nuclear energy sector impact to socio–economic development

NUCLEAR ENERGY SECTOR IMPACT TO SOCIO–ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT

dr. Luka Štrubelj

GEN energija

15.-16. November 2012

Outline

• Slovenia

•Current socio-economic status in Slovenia

•Future socio-economic development in Slovenia

• European Union

•Current socio-economic status in EU

•Future socio-economic status in EU

• Worldwide data

• Conclusions

Socio-economic impact of nuclear energy sector

• Direct jobs (NPP, design, manufacturing ie. turbine, RPV)

• Indirect jobs (upstream or downstream suppliers, ie. suppliers of steel)

• Induced jobs (in general economy, grocery store clerks, teachers, doctors, …)

• Development of region

• National level: increased GDP

Slovenia – existing NPP

One nuclear power plant – NEK

• Net power: 696 MWe (40% of the total electricity produced)

• Co-owned by Slovenia (GEN energija) and Croatia (HEP)

• Employment of 620 people

• 2000 indirect jobs

• Increased GDP by 61 million EUR*

• Added value: 66 million EUR (110.000 EUR per employee)*

• Well paid jobs: 80% above Slovenian average

• Increased housing by 1000 apartments and 700 residental houses in years 1971-1981**

• Increased sport, culture and touristic offer

• The education level and technological development increased

• Increased number of population in the region

• Induced development of region

* reference: Valvazorjev raziskovalni center, Analiza dobrih praks pri gradnji jedrskih elektrarn, April 2011

** reference: KIN.PS, Analiza ekonomskih in socioloških razvojnih vplivov jedrskih objektov na lokalno

skupnost Krško in regionalni prostor Posavja,2008

Slovenia – existing NPP

Population in municipality

reference: SURS

NEK construction

1975-1983

Independence of Slovenija Decision to build NEK 1970

Slovenia - development

• One nuclear power plant NEK in operation, second unit – JEK2 is planned

• Net power 1000-1600 MWe, all available PWR technologies


During construction (5 years)*

• Increased GDP from 500 million EUR (1,7 % - option with smaller 1000 MW unit) or nearly 680 million EUR (2,2 % - option with larger 1600 MW unit)

• Direct, and especially an indirect engagement of approximately 20.000 or 27.000 employees

• 4 – 5 million EUR of additional expenses for research and development activities

• The general government revenue will increase for almost 190 or 260 million EUR

• Contracts with domestic construction companies

• Use of accommodation facilities

• Additional consumption

* reference: Macroeconomic effects of the Krško 2 NPP construction

and operation, Ekonomski institute pravne fakultete, May 2008


During operation (60 years)*

• GDP increase for 100 million EUR (0,3 % - 1000 MW unit) or 150 million EUR (0,5 % - 1600 MW unit) at a yearly level

• Direct, and especially an indirect engagement of approximately 3.000 or 4.800 employees at a yearly level

• 0,9 or 1,4 million EUR of additional expenses for research and development activities

• The inflow of general government revenues will increase for 30 or 50 million EUR

• Employment of 400 people (training, scholarships, consumption)

• Increase of population (new schools, social infrastructure)

• New enterprises, business zones, new jobs in tourism and agriculture

• Development of infrastructure: roads, municipal infrastructure, telecommunications, housing

* reference: Macroeconomic effects of the Krško 2 NPP construction

and operation, Ekonomski institute pravne fakultete, May 2008

EU - status

• 132 NPPs in operation

• 250,000 direct jobs*

• 250,000 indirect jobs*

• Nearly 400,000 induced jobs

• Estimated added value of 55 – 70 billion EUR per year

* reference: Foratom, The socio-economic

benefits of nuclear energy, 2010

EU 27

EU - development

Stress tests

• 10.000 direct and indirect jobs*

• 10 billion EUR investment until 2020* (75 million per NPP)

* reference: Jean-Pol Poncelet, director-general of the Foratom , Fukushima-

Daiichi Consequences ‘Will Not Affect’ Nuclear Operation

EU - development

Long term operation – LTO (Lifetime extension)

• 100 NPPs (except Belgium, Germany and United Kingdom)*

• Life time extension from 40 up to 50 or 60 years*

• 90 billion EUR investment in next 20 years* (900 mio. per NPP)

• 30.000 direct and indirect jobs* (300 per NPP)

• reference:Jean-Pol Poncelet, director-general of the Foratom , Fukushima-


Age of existing NPP

EU - development

Decommissioning and waste management

• Annual investment of 3-5 billion EUR*

• 30.000 direct and indirect jobs *

* reference:Jean-Pol Poncelet, director-general of the Foratom , Fukushima-


www.arao.si

EU - development

New built

• 100 new NPPs until 2050 according to Delayed CCS scenario of the EU energy roadmap 2050, that corresponds 140 GWe between 2025 and 2045 (post Fukushima)*

– EU energy roadmap 2050, pre Fukushima 180 GW

– Eurelectric projection up to 198 GW

– IAEA projection from 134 up to 294 GW (including non-member states)

• 500 billion EUR investment until 2050 (5 billion per NPP)

• 250.000 new direct and indirect jobs in supply chain and construction

* reference: European commission, Energy roadmap 2050, 2012

TVO, Olikuoto 3

EU - development

How many nuclear power plants could operate?

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

0

20.000

40.000

60.000

80.000

100.000

120.000

140.000

160.000

2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048

Num

ber

of r

eact

ors

Inst

aled

pow

er (M

W)

Year

No LTO

LTO 50 a

LTO 60 a

New built

27 % reduction in nuclear share of electricity production 20 %

No LTO for Great Britain, Belgium and Germany is included. Construction of 4 NPPs according to the plan is included in all options.

EU - development

How many jobs (direct and indirect) could be available?

Existing 500,000 direct and indirect jobs

Total 1,450,000 jobs, including induced

EU – development - projects

• In the UK the 10 new plants that will be built will provide around 9,000 highly-skilled jobs and a further 7,000 supply chain and local service jobs

• In France EDF will hire 400 engineers for the UK new build market over the next 5 years. During the five-year construction period of the EPR reactor at Flamanville, in France, a total of up to 2,300 people will have worked on-site. Once built, the EPRs at Flamanville and Penly (also France) will create 800 new operational jobs - 300 permanent ones and 100 supply chain jobs per plant.

• In Finland, 4,000 people will have been employed during the construction phase of Olkiluoto 3. Once operational, it will create 300 new jobs.

• In Sweden, the construction of the underground waste repository at Forsmark will create around 400 jobs and provide added economic stimulus to the region.

* reference: Foratom, The socio-economic benefits of nuclear energy, 2010

Worldwide data

• NPP in operation: 437; 372 GWe

• NPP in construction: 64

• Projection 2020: 421-508 GWe*



* reference: IAEA, Energy, electricity and nuclear power estimates

for the period up to 2050

Development of nuclear countries

Gapminder.org

TOE

GDP vs. nuclear power generation

Gapminder.org

TOE

Conclusions

Nuclear energy = job opportunities

Nuclear energy = business opportunities

Nuclear energy = development of region/country

References

[1] IBE, Pre-feasibility study JEK 2, March 2011

[2] Macroeconomic effects of the Krško 2 NPP construction and operation, Ekonomski institiut pravne fakultete, May 2008

[3] IAEA, The database on nuclear power reactors (http://www.iaea.org/pris/), August 2012

[4] OECD NEA, The role of nuclear energy in a low-carbon energy future, 2012

[5] European commission, Energy roadmap 2050, 2012

[6] Nuctnet news, Fukushima-Daiichi Consequences ‘Will Not Affect’ Nuclear Operation, http://www.nucnet.org/all-the-news/2012/08/07/fukushima-daiichi-consequences-will-not-affect-nuclear-operation, August 2012

[7] Eurelectric, Power Coices: Pathways to carbon-neutral electricity in Europe by 2050, 2010

Thank you for your attention!

nuclear energy sector impact to socio–economic development

Business