Memorandum submitted by the Institute
of Physics
1. INTRODUCTION
Within an approximate five- to 10-year time
frame there are likely to be significant reductions in both coal-fired
and nuclear fission capacity. As a consequence, despite reductions
in energy demand resulting from increased energy efficiency and
an increase in renewables capacity, there will be a shortfall
in generating capacity. This will also be impacted by the intermittent
nature of the primary, near-term, renewable energy sources.
Over this timescale, the shortfall can only
be addressed by the construction of additional capacity from existing
technologies. Such capacity must, however, be consistent with
the commitment for reduction in greenhouse gases emissions. Policy
and regulatory regimes must also ensure that both sustainability
and diversity of supply are assured and that the UK does not become
overly dependent on imported oil or natural gas.
2. CLIMATE CHANGE
The objective of meeting climate change targets
is fundamental, as the issue of stopping the growth (and preferably
the reduction) of atmospheric carbon dioxide levels and other
greenhouse gases is one of great importance. Realistically, emissions
need to be reduced by about 60% to stop growth; however, that
target at present appears to be unattainable.
The continuous use of fossil fuels will eventually
result in carbon dioxide levels exceeding the recommended upper
limit of 550 ppm which, as highlighted in the Royal Commission
on Environmental Pollution's (RCEP) report, Energy—The
Changing Climate, will probably lead to dangerous and destructive
climate change.
The Institute has noted the Government's commitment
to meet challenging environmental targets, such as a reduction
in the emission of greenhouse gases of 12.5% by 2008-12 and of
carbon dioxide by 20% by 2010. It is of concern to note that the
RCEP report stated that the UK is poorly prepared to meet these
long-term targets. Our concern is exacerbated by the fact that
carbon dioxide emissions have risen during each of the past two
years, and are now higher than at any time since 1997.
The Institute is of the view that, although
a reduction in current levels of greenhouse gas emissions is achievable,
this could be more than countered with large increases in emissions
from developing countries like India and China, undergoing rapid
industrialisation. Thus, the UK along with the rest of the EU,
needs to continue to push for international progress in reducing
emissions.
3. NATURAL GAS
Natural gas is expected to fuel the production
of over two-thirds of the UK's electricity by 2020. Such a dependence
on what will increasingly be an imported resource is a major concern.
The Institute published a report last year, Gas supplies to
the UK—a review of the future, which clearly highlights
the risks associated with a dependence on importing natural gas,
to meet the UK's need for energy.
The report stated that from 2006 the UK was
forecast to become a net importer of gas. However, it is of concern
to note that the UK actually became a net importer in 2004. This
has implications for the UK's security of supply, in terms of:
— potential threats to supply arising
from political instability in gas-producing nations;
— price disruptions arising from risks
associated with the supply and demand of gas; and
— concerns relating to the transit
of gas and the facilities through which it is delivered.
The report also stated that a greater demand
across the EU for natural gas is forecast, with increased competition
for the same gas resources as nations attempt to meet their own
carbon and pollutant-reducing targets. Even though carbon dioxide
emissions from gas-fired generating plants are significantly less
than from previously dominant coal-fired plants, gas-fired electricity
generation alone will struggle to help meet the UK's future climate
change targets. Additionally, there are concerns over gas leakage
during transit along long pipelines, which is of concern as natural
gas (ie methane) is an even more potent greenhouse gas than carbon
dioxide.
4. NUCLEAR FISSION
(a) What nuclear offers
Nuclear fission has a major role to play in
lowering carbon dioxide emissions, as it can meet base-load electricity
demands and is practically a zero carbon dioxide emitter. Given
that most EU nations are poorly prepared to meet their respective
Kyoto Protocol emissions targets, the Institute believes that
new nuclear power plants need to be commissioned to replace current
plants as they reach the end of their lives. If new nuclear power
plants are not constructed, then by 2020 there will be a power
void which will most probably have to be filled by fossil fuel
electricity generation resulting in more, not less, carbon dioxide
emissions.
The Institute has in recent years welcomed both
the UK Government's and the Scottish Executive's various initiatives
to tackle carbon dioxide emissions such as the renewables obligation
and the climate change levy. However, the Institute feels that
the nuclear industry has been severely disadvantaged by not being
exempted from the climate change levy, since nuclear power does
not contribute to carbon dioxide emissions.
The Institute wholeheartedly agrees with the
views of the UK Government's Chief Scientific Advisor, Professor
Sir David King, that in order for the UK to meet its international
targets to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, it must inevitably
revive its nuclear power plant building programme.
Unless there is new nuclear build, the reliance
on fossil fuel energy generation will be unabated. The decommissioning
of nuclear plants in Scotland, for instance, will result in the
loss of approximately 55% of its current electricity generating
capacity by around 2023. New nuclear plants are required in order
to maintain and improve not just the UK's, but the EU's current
diversity, security and environmental balance of electricity supply.
On the critical path of ensuring an extant option
for nuclear power is the technical assessment or "licensing"
required by the regulatory authorities. This is a three-year process
which does not pressure implementation but would ensure an option
to move forward while nuclear is kept open.
(b) Novel reactor designs
While the popular perception in Europe and North
America is that nuclear power is an industry in decline, the reality
worldwide is the reverse. Over recent years there has been a wave
of new nuclear plant construction in the Far East, most notably
in China. In addition, Finland and France are constructing new
nuclear plant.
The Institute's technical report, The future
of fission power—evolution or revolution?, published
in April 2004, highlights the technical advances that are being
made in reactor designs worldwide. New modular reactors are being
developed, which have lower capital costs, are more efficient,
safer to operate, produce significantly less radioactive waste
and generate electricity at a lower cost unit than the current
fleet of reactors.
The report reviews both evolutionary and revolutionary
reactor designs. Evolutionary designs capitalise on existing technology
and introduce system simplifications that improve safety while,
at the same time, reducing costs. For example, the AP1000 design,
a pressurised light water reactor from Westinghouse, already licensed
in the US, and the European Pressurised Water Reactor, which is
the design adopted by both Finland and France, are both ready
to seek licensing in the UK. A key feature of the evolutionary
designs, following 9/11, is that they meet ever more demanding
safety and security requirements. A study sponsored by the Electric
Power Research Institute, in the US, determined that current reactor
structures are robust and protect the fuel from impacts by large
commercial aircraft.
Revolutionary designs reviewed in the report
include the development of High Temperature Gas Reactors and Pebble
Bed Modular Reactors, which represent the first of a class of
"revolutionary" systems. These revolutionary designs
will be inherently even safer and more efficient than the evolutionary
class. The Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) is being developed
in South Africa by an international consortium. Key benefits of
PBMR include the fuel's ability to withstand very high temperatures,
and the fact that the concept is of a simple modular construction
with consequential low capital cost of units, which may be produced
in substantial numbers ensuring economy of scale. These systems
also have the potential for duality of mission, ie electricity
and hydrogen production, desalination, symbiotic process heat
for energy intensive chemical processes.
The report concluded that both types are needed.
The evolutionary designs are needed to plug the gap left by the
retirement of current nuclear and fossil fuel plants, and to avoid
the sizable increase in carbon dioxide emissions in the near future.
Revolutionary designs could then follow, delivering safe, long-term
competitive and sustainable energy.
One of the key problems of ensuring fission's
future in the UK could be the lack of a skilled work force. The
nuclear industry, at present, plays a key role in the UK economy,
employing 40,000 directly and supporting many additional jobs—new
build would offer opportunities to maintain and grow the work
force, while keeping alive the knowledge and expertise that has
been built up. New build would also benefit the UK in terms of
GDP. The benefit in GDP terms of a programme to replace the current
nuclear fleet has been assessed in a recent independent study[195]
at around £4 billion per year once the stations are all operational.
The Institute's report also makes reference
to work that is jointly being carried out cooperatively by a number
of countries on the US Department of Energy's Generation IV programme.
This activity is aimed at developing advanced reactor systems
and fuel cycles for deployment circa 2030. International collaborative
work has selected candidate systems to be developed that further
improve the economics, safety, environmental impact and security
in order to meet the stringent challenges of sustainable development
energy generation in the 21st century.
(c) Legacy waste and new build
In considering the issues relating to managing
radioactive waste, it is fundamental to separate those dealing
with pre-existing radioactive waste from issues involved in the
construction of new nuclear plants. Even if a decision were made
not to construct new nuclear plants, the need to manage nuclear
waste produced as a consequence of past and current electricity
generation and plant decommissioning will remain. The new nuclear
plants, highlighted in the previous paragraphs, will generate
significantly lower amounts of waste. A fleet of 10 new reactors
would be enough to maintain the UK's share of nuclear electricity
at around 25% and such a fleet, operated for their full design
lifetime of 60 years, would add less than 10% to the volume of
waste which already exists. The new waste would also be easier
to deal with than much of the legacy waste. The UK should not
use the challenge of dealing with some of the more difficult legacy
wastes as a basis to delay the decision for a new nuclear build
programme.
5. NUCLEAR FUSION
Nuclear fusion has long been hailed as the ultimate
energy source, mimicking on Earth the processes which take place
deep inside the Sun and other stars, where light elements are
fused to form heavier ones, releasing huge amounts of energy.
Harnessing this energy on Earth would provide
a virtually inexhaustible energy source with no greenhouse gas
emissions.
The Institute is of the view that nuclear fusion
potentially has an important role to play in low carbon energy
generation in the long-term future. Despite the fact that commercial
electricity generation from nuclear fusion is not likely before
2040, its benefits as an energy source for the long-term future
are significant.
Fusion research is finally coming of age. Results
from large machines like the Joint European Torus (JET), the world's
largest magnetically confined fusion facility, mean that physicists
have a deep understanding of the processes that will make fusion
a reliable system for large-scale base-load electricity generation.
The UK Government and their international partner Governments
commitment to the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor
(ITER), which it was recently announced is to be built in Cadarache,
France, will hopefully lead to a demonstration of fusion energy
production on a 20-30 year timescale.
6. RENEWABLES
(a) The challenge for renewables
The Institute wholeheartedly supports RD&D
into new renewable energy technologies which potentially, may
eventually reduce the UK's dependence on fossil fuel electricity
generation. Renewables are an essential part of the future energy
mix, but there is a need for increased research and innovation
in the relevant RD&D sectors, in order for the UK to be in
a position to respond to the challenges of the medium to long-term
future.
The Institute notes that the 2003 Energy White
Paper, Our energy future—creating a low carbon economy,
aspires by 2020 to double the UK's renewables' share of electricity
from the 2010 target of 10%. The equivalent targets for Scotland
are 18% by 2010 and 40% by 2020. These targets represent a significant
challenge given that, in the UK, only 3.6% of electricity was
generated from renewable energy in 2004, coupled with the fact
that renewables presently suffer from various barriers to exploitation,
which in themselves demand greater RD&D.
(b) Barriers to the deployment of renewables
Realising the large potential benefits that
renewables and other advanced technologies, such as fuel cells,
could make to a low carbon economy requires a number of technical,
economic, institutional and social constraints to be overcome.
Overcoming the technical and economic barriers requires substantial
RD&D to improve performance and reliability, bring down costs,
and resolve issues of grid integration. These measures need to
go hand-in-hand with policy support to remove institutional and
social barriers.
Maturity
The maturity of renewables varies considerably.
While a number are commercially proven, others are still at a
pre-commercial stage, and some still require quite fundamental
R&D.
Cost
In the UK, at current gas prices and under current
market structures, mature technologies are not yet competitive
with existing gas fired Combined Cycle Gas Turbine plant without
subsidy, although in the medium term (2020) some technologies
(eg on- and off-shore wind) could be. Technologies such as solar
photovoltaics are unlikely to be cost-competitive with centralised
generation unless a step change in cost-effectiveness is achieved
by the new types of photovoltaic cells currently under development.
They may, however, become competitive in remote off-grid locations,
where the cost of other stand-alone systems, such as diesel generators,
is high. It is also worth noting that as Governments seek to reduce
carbon dioxide emissions, the emissions will acquire an economic
"cost". For example, the EU Emissions Trading Scheme
which is now operational will determine a monetary value per tonne
of carbon dioxide for the trade of carbon dioxide emissions. If
this additional cost of emitting carbon dioxide from fossil fuel
based power sources is taken into account in the future, then
the competitiveness of renewables will improve.
Intermittency
Many of the technologies, for example, wind
power, are intermittent and thus require energy storage or backup
generating capacity to be available on the electricity network.
Distributed nature
Current renewable energy plants are generally
small in scale—from a few kilowatts for individual PV installations
to tens of megawatts for biomass plant—compared to conventional
power stations (typically a gigawatt or so). The small scale nature
of renewables has advantages for use in some situations, for example,
for stand-alone applications, but in a country like the UK where
the transmission grid is designed for distribution of power from
a small number of large power stations, the incorporation of small,
distributed sources raises some technical issues. The bulk of
renewable energy resources may also occur in locations which are
remote from regions with large energy consumptions (eg remote
parts of Scotland), and where grid infrastructure to transport
the power is limited or non-existent.
Social and institutional constraints
Issues which may hamper development include:
public acceptability, planning constraints and institutional barriers,
for example, lack of clarity over planning consents, permitting
of plants, skills issues, and investment regimes. While most renewables
are environmentally benign, in that emissions of carbon dioxide
and other air pollutants associated with them are typically very
low (even after allowing for their manufacture), they do have
a number of other local environmental impacts. For example, wind
turbines may be visually intrusive, particularly if they are located
in areas which are highly prized for their beauty or isolation.
This can cause considerable local opposition, and care is needed
to ensure that technologies are located sensitively, and that
techniques to mitigate impacts are used where possible.
Funding for RD&D
A significant problem facing renewables and
other low carbon generating technologies is that, following the
liberalisation of the UK energy market, the current price of electricity
is so low that it is not economically viable to develop and introduce
new generating technologies to the market, unless they can be
developed at a low cost and can provide electricity predictably
at competitive wholesale prices. The solution to date has been
to subsidise RD&D; renewables have benefited from Government
support for RD&D and, in the absence of any other solution,
this will need to continue.
Renewable energy RD&D in the UK is funded
through a number of routes; the main ones supported by the Government
and the public sector, together with EU funding. In addition,
there is industry funded RD&D, and commercial deployment of
renewables in the UK is supported by the Renewables Obligation.
The House of Lords Science and Technology Committee suggested
in their report, The practicalities of developing renewable energy,
that the level of funding for RD&D is not sufficient if the
UK is to meet its renewable energy targets. While UK expenditure
has increased in recent years, it is still lower than in several
other European countries (see figure 1); US expenditure on renewables
RD&D is about $250 million per annum.
A recent DTI/Carbon Trust review[196]
found that there appears to be a funding gap in moving renewables
to the pre-commercial stage, and from the pre-commercial to the
supported commercial stage. They also considered that the current
landscape for renewables funding is complex, which suggests that
a clearer overall strategy for UK RD&D in both renewables
and other new energy technologies, together with a clearer map
of RD&D funding and clearer demarcation of roles of different
funding bodies could be useful. This could be a potential activity
for the new UK Energy Research Centre. A clearer research "atlas"
indicating institutions and developers carrying out relevant RD&D
could also encourage graduates and postgraduates to consider working
in this field by clearly showing the variety of career opportunities
available.
For physicists currently wishing to work in
this area, the main source of public UK funding is the EPSRC's
SUPERGEN programme. The EPSRC has been tasked with taking a clear
lead in driving forward the sustainable energy agenda and covering
the full spectrum of energy research issues, and was given extra
funds in the 2004 Spending Review to expand support for research
and training necessary to underpin future energy options (including
renewables)[197].
However, the amount of RD&D spend available
through SUPERGEN is far too small to drive the necessary research,
let alone the far greater effort needed to transfer this into
production. Renewables seem to have developed a "low cost"
view of their implementation, which will not drive the actual
costs of developing energy sources on the scale needed.
20 September 2005
195 Macroeconomic Analysis of Nuclear Plant Replacement,
Oxford Economic Forecasting; Match 2005. Back
196
Renewables Innovation Review, DTI/Carbon Trust, 2004. www.dti.gov.uk/energy/renewables/
policy/renewables-innovation-review.shtml Back
197
EPSRC, 2005. "Delivery Plan 2005/06-2007/08", www.epsrc.ac.uk Back
| 
