Chernobyl + 20

Why Nuclear Power is no Solutionfor Tackling Climate Change

Clean Energy Alternatives

Klaus IllumECO Consult, Denmark

There are three problems confronting us – overruling all our other problems:

1. The inequality in wealth and energy consumption among the peoples of this world

2. The impending peak in oil (and gas) production

3. Climate change

Peak oil may slow down climate change.But we should prepare for a soft descent after

the peak.

1972

In 1976 M. King Hubbert (1903-1989) concluded his paper Exponential Growth as a Transient Phenomenon in Human History with the following observations:

“It appears therefore that one of the foremost problems confronting humanity today is how to make the transition from the precarious state that we are now in to this optimum future state by a least catastrophic progression.

Our principal impediments at present are neither lack of energy or material resources nor of essential physical and biological knowledge.

Our principal constraints are cultural. During the last two centuries we have known nothing but exponential growth and in parallel we have evolved what amounts to an exponential-growth culture, a culture so heavily dependent upon the continuance of exponential growth for its stability that it is incapable of reckoning with problems of nongrowth.”

A flock of hens and a cock live on an island far out at sea.The flock is no bigger than it can live very well from the grass and other weeds growing on the island and the worms in the soil.

But one day the hens find a hundred barrels of grain drifted ashore from a wrecked ship. Now abundant amounts of food is easily available. They multiply. The chickens grow up and have more chickens. They become fat from all the grain they eat. Soon there is not room for any more. And what is left of the grain has been treaded down into the ground.

Moreover, the many hens and chickens have destroyed the natural vegetation.Crisis is looming. Had they found only ten barrels of grain instead of a hundred they had been better of.

Human economics work the same way.

A Viable Energy Strategy for the Nordic Countries 2006 –2030

A viable investment budgetfor the renewal and consolidation of the energy resource base,

the reduction of CO2 emission,and the phasing out of nuclear power

Paper prepared for Greenpeace Nordicby Klaus IllumFebruary 2006

What can in practice be achieved ?A comprehensive case study

Energy sources Conversion and transmission End-use

Efficiency is a property of the energy system as a whole

100

105

110

115

120

125

130

135

140

145

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

E l e c t r i c a l a p p l i a n c e s, s t o c k d e v e l o p m e n t

T r a n s p o r t a t i o n v o l u m e s

P r o d u c t i o n q u a n t i t i e sa n d h e a t e d f l o o r a r e a

P e r c e n t

Assumed quantitative growth rates

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

2005 2010 2015 2020 2030

1

2

3

U S D p e r b a r r e l

C r u d e o i l p r i c e s c e n a r i o s 1, 2 a n d 3

Economic cost assessments made in three future crude oil price cases

Assuming that the prices of natural gas and coal grow in proportion to the oil price

Assume that these investments were made in buildings in order to reduce heat demand and improve the efficiency of heat supply,

….. and that these investments were made in renewable energy sources.

…then – assuming that nuclear power is gradually phased out – we can compute the investments needed in collective power and cogeneration stations and other energy conversion facilities. Let’s see the results

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

I n v e s t m e n t s a n d r e - i n v e s t m e n t s

M a i n t e n a n c e a n d d e p r e c i a t i o n

F u e l s

1, 0 0 0 m i l l i o n E u r o S c e n a r i o A

F u e l p r i c e c a s e 2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

I n v e s t m e n t s a n d r e - i n v e s t m e n t s

M a i n t e n a n c e a n d d e p r e c i a t i o n

F u e l s

1, 0 0 0 m i l l i o n E u r o S c e n a r i o B

F u e l p r i c e c a s e 2

”Business as usual”A fictuous scenario – unrealistic.For comparison only.

Results of the investment programme.Total costs over the period are about the same.But less money is burned.

Even if ”business as usual” were possible,it would be bad business

0

50

100

150

200

250

A c c u m u l a t e d c a p i t a l 2 0 3 0

A n n u a l c o s t s 2 0 3 0

F u e l p r i c e c a s e 1, 2, 3

1

23

S c e n a r i o A1, 0 0 0 m i l l i o n E u r o

T o t a l c o s t s 2 0 0 5 - 2 0 3 0:

1: 9 5 0

2: 1 1 5 03: 1 2 6 0

0

50

100

150

200

250

A c c u m u l a t e d c a p i t a l 2 0 3 0

1, 0 0 0 m i l l i o n E u r o

A n n u a l c o s t s 2 0 3 0

F u e l p r i c e c a s e 1, 2, 3

1 2 3

S c e n a r i o B

T o t a l c o s t s 2 0 0 5 - 2 0 3 0:

1: 1 0 0 02: 1 1 2 03: 1 1 9 0

As fossil fuels become scarce, expensive resources, it pays to build new more energy-efficient energy systems.

The capital value in 2030 of the energy system hardware

Annual costs in 2030

”Business as usual” Feasible investments made

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

S c e n a r i o A

S t a t i o n a r y u n i t s

V e h i c l e s

C O 2 e m i s s i o n 1 0 0 0 0 t o n s

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

C O 2 e m i s s i o n 1 0 0 0 0 t o n s

S c e n a r i o B

V e h i c l e s

S t a t i o n a r y u n i t s

”Business as usual” Feasible investments made

CO2 emissionStationary units

Vehicles