Nuclear risks – safety and security

Introduction

• Deeply interesting conference themes, spanning energy issues, environment & climate, nuclear energy, alternative energies and non-proliferation.
 
The international energy and environment setting

• The world is facing twin energy-related threats: that of not having adequate and secure supplies of energy at affordable prices and that of environmental harm caused by consuming too much of it.
• Soaring energy prices and recent geopolitical events have reminded us of the essential role affordable energy plays in economic growth and human development, and of the vulnerability of the global energy system to supply disruptions.
• Safeguarding energy supplies is once again at the top of the international policy agenda.
• Energy supply – reasonably priced and in the long term renewable – has been identified by the UN Commission on Sustainable Development 2006 as crucial to achieve growth in developing countries.
 
Climate change and energy

• Yet the current pattern of energy supply carries the threat of severe and irreversible environmental damage – including changes in global climate.
• Reconciling the goals of energy security and environmental protection requires strong and coordinated government action and public support.
• The need to curb the growth in fossil-energy demand, to increase geographic and fuel-supply diversity and to mitigate climate-destabilising emissions is more urgent than ever.
• Nevertheless, global energy demand continues to grow. All categories of energy sources are here on the rising demand.
• It is estimated that up to 2030 over 70% of the increase in demand comes from developing countries, with China alone accounting for 30%. Their economies and population grow much faster than in the OECD, shifting the centre of gravity of global energy demand.
• In a climate perspective, it is worth noting that China and India account for almost four-fifths of the incremental demand for coal in this period.
• These are overwhelming perspectives, with huge implications not only for how they arrange themselves, but certainly for us too, our economy and our environment.
• The massive increase in energy demand over the next generation will be, as far as anyone can foresee today, predominantly based on fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are increasingly hard to get and hard to pay for. With the threat of climate change looming large, it is therefore no wonder why companies and governments are screening the horizon for alternative energy sources.
• Supply depends not only on market mechanisms, but as much on public regulation, development stimulation, and the sensitivities of technology and raw material spread. Here the logics concerning nuclear energy come to play.
• To sum up: A range of challenging trends coincide over the next generation: Massive energy demand in developing countries and emerging economies, this being primarily fossil fuel, and therefore resulting in great increase in CO2-emissions from these parts of of the global community, making it an ever more pressing issue to search for alternatives: nuclear power stand out.

The renaissance of nuclear energy

• Many speak about "the renaissance of nuclear power". This renaissance coincides with a global peak in proliferation concerns.
• In 2005, 31 countries operated a total of 443 reactors, providing 15 % of the world’s electricity. 84 % of this output took place in OECD countries.
• Why nuclear energy? I will not enter into any polemics regarding nuclear energy in front of the expert community, but I must emphasise some points:
 -Nuclear energy is one of the few energy sources already in place on a large and proven scale that is emissions friendly, compared to fossil fuels.
-The nuclear energy sector has been riddened by the Chernobyl legacy for a long time. IAEA GC 2006 showed a growing interest in nuclear energy among member states. Political and public opposition to nuclear energy seems to be reduced over the years. However, a future severe nuclear accident may lead to a rapid increase in the opposition.
 
• There might be a renaissance in conceptual terms, but any great expansion of nuclear energy is still far off. Only in the most favourable scenarios will nuclear energy expand its role in the so-called energy mix over the next generation. It is just as probable that it will fall, due to few new reactors being planned and many of the old nearing retirement.

Norway and nuclear energy

• In Norway, large-scale efforts will be made over the next decades to curb CO2 emissions, but reverting to a nuclear energy is, luckily, I must say, not one of the options nearest at hand here. Other societies are not as privileged as we are.

Let me therefore take the opportunity to reaffirm Norway's position on nuclear energy:

• Norway fully supports the right to peaceful use of nuclear power as stipulated in the NPT. Norway attaches great importance to facilitating the use of radiation and radioactive sources in the health sector, agriculture, water management and environmental monitoring.
• Peaceful nuclear applications  represent an important contribution to our joint efforts at reaching the Millennium Development Goals.
• While nuclear energy may have a positive impact on efforts to reduce emission of greenhouse gases, there are also severe environmental implications. Sufficient resources must be set aside in the search of sustainable and environmentally sound solutions. From a Norwegian perspective, it is vital that peaceful uses of nuclear technology do not undermine non-proliferation efforts, nuclear security or safety.
• Norway therefore welcomes suggestions to make the nuclear fuel cycle more resistant to nuclear proliferation, like developing multilateral nuclear fuel-cycle arrangements, reducing the number of vulnerable fuel-cycle facilities and reducing the use of high-risk materials like highly enriched uranium. 

IAEA, nuclear safety and security, non-proliferation

• Nuclear non-proliferation is essential for maintaining international peace and stability. Non-proliferation is a precondition for achieving our ultimate goal of a world free of nuclear weapons.
• The Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) has established a fundamental norm by emphasizing verification and confidence-building. Given new security threats it is imperative to strengthen the non-proliferation dimension of the NPT.  In this regard the continued international concern over the nuclear activities of the Islamic Republic of Iran and North Korea illustrate the great need for full compliance with the NPT, the UN Security Council demands and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
• Last year Norway organized an international symposium on minimization of
  highly enriched uranium in the civilian sector. The emerging threat of nuclear terrorism makes it even more imperative to address the challenges posed by civilian use of highly enriched uranium. There was broad agreement that it is technically feasible to convert most civilian reactors from high to low enriched uranium.
• We need to forge a new international consensus on nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. This is the purpose of the efforts Norway has put into the so called Seven Nation Initiative (Australia, Chile, Indonesia, Norway, Romania, South Africa and United Kingdom). This Initiative has truly a cross-regional composition. We need to work in innovative ways if we are to move the disarmament and non-proliferation agenda forward and to contribute in a positive outcome of the current NPT Review Process.
• In addition to global instruments, partnerships are emerging that address the
  dangers of nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism. Norway takes part in the Proliferation Security Initiative. Norway is contributing with considerable funds to the Group of Eight Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction.
• Norway supports the Global Threat Reduction Initiative as well as the European Union strategy against proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Norway also welcomes the new Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism.

Nuclear safety in our neighbourhood: the case of Northwest Russia

• Bringing in the G8 Global Partnership directs my attention to the North. In Northwest Russia, environmental and non-proliferation concerns over the extensive Cold War legacy and safety & security shortcomings of the civilian nuclear sector have been prominent for more than fifteen years.
• Norwegian-Russian cooperation to mitigate these problems have been going on for just as long. By now, we have spent app USD 200 million on nuclear safety and security in Northwest Russia, including destruction of chemical weapons in the Russian Federation.
• Through our Action Plan for Nuclear Safety in Northwest Russia, substantial achievements have been made. Our efforts are greatly supplemented and strengthened by the Global Partnership, the G8s response to the 9/11 and the global proliferation concerns.
• This partnership, where Norway participates, has from 2003 onwards provided nuclear safety and security projects in the region on a massive scale, thus contributing to eliminating threats like the large number of laid-up nuclear submarines, huge quantities of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste, and unsecured radioactive sources.
• This summer I had the pleasure to tour the Kola Peninsula’s most prominent project sites, together with my British colleague Malcolm Wicks.
• One area which I am particularly proud of, is the removal of radioactive strontium batteries in lighthouses along the Russian Barents Sea coast. Such batteries, unguarded and remote, are increasingly regarded as a serious proliferation risk. Here we have been in the forefront, and by 2009, we will have removed 180 of these installations from the region, and substituted them with solar cell panels!
• In line with our engagement in minimization of highly enriched uranium in the civilian sector, we now support, also financially, an American-led initiative to work out a decommissioning plan for the numerous research reactors in Russia, thus contributing to remove considerable quantities and facilities for highly enriched uranium from circulation.
• Another instance of proliferation risk is the purely knowledge-based one. To put it mildly, the nuclear sector is an intensely knowledge-based one, and proliferation of brain power from the previously extensive Soviet knowledge base has been a continued concern. For many years, we have therefore co-funded the International Science and Technology Centre in Moscow (ISTC), which redirects and engages thousands of scientists in meaningful and fruitful high-level scientific activities.
• I am also particularly proud of the Norwegian-Russian inter-agency cooperation on regulatory issues, like safety standards and measures, development of regulatory frameworks etc. The Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority work with Russian counterparts bilaterally as well as in the various multilateral settings. This adds a very important and necessary dimension to our efforts in the nuclear safety sphere.
• I will close on Northwest Russia where it all started: In the nuclear energy sector. The Kola Nuclear Power Plant. Here we started urgent projects in the early nineties in order to expediently bring safety measures up to a higher level. Over the years, we have spent app. USD 50 million on power plant safety in Russia and Chernobyl.
• During the last few years, reports have concluded that safety levels at the Kola plant are at a level statistically comparable to Western plants. As a consequence, project engagements have been significantly reduced. But due to their construction, they will never be as safe as western plants per se, and we therefore maintain that the plant should be closed.
• However, this is for the Russians to decide. Norway has no means to enforce a closure of some or all of the reactors on Kola. Instead, we try to stimulate the Russian perspectives on alternative and renewable energy sources as a substitute. Indeed, this work has attracted much positive attention.
• But as any picture, also this one is complex. Russia now focuses on further development of nuclear power, aiming at a doubling of its share of domestic energy mix by 2025. As such, Russia is more in line with the general global trend.
• Mobile, floating nuclear power plants are at the design stage. The Russians ensure us that there are no plans for export, and that they will be built and managed to the highest standards. Yet they add a nuclear dimension to our neighbourhood, raising proliferation concerns that we would like to do without.
• On the one hand a nuclear legacy is being handled to success. On the other, nuclear power’s renaissance is already under implementation. This picture we must learn to live with, but doing so, we must ensure that all activity is in accordance with the best international norms and practice.