Premier Debate 2016 September/October ld brief

France

France’s nuclear reactors have led to fewer emissions and better GDP per unit of energy

Moreno 11 [Joel Moreno, Bachelors of Arts in International Studies in Nuclear Engineering, “How the Progression of Nuclear Technology in French Culture Has Led to a More Sustainable Country,” A THESIS Submitted to Oregon State University, June 2011] [Premier]

Graphs of various issues concerning energy, Gross Domestic Product and pollution are presented below. Part of the challenge of comparing these two countries was establishing proper context. Superficially, the United States is much larger than France; beneath that reveals a bigger consumption. As seen in figure 1C, America has had substantially higher consumption rates. To begin comparison of sources, a graph of nuclear energy utilization is presented in Figure 2C. Nuclear power experienced a spike in percent of total usage after the 1970’s Oil Crisis as a result of the legislation passed. Along with overall electricity consumption, the United States consumes more oil in general than France. Graph 2C shows that at the onset, both countries used roughly the same percent of fossil fuels, coal and gas out of their total energy consumption. However, after the 1970’s, France has made an outstanding effort to limit this use, bringing it down to about 10%, whereas the United States has maintained it at roughly 70%. In terms of the environmental impact France is having, it remains wholly lower than the United States in terms of how much energy they consume. Figure 3C shows that their CO2 emissions dwarf that of France, and despite the spotty data, produce significantly less water pollution as well. The water pollutants considered are chemicals defined by the International Standard Industrial Classification, measured by biochemical oxygen demand. Furthermore, Figure 5 C shows that the amount of CO2 produced per kg of oil equivalent dropped significantly after France made the switch to nuclear power. Finally, comparing present day results in figures 6C and 7C, the United States produces roughly 7.75 times more energy, in kW-hrs, than France, yet produces 15.7 times as much CO2 emissions. In addition to a better environmental standard, the economic benefits may be observed in Figure 8C, showing GDP per unit of energy use. A sharp spike is observable for the world GDP per energy consumed around the end of the first decade of the 21st century. This coincides with an economic downturn, indicating that as market value of electricity from the energy industry dropped, consumption dropped substantially more, contradicting the idea that the value of electricity must increase with an increase in consumption. Also, France experiences an sharp incease in GDP per energy consumed from its sales to the European Union during this time. America’s market value per energy consumption is a steady growth, but substantially lower than that of France.

Nuclear power allowed France to survive oil shocks

Moreno 11 [Joel Moreno, Bachelors of Arts in International Studies in Nuclear Engineering, “How the Progression of Nuclear Technology in French Culture Has Led to a More Sustainable Country,” A THESIS Submitted to Oregon State University, June 2011] [Premier]

France uses some 12,400 tonnes of uranium oxide concentrate (10,500 tonnes of U) per year for its electricity generation. Much of this comes from Areva in Canada (4500 tU/yr) and Niger (3200 tU/yr) together with other imports, principally from Australia, Kazakhstan and Russia, mostly under long-term contracts. Its fuel supply is therefore well established. Whether it was intentional or not, the energy shift to nuclear in 1974 was particularly well-timed, investing the small advantage during the Oil Crisis into the nuclear industry would result in drastic declines in waste produced and power generating capacity. Nuclear power in France has always been for the people, wrapping the industry in “ouvrier”, or working-man, mentalities. For example, the PEON, Production d'Electricité d'Origine Nucléaire, commission is a commission of nuclear enthusiasts. Its principal of proportional deterrence dissuaded foreign invasion while allowing it to maintain its position of technological superiority along with its national pride. Strategic nuclear alliances permitted France to ride out tumultuous oil crises while still obtaining crucial nuclear technology. Finally, it is evident in amount of pollution they produced per capita that their nuclear program allowed them to obtain all the electricity they need while preserving their environment to a much higher degree than the United States. This is the result of a much more sophisticated and comprehensive waste disposal program.

France is starting to lag behind which is stigmatizing the market as a whole

Jolly & Reed 15 [David Jolly, Stanley Reed, international journalist for more than two decades, having been posted to Paris, Hong Kong, Tokyo and New York, “French Nuclear Model Falters,” The New York Times, May 7, 2015, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/08/business/energy-environment/france-nuclear-energy-areva.html] [Premier]

For decades, France has been a living laboratory for atomic energy, getting nearly three-quarters of its electricity from nuclear power — a higher proportion by far than in any other country. And France’s nuclear companies have long been seen as leaders in building and safely operating uranium-fueled reactors around the world — including in the United States — and championed by Paris as star exporters and ambassadors of French technological prowess. But in the last few years, the French dynamo has started to stall. New plants that were meant to showcase the industry’s most advanced technology are years behind schedule and billions of euros over budget. Worse, recently discovered problems at one site have raised new doubts about when, or even if, they will be completed. This is not France’s problem alone, but a challenge to the entire energy-consuming world. As worries mount about the dangers fossil fuels pose to the global climate, many countries still see atomic power as a path to clean energy, despite the 2011 Fukushima disaster in Japan. When Paris plays host to United Nations climate talks later this year, French officials are planning to remind anyone who will listen that nuclear reactors are a low-carbon power source. But if the French can no longer demonstrate that modern nuclear power plants can be built on time and on budget, that could add to the stigma that has made many countries think twice, over concerns about safety and radioactive waste. Germany and Switzerland, for example, have dropped nuclear power as an energy option.

French nuclear energy proves Kuznet’s curve

Iwata et al 9 [Hiroki Iwata, Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies, Kyoto University, Japan, “Empirical Study on the Environmental Kuznets Curve for CO2 in France: The Role of Nuclear Energy,” Munich Personal RePEc Archive, December 2009] [Premier]

Our study focuses on the effect of nuclear power on the E[nvironmental] K[uznets] C[urve] for CO2 emissions in France. The world demand for energy is increasing with economic growth and electricity can be produced by various resources such as oil, coal, natural gas, hydro, and nuclear power, the latter two of which exhaust little amounts of CO2 emissions when producing electricity. Our study therefore analyses the EKC for CO2 taking into account nuclear power generation.2 It is interesting to analyze the case of France, which has the world highest nuclear power ratio to its entire amount of electricity produced (78%, 2003).3 Our estimation results show that the EKC for CO2 emissions is proven in France and the effects of nuclear energy on CO2 emissions are signifi- cantly negative. The causality tests confirm the uni-direction running from income and nuclear energy to CO2 emissions. The estimated results show that the turning point in the relationship between income and CO2 emissions is within the sample period. To check the robustness, our study estimates the model, adding trade or energy consumption in addition to income and nuclear energy. While the effects of trade or energy consumption are insignificant, the EKC for CO2 is still satisfied and the effects of nuclear power are also significantly negative.

This study uniquely proves the Kuznet’s curve in regards to French nuclear power

Iwata et al 9 [Hiroki Iwata, Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies, Kyoto University, Japan, “Empirical Study on the Environmental Kuznets Curve for CO2 in France: The Role of Nuclear Energy,” Munich Personal RePEc Archive, December 2009] [Premier]

In this paper, unlike previous studies, we estimate the environmental Kuznets curve for the case of France by taking nuclear energy in electricity production into account. Due to the fact that other factors such as international trade and energy consumption may also have impacts on CO2 emissions, we expand our estimation model by including these factors into the model. For the econometric technique, we adopt the autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) approach to cointegration developed by Pesaran et al. (2001). Additionally, stability and causality tests are also conducted. From the estimation results, we find evidence supporting the EKC hypothesis for the case of France. The stability tests also indicate that estimated models are stable over the sample period. The impact of nuclear energy on CO2 emissions is shown to be significantly negative in both the short-run and long-run. For the impact of trade, our results point out that it is not statistically significant in both the long-run and short-run. On the impact of energy consumption on CO2 emissions, unlike previous studies in the case of France, we only find evidence of statistical significance in the short-run, but not in the long-run. Our finding on the uni-directional causality relationship running from income to CO2 emissions implies that although economic growth causes more CO2 emissions, any effort to reduce them does not restrain the development of the economy. This result is consistent with that of previous studies. In addition, from the result of the statistical significance on nuclear energy and uni-directional causality relationship running from nuclear energy to CO2 emissions, our study statistically provides evidence of the important role of nuclear energy in reducing CO2 emissions. However, it is necessary to bear in mind that nuclear power generation requires safety management costs in order to avoid any accident that may potentially damage the environment and human beings.

Germany

After ceasing use of nuclear power, most German energy sources were in private individuals and small companies

Smedley 13 [Tim Smedley, freelance features writer for national newspapers and magazines, specialising in work, sustainability and social issues, “Goodbye nuclear power: Germany's renewable energy revolution,” The Guardian, May 10, 2013, https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/nuclear-power-germany-renewable-energy] [Premier]

While a lot of the media attention has been focused on large-scale wind farms (and Fischedick expects wind power to contribute half of the 80% renewable energy target by 2050), one of the most fascinating aspects of Energiewende is how it embraces micro-generation and micro-ownership. Public acceptance is, says Fischedick, much easier to maintain if it is paralleled with levels of individual ownership. Also known as a 'prosumer' model, over 50% of renewable-energy capacity is owned by individuals or farmers in Germany; the Big Four energy companies own just 6.5% (according to 2010 figures). "This is PV, co-generation... really small facilities," says Fischedick. "The prosumer aspect is vitally important... if you only have the chance to look from outside at the changes then you are much more [likely to be] complaining about what is going on." This in turn is causing the big utility companies to reassess their role. Rather than continuing to rely on business-as-usual, they are significantly ramping up investment in biomass plants, offshore wind and large-scale photovoltaic plants, informs Fischedick. "In addition we have some utility companies looking at becoming a sort of service provider for the prosumer; RWE for instance provide a new service for the typical house owner to help them construct their own PV system on the roof, and to combine it with a small-scale battery. They have really changed their business portfolio in the last two years, just to be part of the game."

India

India production high now-little uranium reserves, so they’re making thorium cycle reacctors

IEA 15 ["Technology Roadmap: Nuclear Energy." IEA Technology Roadmaps (n.d.): n. pag. 2015. Web. 8 Aug. 2016] [Premier]

India has been developing nuclear energy technology since the 1950s, and its first reactor began operations in 1969. As it is not party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), India’s nuclear industry has essentially evolved indigenously, with a longer term objective of developing nuclear power reactors that can operate on the thorium cycle, the country having significant thorium reserves and very little natural uranium reserves. India has a long history of nuclear energy R&D and is currently constructing a sodium-cooled fast breeder reactor which could operate on the thorium cycle. India expects to have an estimated 20 GW of nuclear capacity by 2020 and has announced ambitious targets to increase the share of nuclear electricity in the following decades. It is estimated that India could become the third-largest nuclear energy country in the world by 2040. Rapid economic and population growth, combined with increased urbanisation, are expected to fuel strong electricity demand. The need for reliable base-load electricity at competitive costs is the main driver for nuclear energy development in India. Other drivers include enhanced energy security and local pollution concerns.

Indonesia

Indonesia is looking to build nuke power, but most of the country is prone to earthquakes and tsunamis

Schneider et al 11

Mycle – consultant and project coordinator, Antony Frogatt – consultant, Steve Thomas – prof of energy policy @ Greenwich University, “Nuclear Power in a Post-Fukushima World 25 Years After the Chernobyl Accident” World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2010-11, http://www.worldnuclearreport.org/IMG/pdf/2011MSC-WorldNuclearReport-V3.pdf [Premier]

Hudi Hastowo, head of Indonesia’s National Atomic Energy Agency (Batan), told the Jakarta Post that using nuclear energy was one of the best solutions to address the country’s power shortage issue. He played down safety issues that critics have been voicing, saying that it would be safe to operate a nuclear plant.8 Chalid Muhammad from the environmental NGO Indonesia Green Institute, however, has argued that the government should stop the plan to build a reactor because 83 percent of Indonesia’s area is prone to disasters such as earthquakes and tsunamis. “The government should focus on building decentralized power plants that use renewable energy sources, such as micro-hydro and geothermal plants,” Muhammad said, stating that these small-scale plants can meet the needed electricity demand and are much safer compared to larger plants.9 Environment Minister Gusti Muhammad Hatta observed in mid-March that Indonesia is not ready to build nuclear plants due to human resource issues and public opposition. He argued that nuclear power plants should be the last resort because the country has several other energy options. But Gusti’s statement comes even as Batan insists on going ahead with its nuclear program despite mounting opposition.10

Japan

Japan Nuclear Power on the decline—SQUO solves.

Hoyle & Negishi 7/31 [Rhiannon, Mayumi; Reporters for the Wall Street Journal; The Wall Street Journal; 7/31/2016; “Japan Nuclear-Power Jitters Weigh on Global Uranium Market”; http://www.wsj.com/articles/japan-nuclear-power-jitters-weigh-on-global-uranium-market-1469990663; [PREMIER]]

Antinuclear sentiment is gaining momentum in Japan with the election three weeks ago of an antinuclear governor in the only Japanese prefecture with an operating nuclear-power plant, and the likelihood that a court injunction will halt the next reactor slated to go online in August.

Japan was once the world’s No. 3 nuclear-power generator, behind the U.S. and France. The slump in the uranium market is being exacerbated by weak demand from the U.S. and plentiful uranium supplies in China, an emerging nuclear-power producer.

The price of uranium has slumped to $25 a pound, its lowest level since April 2005, according to the Ux Consulting Co., a nuclear-fuel research firm​that publishes weekly market prices. The fuel’s value is down 27% since the start of this year and is a fraction of the $136 a pound it traded for at its 2007 peak.

It is the worst-performing mined commodity this year. Other natural resources such as copper, coal and iron ore have gained year to date.

There is plenty to fret about. In the U.S., a market awash with cheap natural gas, nuclear reactors have been closing. A few years ago, France said it would start reducing its reliance on atomic energy. China, while rolling out a broad expansion of its nuclear fleet, has built up inventories of uranium that could last more than a decade.

In Japan, a long-awaited revival hasn’t happened.

The Fukushima Daiichi meltdowns in 2011 sparked protests and the shutdown of its fleet of 50-plus nuclear plants, and tarnished uranium’s image globally. The government had planned to restart more than 30 reactors by 2030, and analysts had expected as many as 10 back online by 2017.

Now, it isn’t certain the two reactors that are operating will remain running and that the dozens of other reactors not slated for decommissioning will ever be restarted.

“The restart pace is way behind earlier expectations,” said Jonathan Hinze, international executive vice president at Ux Consulting. “As long as the Japanese reactors are sitting idle, it just keeps feeding the negative perceptions in the uranium market about the demand side.”

A court injunction in March forced Kansai Electric Power Co. to halt its Takahama plant, less than two months after it went online at the beginning of the year. The court said the utility had failed to show that the plant would be safe in the event of a quake or tsunami.

The governor of Kagoshima, Satoshi Mitazono, elected three weeks ago, has promised voters to suspend operations at the only other plant in operation, Kyushu Electric Power Co.’s Sendai nuclear plant. He cited heightened fears among residents following the April quakes in the Kumamoto area, which had long been thought to be safe from large tremors.

Residents across Japan are seeking court injunctions to prevent restarts elsewhere, including a suit to stop the planned August restart of Shikoku Electric Power Co.’s No.3 reactor at its Ikata plant.

No new nuclear plants in Japan-Fukushima killed public opinion

IEA 15 ["Technology Roadmap: Nuclear Energy." IEA Technology Roadmaps (n.d.): n. pag. 2015. Web. 8 Aug. 2016] [Premier]

Unlike the United States and Europe, which have generally struggled to build new nuclear plants on time and to budget, both Japan and the Republic of Korea were able to maintain successful new build programmes with impressive construction times thanks to sustained construction programmes over the last decades, increased modularity of designs, and well-managed supply chains. This contrasts with the situation in the United States and in Europe, where the last nuclear construction projects to be completed were launched in 1977 and 1991 respectively. With the exception of the two reactors currently under construction, prospects for new build in Japan are unclear and probably limited, given low public acceptance for nuclear after the Fukushima Daiichi accident and the challenge of restarting its nuclear plants as they await regulatory and local political approval. The government hopes that it will be able to restart several reactors at the beginning of 2015.

ME General

High incentive for Middle East production now-Saudi Arabia and Jordan prove

IEA 15 ["Technology Roadmap: Nuclear Energy." IEA Technology Roadmaps (n.d.): n. pag. 2015. Web. 8 Aug. 2016] [Premier]

With rapid electricity demand growth expected over the next decades, some countries in the region are looking at nuclear power to improve energy security through energy diversification and also to reduce domestic consumption of natural gas and oil, freeing up more resources for export. In addition to rising electricity demand, the region’s rising demand for fresh water makes desalination from nuclear an attractive opportunity in the mid to long term. Saudi Arabia has announced plans to construct 16 nuclear reactors with a total capacity of 17 GW by 2032 and hopes to have its first reactor operating by 2022. Jordan is also planning the construction of up to two reactors and signed an agreement with Russia in October 2013. For the Middle East, the main challenges in developing nuclear power will be in setting up the needed nuclear infrastructure and training, as well as the education of a highly skilled nuclear work force. The region is working closely with the IAEA to set up the necessary infrastructure and the UAE’s implementation of the IAEA milestones has been recognised as exemplary (see Box 4). For oil- and gas-rich countries in the region, overcoming these challenges has been facilitated by the significant resources made available to attract foreign experts, who provide training thereby passing their expertise and knowledge on so that local expertise and capacity are developed. However, there remains some concern about the availability of highly skilled and experienced nuclear experts if nuclear programmes are to develop extensively in the region.

Russia

Russia nuclear power production high now-renewing old reactors and leading R & D

IEA 15 ["Technology Roadmap: Nuclear Energy." IEA Technology Roadmaps (n.d.): n. pag. 2015. Web. 8 Aug. 2016] [Premier]

With Japan’s nuclear fleet idle, the Russian Federation is currently the third largest nuclear power country − behind the United States and France − with 33 reactors in operation and a total installed capacity of 25 GW. The State Atomic Energy Corporation, Rosatom, is also one of the leading providers of nuclear technology globally with extensive industry experience. Most of Russia’s reactors are being considered for lifetime extensions; to date, 18 reactors with total capacity of over 10 GW have received 15- to 25-year licence extensions. VVER reactors, which comprise half of the fleet, are also likely to be uprated, which would provide an additional 7% to 10% capacity. The oldest VVERs and all of the operating RBMK reactors are expected to be retired by 2030. The main drivers for future nuclear energy development in Russia include the replacement of ageing reactors due to be decommissioned and the development of additional new capacity to increase the share of nuclear electricity from 17% today to 25% to 30% by 2030. Increased nuclear generation would also free up natural gas for export. Currently, there are ten reactors with a total installed capacity of 9.2 GW under construction (one of them, Rostov 3, was actually connected to the grid on 29 December 2014) and a further 24 reactors (about 29 GW) planned by 2030, including advanced Gen III VVER reactors and sodium-cooled fast breeder reactors, and a BN-800 under construction that reached criticality in June 2014. Russia has invested significantly in nuclear R&D and is one of the leading developers of fast breeder reactors and of small floating reactors that provide nuclear power to remote areas. Two floating SMR KLT-40S units on the Lomonosov barge are under construction in Russia.

South Korea

South Korea production high now

IEA 15 ["Technology Roadmap: Nuclear Energy." IEA Technology Roadmaps (n.d.): n. pag. 2015. Web. 8 Aug. 2016] [Premier]

The Republic of Korea currently has 20.7 GW of nuclear capacity, accounting for 27% of total electricity generation in 2013. To reduce reliance on imported fossil fuels and to enhance energy security, the country has, for a long time, had a strategic goal to increase the share of nuclear generation. However, after the Fukushima Daiichi accident, a more moderate policy has been put forward which will see nuclear capacity increase up to 29% of the total electricity generation capacity by 2035, down from a previous target of 41%. With average capacity factors in recent years of 96.5%, the Republic of Korea has developed strong operating experience and competence. In 2009, the Republic of Korea won its first export contract from the United Arab Emirates and hopes to expand exports to other Middle East countries and Africa.

Nuclear energy development was tied with militaristic visions and economic independence

Valentine & Sovacool 10 [Scott Victor Valentine, Graduate School of Public Policy, University of Tokyo, Benjamin K. Sovacool, b Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, “The socio-political economy of nuclear power development in Japan and South Korea,” Energy Policy Vol 38, December 2010] [Premier]

Nuclear energy was ideologically linked with visions of military autonomy and strength, as well as economic competiveness. In particular, the nuclear program was closely aligned with creating an image of military strength. Nuclear technology was coveted not only as an electricity technology that would power the economy, but also for enhancing national defense. Desiring to pre-empt the potential social upheaval and economic disruption of a war with North Korea by a show of strength, government leaders embraced technological development in general and the attainment of nuclear weapons in particular as long-term goals. President Park Chung Hee openly announced ambitions to develop indigenous nuclear weapons to ensure that South Korea possessed a strong military deterrent that was independent from US military protection. President Park established a covert Weapons Exploitation Committee in 1969 to obtain highly enriched uranium and negotiate purchases of advanced nuclear weapons components (Siler, 1998). Efforts to intensify the nuclear weapons program were accelerated in the 1970s when Presidents Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter called on South Korea to bolster its self-defense capacity and announced plans to reduce America’s military presence in South Korea (Kang and Feiveson, 2001). The military dimensions of the nuclear power program were only put on hold after 1976, when the United States, shocked over South Korea’s decision to bolster self-defense capacity through nuclear rather than conventional means, threatened to suspend export licenses and credits necessary to acquire American nuclear reactor designs unless it forwent plans for nuclear weapon development (Kim and Byrne, 1996). Thus, for at least two decades, nuclear power production was intertwined with the allure of nuclear weapons, deterrence, and Korean military strength. Nuclear power was also attached to visions of economic modernization and industrialization. With limited natural resources, key political leaders endorsed cooperation between industry and government and promoted advanced technology as a way to achieve economic growth and international sovereignty. South Korea, strongly influenced by the Korean War and Japanese colonization and further conditioned to create a free-standing electricity system after North Korea abruptly cut off supply in 1948, placed a strong emphasis on achieving energy security amidst expanding demand for energy. Government elites saw nuclear power as central to lifting South Korea out of impoverishment after civil war (Byrne and Hoffman, 1996).

Switzerland

Public opposition

Schneider et al 11

Mycle – consultant and project coordinator, Antony Frogatt – consultant, Steve Thomas – prof of energy policy @ Greenwich University, “Nuclear Power in a Post-Fukushima World 25 Years After the Chernobyl Accident” World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2010-11, http://www.worldnuclearreport.org/IMG/pdf/2011MSC-WorldNuclearReport-V3.pdf [Premier]

Switzerland was one of the first countries to take domestic action in response to the Fukushima crisis. On March 14, 2011, Energy Minister Doris Leuthard suspended the approval process for three new nuclear power stations so safety standards could be revisited.56 Support for nuclear plants fell sharply in Switzerland following the crisis, with a poll published on March 20 showing that 87 percent of the population wants the country’s reactors phased out.57

Thailand

Huge public opposition

Schneider et al 11

Mycle – consultant and project coordinator, Antony Frogatt – consultant, Steve Thomas – prof of energy policy @ Greenwich University, “Nuclear Power in a Post-Fukushima World 25 Years After the Chernobyl Accident” World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2010-11, http://www.worldnuclearreport.org/IMG/pdf/2011MSC-WorldNuclearReport-V3.pdf [Premier]

An opinion poll in late March 2011 found that 83 percent of respondents disagreed with the plan to build nuclear plants in Thailand, and only 16.6 percent backed the move. When asked about construction of a nuclear plant in their respective provinces, 89.5 percent of respondents objected while only 10.5 percent agreed.18 Thailand’s study on nuclear plant construction will be thoroughly reviewed in light of the crisis in Japan, which will serve as a study case for Thailand, Energy Minister Wannarat Channukul said.19

UAE

UAE production high now-developing nuclear tech to replace dwindling natural gas

IEA 15 ["Technology Roadmap: Nuclear Energy." IEA Technology Roadmaps (n.d.): n. pag. 2015. Web. 8 Aug. 2016] [Premier]

The Bushehr NPP in Iran that began commercial operation in September 2013 was the first nuclear power plant to operate in the Middle East. The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is the most advanced newcomer country in the region, with construction started on three of four units of the Korean-designed APR1400 (the construction of the third unit stated in 2014), which will have a total installed capacity of 5.6 GW, at the Barakah site. The first unit is expected to start generating electricity in 2017, and the final unit is scheduled for operation in 2020. With electricity demand expected to exceed 40 GW by 2020, nearly doubling 2010 levels, the UAE has identified nuclear energy as an important source of future electricity supply. Electricity needs are currently met almost exclusively by natural gas. As a proven, cost-competitive and low-carbon source of electricity, UAE is developing nuclear power to provide a significant source of base-load electricity.

Nuke power is a cornerstone of the ties between Korea and the UAE

Schneider et al 11

Mycle – consultant and project coordinator, Antony Frogatt – consultant, Steve Thomas – prof of energy policy @ Greenwich University, “Nuclear Power in a Post-Fukushima World 25 Years After the Chernobyl Accident” World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2010-11, http://www.worldnuclearreport.org/IMG/pdf/2011MSC-WorldNuclearReport-V3.pdf [Premier]

South Korean president Lee Myung-bak dismissed concerns about the safety of nuclear plants that the South Korean industry plans to build in the UAE. Safety concerns have been rising since the Fukushima crisis began. Lee said that South Korea will make all-out efforts to ensure the safety of reactors. “The construction of the nuclear power plants reflects growing economic ties between Korea and the UAE. We will take all possible measures to ensure their safety,” Lee said three days after the Fukushima crisis started, at a groundbreaking ceremony for initial work at the proposed nuclear site in Braka, some 300 kilometers west of Abu Dhabi. The Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi, Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al Nahyan, was also present.24

United States

Energy demand massively increasing – nuclear will fill a big chunk

Pedraza 12

Jorge Morales Pedraza, consultant on international affairs, ambassador to the IAEA for 26 yrs, degree in math and economy sciences, former professor, Energy Science, Engineering and Technology : Nuclear Power: Current and Future Role in the World Electricity Generation : Current and Future Role in the World Electricity Generation, Nova 2012, New York. [Premier]

As can be easily see from Figure 8 the number of nuclear power reactors under construction dropped significantly during the period 1999-2004. After 2005, there is a trend to increase slowly the total number of nuclear power reactors under construction each year. It is expected that this trend will continue in the coming years. One of the major problems that several countries have to deal with in the coming years, particularly in the case of North America and Europe, is the increase ageing power-generation capacity, even in the field of electricity generation using nuclear energy. To overcome this problem both regions have an urgent need for major investment in the energy sector in order to meet the expected increase in the electricity demand and to replace ageing infrastructures in the energy sector. According to the World Energy Outlook for 2006, ―around 800 -900 GWe capacity will be required by 2030 to replace the existing capacity and to address increasing needs. It is reasonable to assume that out of these potential new 800-900 GWe, at least 100 GWe will be produced by Generation-III nuclear power reactors. This corresponds to the construction of 60 to 70 big nuclear power reactors, which represents an investment of €150 billion over 20 years (for an average overnight construction cost of €1,500 per kWe). These new nuclear power reactors to be constructed in the coming years should be designed to operate 60 years. In the following figure the ageing of the nuclear power reactors currently in operation is shown.

Vietnam

Vietnam increasing nuclear capability now

IEA 15 ["Technology Roadmap: Nuclear Energy." IEA Technology Roadmaps (n.d.): n. pag. 2015. Web. 8 Aug. 2016] [Premier]

Among developing Asian countries, Viet Nam is the most advanced with respect to its nuclear programme. The country has committed plans for developing nuclear and is in the process of developing its legal and regulatory infrastructure. Viet Nam is planning at least 8 GW of nuclear capacity by the end of the 2020s and hopes to have a first unit in operation by 2023.