international framework for nuclear energy cooperation: recent developments … · ·...
TRANSCRIPT
International Framework for
Nuclear Energy Cooperation:
Recent Developments for Assistance
to Newcomer Countries
Dr. Alex R. BurkartCo-Chair
Infrastructure Development Working Group
IAEA TM/WG on Topical Issues on Infrastructure Development:
Managing the Development of a National Infrastructure for
Nuclear Power Plants
Vienna, 24-27 January 2012
Historical Perspective:
Aims & Objectives
• The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) was launched in February
2006 as a comprehensive vision and approach to the safe and secure
development of nuclear energy.
• Conceived in order to meet the growing global demand for clean, safe,
secure and environmentally sustainable sources of energy.
• In June , 2010, Partners agree to rename GNEP as the International
Framework for Nuclear Energy Cooperation (IFNEC).
IFNEC Statement of Mission
“The International Framework for Nuclear Energy
Cooperation provides a forum for cooperation among
participating states to explore mutually beneficial
approaches to ensure the use of nuclear energy for
peaceful purposes proceeds in a manner that is efficient
and meets the highest standards of safety, security and
non-proliferation. Participating states would not give up any
rights and voluntarily engage to share the effort and gain
the benefits of economical, peaceful nuclear energy.”
Current Membership
Participants
1. Argentina2. Armenia3. Australia 4. Bulgaria 5. Canada6. China7. Estonia8. France9. Germany10. Ghana11. Hungary12. Italy13. Japan14. Jordan 15. Kazakhstan16. Kenya17. Korea, Republic of 18. Kuwait19. Lithuania
20. Morocco21. Netherlands 22. Oman23. Poland24. Romania 25. Russia26. Senegal27. Slovenia 28. Ukraine 29. United Arab Emirates30. United Kingdom31. United States
Observer Organizations
1. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
2. Generation IV International Forum (GIF)
3. Euratom
Observer Countries
1. Algeria2. Bahrain3. Bangladesh4. Belgium 5. Brazil 6. Chile7. Czech Republic8. Egypt 9. Finland 10. Georgia11. Greece12. Indonesia13. Latvia14. Malaysia15. Mexico16. Mongolia17. Nigeria18. Philippines19. Qatar
20. Singapore21. Slovakia22. South Africa23. Spain24. Sweden25. Switzerland26. Tanzania27. Tunisia28. Turkey29. Uganda30. Vietnam
IFNEC Structure
STEERING GROUPUnited States Chair
China, France & Japan Vice-Chairs
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEEMinisterial Level Officials or Designees
Infrastructure Development
Working Group (IDWG)
U.S. and UK Co-chair
Lead Activities Lead Activities
Human Resource
Development
Radioactive Waste
Management
Interaction With Specialist Organizations
Small Modular Reactors
Subgroup on Resource
Requirements and Fuel Supply
Subgroup on Approaches for Selection of Back-end Fuel Cycle
OptionsFuel Services Framework
Infrastructure
Participant Country Support
Online Resource Library
Reliable Nuclear Fuel Services
Working Group (RNFSWG)
France and Japan Co-chair
• RNFSWG Explores:
� Resource requirements and fuel supply
� Approaches for selecting back end fuel cycle options; and
� Opportunities and challenges associated with Comprehensive Fuel Services
(CFS), including engagement with industry.
• Industry/Stakeholder Engagement
� Industry is encouraged to participate in RNFSWG meetings where its
input is crucial to the Working Group’s efforts to explore the challenges
and opportunities associated with CFS.
• CFS/Joint Convention
� IFNEC will seek introduction of CFS concept within the Joint Convention
on the Safety of Spent Fuel and Safety of Radioactive Waste.
• Next Meeting
� Tentatively planned for April 2012, location TBD.
Reliable Nuclear Fuel Services
Working Group
Key Considerations for
IDWG Activities
• Established to facilitate the development of the infrastructure needed for
worldwide nuclear energy expansion in a safe, secure and peaceful
manner.
• The IAEA document - “Milestones in the Development of a National
Infrastructure for Nuclear Power” established 19 infrastructure elements
which we use as a basis for looking at the Group's activities.
• Consensus messages
� All members are experiencing infrastructure development challenges.
� Human Resource development is a central issue.
� Providing a forum for exchange of experience, lessons learned, and resource
information is beneficial to members.
Infrastructure Development
Working Group
• Focuses on seven key areas:
�Human Resource Development
�Radioactive Waste Management
�Small Modular Reactors
�Support for Participant Countries, including Assessments
and Financing Approaches
� Interaction with Specialist Organizations
�Online Resource Library
� Infrastructure Needs for an International Nuclear Fuel
Services Framework
10
• IDWG meetings
� April 2011 in Paris
� October/November 2011 in Vienna
IDWG Meetings and Workshops:Defining Activities, Summarizing Results,
Sharing Information � Peer-to-peer
engagement
� Lessons-learned
exchanges and
workshops
� Interaction with
industry,
educational
community and
specialist
organizations
� Fast-track
activities to
complement a
strong base of
IAEA and bilateral
efforts
Human Resource Development
Modeling Tool
• Recent model development has focused on regulatory agency workforce
and safeguards capabilities
� Opportunities for specialized
training such as safeguards are
now represented in the model
� Workforce for a nuclear regulatory
body based on the US NRC is now
included in the model
Proposed Activities under PUI
Turned over to the IAEAon September 20, 2011 foruse with all Member States
• Near-Term Developments to Support Transfer Include� Writing a “users manual” and technical documentation� Developing training course materials� Refining the software (if necessary)
• Trial Review with the IAEA - Oct 2011� Final review of tool documentation and training course materials
• Pilot the Tool with Selected Member States� First IAEA Training Session - Jan 2012
• Approximately $500,000 expended by the U.S. on development.� Awaiting more funding from the Peaceful Uses Initiative.
“This tool can be an excellent way for
Member States to plan for human resource
development and is a good example of the
potential for cooperation among the IAEA,
the USA and IFNEC”
Alexander Bychkov, DDG, IAEA
Nuclear Power Institute (NPI):
Human Resource Development
• August 2011, Rosatom (Russia) visited NPI/TAMU
� Projected Outcome: Build on existing Russian student programs and possible faculty and student exchange
• October 2011, IAEA International Experts visited NPI/TAMU.
� France, Argentina, UK and Japan
� Focus: Educational Programs and implementation of programs in technical universities.
• January 2012, UK nucleargraduates visited NPI/TAMU
� 31 students and team leaders
� Focus: Training
• February 2012, IAEA International Experts to visit NPI/TAMU
� Bangladesh, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Thailand, United Arab Emerites, Vietnam
� Focus: Development of Human Resources and building a national infrastructure for nuclear power.
• February 2012, Malaysian Delegation to visit NPI/TAMU
� UNITEN and UKM (universities) and Tenaga (utility)
� Projected Outcome: Program Development, University Faculty and Student Exchanges, Teacher Exchanges
• Spring 2012, Vietnam Delegation visit to NPI/TAMU
� Projected Outcome: Program Development, University Faculty and Student Exchanges, Teacher Exchanges
Initial IDWG
Activities
Negotiations
Outcomes
Future
Exchange Program Highlights:
NPI and the Czech Republic
Economic Study for SMRs
• Preliminary Findings of Independent Ongoing Study of Economics of SMRs
� Construction learning can bring down overnight cost.
� Predictable and streamlined regulatory and construction schedules that includes strong
stakeholder involvement and support can reduce the cost of capital, which in turn can reduce
levelized cost.
� Building multiple units at a site will bring down average cost per unit.
• In some cases SMRs can be competitive with large plants
• In some cases SMRs can be competitive with natural gas
� Transferring significant capital costs from the site to the factory can be one of the principal
factors to reduce contingency costs.
� Standardized, certified designs can reduce duration risk, which is also a key factor reducing the
cost of capital.
• “Economies of Small and Modular” can be Competitive with “Economies
of Scale”
• Waste Management Issues are of Interest
16
IFNEC Resource Library
• An integrated on-line source of
existing infrastructure development
references, programs, tools, and
pooled Participants’ resources
�Education and training sources
�Assessment tools
�Conference and event information
�Best practice references
�Operational data
�Services information
�Vendor information
�Past meeting presentations
• Now the unified source for all non-public IFNEC data, including IDWG, RNFSWG, and Steering Group presentations
• Resource Library calendar is regularly updated to reflect ongoing civilian nuclear energy-related events
17
Radioactive Waste Management
• Radioactive Waste Management Subgroup (chaired by the UK)
reinforces the importance of radioactive waste management
• Working from a consolidated topic list
� Research and Development
� Funding and institutional arrangements
� Interactions with stakeholders
� Safe and secure storage and transport of used fuel and radioactive waste
prior to disposition
� Opportunities and constraints for regional and/or shared disposal
facilities
� Opportunities for changing how human resources are developed
� Will be addressing waste issues for Small Modular Reactors
Workshop on Emergency
Preparedness and Response
• Ensuring Effective Emergency Preparedness and Response as an Aspect of
Infrastructure Development
• International Framework for Preparedness and Response to Nuclear and
Radiological Emergencies
• IAEA Guidance, Tools and Programmes in the Area of Emergency Preparedness
and Response
• Case Study on Experience in Developing an Emergency Preparedness and
Response Capability While Establishing a National Nuclear Power Program
• IAEA Guidance on Emergency Preparedness and Response: Considerations for
States Embarking on a Nuclear Power Programme
• Making the Best Use of IAEA and Member State Assistance Programmes
Assistance Programs
18
• Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute
• Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Company
• Kozloduy NPP Plc.
• Lightbridge Corporation
• Lithuanian Electricity Organization
• National Skills Academy for Nuclear (UK)
• Nuclear Assurance Corporation
• Nuclear Energy Institute
• NuScale Power
• Oak Ridge National Laboratory
• PNTL
• SKB
• Société Générale
• Sogin
• Towers Perrin
• Toshiba Corporation
• UK National Nuclear Laboratory
• Urenco
• U.S. Export-Import Bank
• U.S. Civilian Research and Development Foundation
• Ux Consulting Company
• Westinghouse
• WM Mining
• AdSTM Inc
• Advance Uranium Asset Management
• Ansaldo
• Areva
• Argonne National Laboratory
• Atomstroyexport
• Babcock & Wilcox
• Barclay’s Capital
• Cameco Corporation
• Curtiss-Wright Flow Control Company
• Deutsche Bank
• EDF
• Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation
• Enel (Italy)
• Energopomiar (Poland)
• Eni (Italy)
• Fitch Ratings
• GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy
• International Nuclear Services
• Hyperion Power
• JAIF International Cooperation Center
Industry Engagement
• Czech TechnicaI University
• CIRTEN
• Igor Kurchatov Vocational School
• Kuwait University
• North Carolina State University
• Politechnico di Milano
• Sapienza University of Rome
• Texas A&M University
• University of California-Berkeley
• University of Manchester
• University of Sofia
• University of Tartu (Estonia)
Educational Community andInternational Organization
Engagement
• ARIUS
• EDRAM
• European Nuclear Education Network (ENEN)
• Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
• World Association of Nuclear Operators (WANO)
• World Institute for Nuclear Security (WINS)
• World Nuclear Association (WNA)
Joint Workshop: Backend Management
Summary Points
• General, relating to infrastructure support for CTG� Timeframes for radioactive waste management & decommissioning are longer than operational
reactor life
� Setting a full (reactor, sf /rwm, decommissioning) lifecycle strategy, complete with decision-making points, is key
� Ethical, socio-political aspects of storage & disposal (& transportation) important
o Much joint work being done and useful to transfer experiences but no universal formula for successful progress e.g. on siting
� Technical aspects are generally well understood and issues are manageable
o Again much joint research being undertaken
• Specific to multinational approaches for storage / disposal
� These may appear attractive but
� Similar issues to the above general points
� Political/ public support lacking & difficult to tackle
• a main barrier to progress?
� But this should not prevent constructive discussion, particularly if no host country is identified at
the beginning of the process
Joint Workshop: Backend Management
Recommendations Going Forward
• The WGs should continue to work together & share experiences, technologies in
storage, transportation and disposal in approach to infrastructure support for CTG
• Continue discussion on Regional Co-operation (recognizing sensitivities) within
the IFNEC context
� In line with Joint Convention / IAEA Principles etc.
� Recognising positive and negative impacts on infrastructure (including financing rwm, regulatory and legal frameworks)
� Recognising countries could consider dual track approach – national / international
o but not one at the expense of the other, i.e. “wait and see” not acceptable
� Could/ should/ would a country or a group of countries “volunteer”?
� Recognise “issues” such as liabilities, economics, financing etc
o IDWG to draft papers
� Recognise aspirations of new countries and manage expectations in policy / strategy development for either single/ dual-track
approach
o Assistance in establishing infrastructures, especially legal and regulatory framework
o Partnership building between regulators, and also partnerships between site operators or organizations
• Continue engaging with industry (i.e. the implementers/ service providers)
� Role of Industry in a public/private partnership needs further exploration
� RNFSWG to redesign and re-circulate industry survey
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AT WARSAW UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2011
IFNEC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
WARSAW, POLAND
September 29, 2011
•UAE joined as a Participant and Philippines and Qatar joined as Observers.
•Kenya joined as a full Participant several days after the meeting.
• Addressed key role of private sector and public-private partnership
� Bill Gates featured as keynote speaker via video
o Private sector innovation
o Need predictability in the market, including
regulatory, in order to attract investors
o Need greater government R&D investments
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING AT WARSAW UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2011
Key Role Of Private Sector
• Investment Banking Sector
� Briefing on approaches and status of private financing of
nuclear projects provided by Barclays Capital
Managing Director James Asselstine.
• Country Perspectives
� China and France provided briefings on their approach to financing.
• Agreed Upon Actions
� World Bank: Agreed to encourage the World Bank via the IFNEC Warsaw Joint
Statement to undertake a study of the economics and financing of nuclear power .
� Finance Workshop: Agreed to hold an expert-based stakeholders workshop on
financing to discuss the challenges and opportunities in the area of financing and
what IFNEC can do to support.
Addressed Financing:
Barriers and Opportunities
� Fukushima. Highlights continued importance of safety.
� Safety Conventions and Liability. Calls on all IFNEC countries to join four main safety conventions
as well as the establishment of a global nuclear liability regime.
� Comprehensive Fuel Services (CFS). Highlights Comprehensive Nuclear Fuel Services (CFS),
encourages continued engagement with industry and other stakeholders, and directs that a
discussion paper on the benefits and issues regarding CFS be developed.
� Financing. Recognizes financing as a major barrier to access nuclear energy and the importance of
multilateral development banks. Calls on the World Bank to conduct an economic and financial
assessment of nuclear power and offers to work with the World Bank.
� Stakeholder Engagement. Emphasizes need for IFNEC to engage with the various stakeholders of
the nuclear energy sector.
� Infrastructure Development. Emphasizes the need to continue sharing lessons-learned, assist
with human resource development, address radioactive waste management; and directs the
Infrastructure Development Working Group to continue engagement with industry and other
stakeholders.
IFNEC 2011 Joint Statement
• Expert-based stakeholders-wide workshop on financing in London, May
9-10, 2012.
• Scenario-based exercise will collectively explore the current barriers and
opportunities regarding financing nuclear energy projects.
• Key stakeholders involved in financing of nuclear power projects (e.g.,
vendors, utilities, energy agencies, export credit agencies, investment
banks, and multilateral development banks) will be invited to identify
potential solutions to nuclear financing issues.
• Participants and Observers will develop a set of practical steps that the 61
countries of IFNEC could employ to address the financing of a safe and
secure nuclear energy program.
IFNEC Nuclear Financing Workshop
The Comprehensive Nuclear
Fuel Services (CFS) Concept
• A CFS approach is one that provides reliable and commercially-based services on a global basis based on a range of options for fuel supply, used fuel management and ultimate disposal services.
• Under the CFS concept, suppliers would offer a set of options for fuel supply, used fuel management, and ultimate disposal services.
• CFS is intended to be a flexible and tailored approach that recognizes and accommodates the unique requirements of the specific users and service providers.
• A CFS approach could provide a competitive economic advantage over indigenous development of enrichment and reprocessing and would remove some of the burdens associated with the interim storage and the final disposal of used fuel or/and high level radioactive wastes.
• Tentatively set for October 10 in Marrakesh
• Greater attention on the needs of the developing world and
access to the global market (e.g., financing, HR,
infrastructure, expert-based information sharing) expected.
• Will receive specific proposals from Steering Group and
Working Groups as to what IFNEC can do to:
� Address financing as a barrier;
� Realize CFS; and
� Further engage in infrastructure development areas.
Morocco To Host and Chair 2012
Executive Committee Meeting