general of the World Energy Council.

The London-based council has members in 100 countries and says it is a non-government, non-commercial organisation seeking balance on energy isssues.

"By 2050 nuclear primary energy could be as little as four percent or up to 14 percent and there's the possibility of further expansion in nuclear's contribution beyond 2050," said Jefferson. "By 2100 this could be 20 percent, or a little more."

The British Nuclear Industry Forum says nuclear power protects countries against disruptions in the supply and price of other fuels, and helps the environment by reducing carbon and sulphur dioxide emissions.

Britain's nuclear safety record is excellent and continues to improve, says the Forum, but this is far from the public's perception in Europe and North America.

Peter Beck, associate fellow at the Royal Institute of International Affairs, says the proliferation of nuclear plants would mean the production of lots of plutonium for which there was no adequate means of storage, or ways to make safe.

This would make it more likely that terrorists could acquire material for making nuclear weapons. The safe working of the plants would also give cause for concern.

"The U.S. industry keeps saying the chance of a nasty accident is a million to one reactor years. There are now about 300 nuclear plants, if you have 1,000 to 1,500 all over the place and many in developing countries, a lot of people believe present designs are just not safe enough," Beck said.

Some experts say arguments about safety and the environment are becoming redundant since the demise of nuclear power will occur because it cannot compete with new means of generation.

"Really cold, hard market forces have done in the nuclear power business," said Christoper Flavin, vice-president for research at the Worldwatch Institute in Washington.

"New gas-fired and diesel engines have quite extraordinary efficiency and they beat nuclear by a factor of two to three. Nuclear can produce at about 12 cents a kilowatt hour, and might be able to get down to 10, but these turbines can produce at no more than four cents," Flavin said.

Electricity sources of the future will be more diverse, with wind, and solar power being harnessed, he added.

Improving electronics make wind and solar power generation ever more efficient and viable. Homes able to soak up solar heat will be linked to provide power for all the community and solar power is viable outside hot countries.

"Even in Britain, there's enough space on rooftops to generate about two thirds of peak power," Flavin said.

Other experts say that these new, renewable sources of power are important but the world will not be able to ignore traditional sources such as coal, oil and gas and nuclear power can be harnessed to give economic and safe power.

"Nuclear power has to be part of the mix," said Professor William Gelletly of Surrey University. "We could have much safer systems, which reduce problems of waste storage, like the Hybrid Accelerator reactor."

This system, being developed by Italian physicist Carlo Rubbia, joint winner of the Nobel Physics Prize in 1984, runs on thorium fuel, avoiding the production of plutonium, and is always subcritical. Thorium is about four times more abundant than uranium.

Organisations such as Greenpeace have no time for such theories.

"The Chernobyl anniversary is a stark reminder of the danger of this type of power. We feel there should be no further investment in nuclear; any investment is a waste of time," said Karen Richardson, Greenpeace International nuclear campaigner.

"Chernobyl shows that nuclear power is an inherently dangerous form of power generation."-Reuter