NUCLEAR LOBBY at POZNAN COP-14: SNEAK in THROUGH the BACK DOOR the Threat of Climate Change Has Become Central to the Nuclear Industries Survival Strategy
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DECEMBER 18, 2008 | No. 681 NUCLEAR LOBBY AT POZNAN COP-14: SNEAK IN THROUGH THE BACK DOOR The threat of climate change has become central to the nuclear industries survival strategy. Faced with terminal decline from the late 1980's onwards, they seized the opportunity during the climate negotiations that began after the signing of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. NUCLEAR LOBBY AT POZNAN The critical area of Kyoto for the nuclear industry was Article 12 on the COP-14: SNEAK IN THROUGH Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), a credit mechanism for THE BACK DOOR 1 industrialized countries where they could finance mitigation projects in FRENCH NUCLEAR INVASION developing countries in return of certified emission reductions credits OF U.S. HITS MAJOR (CERs), to be used to offset their own reduction targets. ROADBLOCKS 3 (681.5911) Jan Vande Putte - After years and to minimize the political stigma of ESKOM CANCELS PWRS: of careful preparation, with highlights at not being part of the solution, it would MAJOR BLOW TO NUCLEAR the Conferences in The Hague and be a mistake to overlook its deeper EXPANSION 4 Bonn, nuclear lobbyists were effectively significance. In recent discussions on defeated in Marrakesh in 2001, with a pro-nuclear strategies to get full FRANCE'S EDF BUILDS NEW leading role of the AOSIS countries (The recognition in the so-called post-Kyoto AND PATCHES UP OLD 6 Alliance Of Small Island States), being 'financial architecture', long commitment EU COMMISSION GOING HIGH highly critical of the nuclear waste and periods of some 15 years are seen as a SPEED FOR DYSFUNCTIONAL plutonium shipments from and to Japan minimum to effectively contribute to the NUCLEAR SAFETY DIRECTIVE through their region as well as by the EU, nuclear industry's financial problems. 7 OPEC and the Central-European Something to keep in mind, given the countries. A diplomatic compromise was rumors at Poznan of shortening the next NUKE PURSUIT ANYTHING BUT POWERWISE 8 found stating that industrialized countries two commitment periods to 5 years. could not use the credits from nuclear CLIMATE CRISIS WILL BE AT power, thus avoiding an explicit rejection Lessons from the CDM TOP OF OBAMA'S of nuclear technology as such, but Quite a lot has been published on the ENERGY/ENVIRONMENTAL effectively blocking it from being part of future of CDM in the post-2012 area, as NOMINEES AGENDA --BUT the game. The congratulations to the well as on proposals for new financing WHAT ABOUT NUCLEAR? 9 NGO folks involved were certainly well- mechanisms. It is rather generally CHILD LEUKEMIA DEATH deserved. recognized that CDM had a very poor RATES INCREASE NEAR U.S. performance. The Climate Action NUCLEAR PLANTS 10 Long commitment periods needed Network's position paper is clear: it has After being kicked out of the Kyoto a net negative impact on the reduction of IN BRIEF 11 financing mechanisms, the nuclear greenhouse gasses. This is because industry tried to minimize its defeat, by industrialized countries are offsetting a stating that after all, it would not have part of their own reduction obligations by made any difference. The analysis was buying credits generated by projects that the commitment period was too which are not really 'additional', meaning short, in fact from 2005 (entry into force that e.g. Japan is buying credits from a of Kyoto) till 2012, not being enough to large hydro power plant in China which significantly soften the huge upfront was going to be built anyway, even investment risks of a nuclear power without the credits, while the domestic plant. Although this explanation was in targets of Japan can be lowered the first place aimed to cover their defeat because of the credits. Furthermore, projects often neglect environmental big 'project' (to use the analogy with through a Technology Transfer criteria or disrupt local communities CDM). It would begin with an analysis agreement, with an active participation and most CDM projects are in the of the projected business-as-usual of countries such as India, Brazil, largest developing countries such as emissions profile of the whole sector Argentina, the US, Japan and the EU. China or India, with only few projects in for the crediting period, followed by a Least Developed Countries. calculation as to the effect of existing Filling the gap will be hard Management of the whole CDM is far domestic policies and measures on The three described post-2012 financial from kosher. It is done through an that emissions profile, which would instruments are illustrative of a much 'Executive Board' which members are establish a 'baseline'. Any further larger number of options. This might either defending national or business reductions below this baseline would seem to be an impressive nuclear interests or both. Even UNEP is pretty then generate credits which would be 'coup' with the objective to have a critical on CDM. eligible to be sold on the carbon prominent role of nuclear power in the market. Such approach falls under the post-Kyoto world. However, the main But behind the closed doors of the group of 'Target and Timetables' mechanism of carbon trading will 'informals' during the Poznan approaches. The 'no-lose' qualification remain rather incompatible with the Conference, diplomats continue a refers to the voluntary nature of the needs of the nuclear industry to get cynical discourse. It’s worth listening target for China, meaning that there are long-term commitments and stable and carefully to friendly diplomats reporting benefits if the emissions remain under high carbon prices. Without this, banks from it, in order to understand where the baseline and no penalties if not. might remain skeptical on funding new they are heading to post-2012. Just to reactor projects. Technology Transfer look at three key players. Japan is The SNLT approach certainly has some agreements might be very focused on pushing to 'streamline' the CDM advantages for the nuclear industry. specific projects or programs, but it system, to have even less power with While the CDM, as a project-based looks rather unlikely this could generate the board, less time to approve mechanism, is now effectively blocking the thousands of billions to fuel a real projects, and going for a much larger- nuclear projects, such would be far nuclear 'renaissance'. scale application in order to go for more complex under a sectoral large-scale offsetting of its obligations. approach which is not looking into the Conclusions China on the other hand is looking details of how emissions reductions in It is hard to come up with any clear forward to big volumes of cash from the sector are realized. Nuclear trade conclusions. The debate on the post- selling credits from large-scale projects between the French state-owned 2012 financial architecture is still at an and avoiding the bureaucracy of the Areva, selling EPR's to China would early stage, fragmented and all options Bonn-based Board. And Europe is thus generate profit for Areva and loads seem to be open. The nuclear industry mainly playing a hypocritical game: of credits for China, selling them on the is however looking very serious into pushing for an improved system and carbon market, to be bought by France this issue and developing a well- stricter sustainability criteria knowing to comply with its post-Kyoto targeted strategy to get nuclear power that between China and Japan they commitments (supposing they reach an in as many mechanisms as possible. have little chance, and thus accepting agreement in Copenhagen or Furthermore, serious efforts are being to go for large-scale offsetting as well, thereafter). It looks much like the put into getting the recognition it thereby avoiding their own domestic closed fuel cycle. Whereas in the case missed in 2001 in Marrakesh. As an responsibilities. of CDM, there are many loopholes in example, lot of efforts have been put in the mechanism, the SNLT-type of making the IPCC Assessment Reports Towards the post-KKyoto financial systems could become the loophole. more pro-nuclear, by generating biased architecture Options to exclude non-sustainable data through the Nuclear Energy The political game around CDM is technologies such as nuclear power are Agency on the costs of nuclear power. probably the best indicator of where certainly conceivable, but might be This ground-laying work should not be the whole system is heading to. CDM politically hard to win. underestimated. as such will probably be continued as a project-based system, with renewed A very different approach than setting Meanwhile, more realistic figures on the attempts to remove the nuclear Targets and Timetables is the capital cost of new nuclear power exclusion in the post-2012 'extended' Technology Transfer. Given the plants are more and more frequently CDM. But the key countries see its uncertain nature of the carbon market published in the financial press, with limitations, even with a 'streamlining' of (e.g. the crash of the European ETS - even the World Nuclear Association the bureaucracy. Approving each the Emission Trading Scheme- market), recently recognizing a cost tag of project remains a slow process in what and short commitment periods, the around 7000 $/kWe installed capacity. could potentially become a trillions- nuclear industry might be looking also These figures, some 2-4 times higher dollar market after 2012. Several new into international, regional or even than what the NEA was still publishing mechanisms have thus been proposed, bilateral agreements for technological earlier this year, will now be trickling amongst the most well-known is the 'innovation'. Likeminded partners could down from the more specialized media so-called Sectoral No-Lose Target create niche markets, e.g. developing to the more popular, and to decision (SNLT).