世界核工业的发展的现状及趋势

The World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2009With Particular Emphasis on Economic IssuesByMycle SchneiderIndependent Consultant, Mycle Schneider Consulting, Paris (France) Project CoordinatorSteve ThomasProfessor for Energy Policy, Greenwich University (UK)Antony FroggattIndependent Consultant, London (UK)Doug KoplowDirector of Earth Track, Cambridge (USA)Modeling and Additional Graphic Design Julie HazemannDirector of EnerWebWatch, Paris (France)Paris, August 2009Commissioned byGerman Federal Ministry of Environment, Nature Conservation and Reactor Safety(Contract n UM) AbouttheAuthors Mycle Schneider is an independent international consultant on energy and nuclear policy based inParis. He founded the Energy Information Agency WISE-Paris in 1983 and directed it until 2003.Since 1997 he has provided information and consulting services to the Belgian Energy Minister,the French and German Environment Ministries, the International Atomic Energy Agency,Greenpeace, the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, the Worldwide Fundfor Nature, the European Commission, the European Parliaments Scientific and TechnologicalOption Assessment Panel and its General Directorate for Research, the Oxford Research Group,and the French Institute for Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety. Since 2004 he has been incharge of the Environment and Energy Strategies lecture series for the International MSc in ProjectManagement for Environmental and Energy Engineering Program at the French Ecole des Mines inNantes. In 1997, along with Japans Jinzaburo Takagi, he received the Right Livelihood Award,also known as the “Alternative Nobel Prize”.Antony Froggatt works as independent European energy consultant based in London.Since 1997 Antony has worked as a freelance researcher and writer on energy and nuclear policyissues in the EU and neighboring states. He has worked extensively on EU energy issues forEuropean Governments, the European Commission and Parliament, environmental NGOs,commercial bodies and media. He has given evidence to inquiries and hearings in the Parliamentsof Austria, Germany and the EU. He is a part time senior research fellow at the Royal Institute ofInternational Affairs Chatham House in London.Mr. Froggatt works intensively with environmental groups across Europe, particularly on energymarkets and policy and helped to establish a network on energy efficiency. He is a regular speakerat conferences, universities and training programs across the region.Prior to working freelance Antony worked for nine years as a nuclear campaigner and co-coordinator for Greenpeace International.Steve Thomas is Professor for energy policy at the Public Services International Research Unit(PSIRU), University of Greenwich, where he has been senior researcher since 2001.Mr. Thomas holds a BSc (honors) degree in Chemistry from Bristol University and has beenworking in energy policy analysis since 1976. His main research interests are reforms of energyindustries, economics and policy towards nuclear power, and corporate policies of energy industrycompanies. Recent clients include Public Services International, the European Federation of PublicService Unions, the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center (USA), Energywatch (UK) andGreenpeace International.Doug Koplow founded Earth Track in 1999 to more effectively integrate information on energysubsidies. For the past 20 years, Mr. Koplow has written extensively on natural resource subsidiesfor organizations such as the Global Subsidies Initiative, the National Commission on EnergyPolicy, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, the United NationsEnvironment Programme (UNEP), Greenpeace, the Alliance to Save Energy, and the USEnvironmental Protection Agency. He has analyzed numerous government programs and madeimportant developments in subsidy valuation techniques.Mr. Koplow holds an MBA from the Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration and aBA in economics from Wesleyan University.ContactsMycle SchneiderPhone: +33-1-69 83 23 79Email: mycleorange.frAntony FroggattPh: +44-20-79 23 04 12E: Steve ThomasDoug KoplowPh: +44-208 331 9056Ph: +1-617-661 4700E: stephen.thomasgreenwich.ac.uk E:M.Schneider,S.Thomas,A.Froggatt,D.KoplowWorldNuclearIndustryStatusReport20092ContentsExecutiveSummaryandConclusions.5I.Introduction .8II.1.OverviewofOperation,PowerGeneration,AgeDistribution . 8II.2.InternationalNuclearExpansionScenarios.12II.3.OverviewofCurrentNewbuild.14II.4.OverviewofPotentialNewcomerCountries .21II.5.StatusandTrendsinNuclearManufacturingCapacities .27II.6.StatusandTrendsinNuclearCompetence .30III.EconomicAnalysis. 40III.1.Introduction.40 III.1.1.Problemsofestimatingandcomparingnuclearcosts . 41 III.1.2.GenerationIII+plants . 42III.2.TheDeterminantsofNuclearEconomics.44III.3.FixedCosts.45 III.3.1.Constructioncosts. 45 III.3.2.Operatingcosts. 61 III.3.3.Decommissioningcosts . 63 III.3.4.Lifetime. 63III.4.ImplicationsforExistingandFutureReactors .64 III.4.1.Existingreactors . 65 III.4.2.Reactorsunderconstruction. 65 III.4.3.Reactorsonwhichconstructionhasstopped . 66 III.4.4.Futureorders . 66III.5.NuclearLiabilityIssues.67III.6.TheSubsidyIssue.70 III.6.1.Overviewofsubsidiestonuclearenergy . 70 III.6.2.Commonformsofsupportaroundtheworld. 71 III.6.3.SubsidiestoexistingreactorsintheUSA. 76 III.6.4.SubsidiestotheUKsExistingNuclearPowerPlants . 81 III.6.5.TheFuture . 88IV.1.Africa .88IV.2.Americas.89IV.3.Asia.93IV.4.Europe.98 IV.4.1.NuclearPowerinWesternEurope . 99 IV.4.2.NuclearPowerinCentralandEasternEurope. 108IV.5.RussiaandtheFormerSovietUnion . 111Annex1:StatusofNuclearPowerintheWorld(1stAugust2009) .114Annex2:NuclearReactorsintheWorld“UnderConstruction”(1stAugust2009) .115Annex3:PotentialNuclearNewcomerCountries,ResearchReactorsandGridSize .117Annex4:TimetableofEventsatOlkiluoto3 .118M.Schneider,S.Thomas,A.Froggatt,D.KoplowWorldNuclearIndustryStatusReport20093NoteTheauthorswishtothankAmoryB.Lovins,ChairmanoftheRockyMountainInstitute,USA,forhisextremelyusefulcommentsonadraftversionofthereport.ThanksalsotoMaryB.Davisforhercarefulproofreading.However,theresponsibilityforanyremainingerrorsremainswiththeauthors.Theprojectcoordinatorwishestoexpresshissinceregratitudetohiscoauthorsfortheirinvaluablecontributionsandcreativethinking.Thereportrepresentstheperspectiveandopinionofthecontractoranddoesnotnecessarilyreflecttheopinionoftheorderer(GermanFederalMinistryforEnvironment,NatureConservationandReactorSafety).M.Schneider,S.Thomas,A.Froggatt,D.KoplowWorldNuclearIndustryStatusReport20094Executive Summary and ConclusionsThe future of the nuclear energy industry is subject to a large number of media reports,study projects, expert meetings and political debates. Much of the published data is basedon speculation rather than on an in-depth analysis of nuclear energys industrial history,current operating status and trends.The World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2009 provides the reader with the basicquantitative and qualitative facts on the nuclear power plants in operation, underconstruction and in planning phases throughout the world. A detailed overview assessesthe economic performance of past and current nuclear projects.As of 1st August 2009 there are 435 nuclear reactors operating in the world, nine less thanin 2002. There are 52 units listed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as“under construction”. At the peak of the nuclear industrys growth phase in 1979 therewere 233 reactors being built concurrently. Even at the end of 1987, there were still120 reactors in process. Much has changed. For the first time since commercial use ofnuclear energy began in the middle of the 1950s no new nuclear plant was connected to thegrid in 2008. In fact, no start-up has been reported for the past two years, since Cernavoda-2was connected to the grid on 7 August 2007, after 24 years of construction.In 1989 a total of 177 nuclear reactors had been operated in what are now the 27 EUMember States, but as of 1st August 2009 only 144 units were in operation. Today theworldwide operating reactors total 370,000 megawatts (370 GW), about 1,600 MW1 lessthan one year ago.In 2007 nuclear power plants generated about 2,600 TWh2 and provided 14% of theworlds electricity. After an unprecedented drop in electricity generation of 2% in 2007,nuclear power plants output lost another half percentage point in 2008. Nuclear powerprovided 5.5% of the commercial primary energy production and about 2% of the finalenergy in the world, and has trended downwards for several years.Twenty-seven of the 31 countries operating nuclear power plants maintained (23) ordecreased (4) their share of nuclear power within the electricity mix in 2008 relative to2007. Four countries (Czech Republic, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia) increased theirshare.The average age of the operating nuclear power plants in the world is 25 years. Somenuclear utilities envisage reactor lifetimes of 40 years or more. Considering the fact thatthe average age of all 123 units that have already been closed is about 22 years, thedoubling of the operational lifetime seems rather optimistic. However, we have assumed anaverage lifetime of 40 years for all operating and in-construction reactors in ourcalculations of how many plants would be shut down year by year. The exercise makespossible an evaluation of the minimum number of plants that would have to come on-lineover the next decades in order to maintain the same number of operating plants.In addition to the 52 units currently under construction3, 42 reactors (16,000 MW)4 wouldhave to be planned, built and started up by 2015 one every month and a half and anadditional 192 units (170,000 MW) over the following 10-year period one every 19 days.1 The equivalent of an EPR (European Pressurized Water Reactor), as under construction in Finland andFrance.2Terawatthours or billion kWh.3In contrast to earlier scenarios, we have considered that all units currently listed by the IAEA as “underconstruction” will be connected to the grid by 2016.M.Schneider,S.Thomas,A.Froggatt,D.KoplowWorldNuclearIndustryStatusReport20095In a new “PLEX5 Scenario” we have modeled the situation taking into account not only thestart-up of all units currently under construction, but also the license renewal as ofAugust 2009 of 54 US and some other nuclear reactors6. Even with license renewals, thenumber of units in operation would never again reach the historical peak of 444 in 2002.By 2015, the number of operating units in the world would be 10 short of the current level,though the installed capacity would increase by 9,600 MW. In the following decade anadditional 174 reactors or about 152,000 MW would still have to be replaced to break evenwith the current nuclear fleet in the world.Even if Finland and France each builds a reactor or two, China goes for an additional20 plants and Japan, Korea or Eastern Europe add a few units, the overall worldwide trendwill most likely be downwards over the next two decades. With extremely long lead timesof 10 years and more, it will be practically impossible to maintain, let alone increase thenumber of operating nuclear power plants over the next 20 years. The one exception to thisoutcome would be if operating lifetimes could be substantially increased beyond 40 yearson average; there is currently no basis for such an assumption.For practically all of the potential nuclear newcomers, it remains unlikely that fissionpower programs can be implemented any time soon within the required technical, political,economic framework. None of the potential new nuclear countries has proper nuclearregulations, an independent regulator, domestic maintenance capacity, and the skilledworkforce in place to run a nuclear plant. It might take at least 15 years to build up thenecessary regulatory framework in countries that are starting from scratch.Furthermore, few countries have sufficient grid capacity to absorb the output of a largenuclear plant, an often-overlooked constraint. This means that the economic challenge tofinancing a nuclear plant would be exacerbated by the very large ancillary investmentsrequired in the distribution network.Countries with a grid size and quality that could apparently cope with a large nuclear plantin the short and medium term encounter an array of other significant barriers. Theseinclude a hostile or passive government (Australia, Norway, Malaysia, Thailand);generally hostile public opinion (Italy, Turkey); international non-proliferation concerns(Egypt, Israel); major economic concerns (Poland); a hostile environment due toearthquake and volcanic risks (Indonesia); and a lack of all necessary infrastructure(Venezuela). Many countries face several of these barriers at the same time.Lack of a trained workforce and massive loss of competence are probably the mostdifficult challenges for proponents of nuclear expansion to overcome. Even France, thecountry with perhaps the strongest base of civilian nuclear competence, is threatened by asevere shortage of skilled workers. Demographics are a big cause: a large