DOCSLIB.ORG

Report on the Contribution of Nuclear S&T to Innovation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Final Report PREPARED FOR: NATURAL RESOURCES CANADA A Report on the Contribution of Nuclear Science and Technology (S&T) to Innovation Fall, 2014 kpmg.ca A Report on the Contribution of Nuclear Science and Technology (S&T) to Innovation Table of Contents Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Roadmap to the Research Questions 1 1.2 Structure of the Report 2 1.3 Context and Limitations 4 2 METHODOLOGY 5 2.1 Introduction 5 2.2 Defining the Nuclear S&T Ecosystem and the Innovation Process 5 2.3 Identify Measures of Innovation Capacity and Outcomes 8 2.4 Collect and Analyze Data 10 3 CANADA’S INNOVATION SYSTEM IN GLOBAL CONTEXT 15 3.1 Chapter Overview 15 3.2 Measuring the State of Canada’s Innovation System 20 3.3 Comparative Assessment of Canadian Industry Level Innovation Metrics 28 3.4 Research Capability International Comparisons 41 3.5 Overview of Federal Investments in S&T 62 4 EVOLUTION OF NUCLEAR S&T IN CANADA’S INNOVATION LANDSCAPE 69 4.1 Chapter Overview 69 4.2 Definitions 71 4.3 Overview of Historic Origins of Nuclear S&T Research 73 4.4 Review of Evolution of Each Cluster 75 4.5 Overview of Recent Developments 88 4.6 Capital Investment 94 4.7 International Perspectives on Canada’s Nuclear S&T Capabilities 97 4.8 Chapter Summary 100 5 CANADA’S NUCLEAR S&T FACILITIES TODAY 101 5.1 Chapter Overview 101 5.2 TRIUMF 102 5.3 Saskatchewan 107 5.4 Universities and CANMET 113 5.5 AECL 118 5.6 Summary 129 6 IMPACT OF NUCLEAR S&T CAPABILITIES WITHIN CANADA’S INNOVATION SYSTEM 131 6.1 Chapter Overview 131 6.2 Mosaic of Nuclear S&T Cluster Capabilities 135 6.3 Nuclear S&T Contribution to Canada’s Innovation Outcomes 147 6.4 Nuclear S&T and the Nuclear Medicine Sector 162 6.5 Summary 166 7 INNOVATION AND THE NUCLEAR ENERGY SECTOR 167 7.1 Chapter Overview 167 A Report on the Contribution of Nuclear Science and Technology (S&T) to Innovation 7.2 Nuclear S&T Activities at AECL and Drivers of Value 169 7.3 Role AECL Plays within the Nuclear Energy Utility Sector and its Innovation 173 7.4 Value derived from AECL Activities 188 7.5 Summary 208 8 SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS FROM NUCLEAR ENERGY 209 8.1 Chapter Overview 209 8.2 Value of Nuclear Energy as a Strategic Sector 211 8.3 Public Good of Lower Electricity Costs 213 8.4 Refurbishment Project Jobs & GDP 221 8.5 GHG Emissions Implications 223 8.6 Summary 225 APPENDIX I – DATA AND INFORMATION SOURCES 1 APPENDIX II – ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 1 APPENDIX III – GLOSSARY OF TERMS 1 A Report on the Contribution of Nuclear Science and Technology (S&T) to Innovation List of Figures Figure 1 – Nuclear S&T Ecosystem .............................................................................................................. 6 Figure 2 – Pathways to Innovation and Innovation Measures ...................................................................... 7 Figure 3 – Approach to Interviews and Surveys ......................................................................................... 13 Figure 4 – Relative Productivity Levels in the Business Sector .................................................................. 21 Figure 5 – WEF Global Competitiveness Index ........................................................................................... 22 Figure 6 – WEF Innovation Score (2013) ..................................................................................................... 23 Figure 7 – WEF Innovation Index Correlation with BERD ........................................................................... 24 Figure 8 – Research Capability, Integration and Business Innovation Scores from CCA and WEF ............ 25 Figure 9 – Domestic Expenditures on R&D (GERD) as a Percentage of GDP (1990-2013) ........................ 27 Figure 10 – BERD, HERD and GOVERD by Funder (2009-2013) ................................................................ 28 Figure 11 – Comparative Analysis of BERD ................................................................................................ 29 Figure 12 – Resource Leaders & Technology Leaders: BERD Intensity Comparison ................................ 30 Figure 13 – Share of GDP, BERD and BERD Intensity for Broad Sectors of Canadian GDP (2013) ........... 30 Figure 14 – Provincial BERD Intensity across Canada (2006) ..................................................................... 31 Figure 15 – Share of GDP, BERD and BERD Intensity for Specific Sectors of Canadian R&D Strength (2013) ...................................................................................................................................... 32 Figure 16 – Share of GDP and BERD Intensity by Sector ........................................................................... 34 Figure 17 – Comparative Analysis of HRST as a Percentage of Total Employment in OECD Countries (2008) ...................................................................................................................................... 35 Figure 18 – Average HRST as a Percentage of Total Employment, by Sector ........................................... 35 Figure 19 – R&D Personnel ......................................................................................................................... 36 Figure 20 – Comparative Analysis of HERD ................................................................................................ 38 Figure 21 – Natural and Social Sciences HERD Comparison (1997 vs. 2012) ............................................ 39 Figure 22 – Comparison of HERD Intensity: Canada Overall vs. Canadian Nuclear Industry ..................... 39 Figure 23 – Canada’s Changing Research Focus ........................................................................................ 40 Figure 24 – Percentage of Nuclear S&T Enabled Research Publications by Research Subject ................. 41 Figure 25 – Number of Publications by Nuclear Energy Related Researchers (2007 vs. 2013) ................. 41 Figure 26 – Canada’s international Reputation for Natural Sciences .......................................................... 43 Figure 27 - Canada’s International Bibliometric Ranking for Natural Sciences ........................................... 44 Figure 28 – Per Capita GDP and Country ARC Scores ................................................................................ 45 Figure 29 – International Comparison of Canada’s ARC by Field of Research (Excluding Japan and Korea) ................................................................................................................................................ 47 Figure 30 – International ARCs for Physics and Astronomy ....................................................................... 48 Figure 31 – SI vs ARC for Sub-Atomic Sciences ......................................................................................... 49 Figure 32 – Comparison of Specialization Focus of research in Natural Sciences vs. Subatomic Physics . 50 Figure 33 – SI vs ARC for Nuclear Medicine ............................................................................................... 51 Figure 34 – Nuclear Medicine Papers per Population (Comparison Index vs. US Reference) .................... 51 Figure 35 – SI vs ARC for Materials Sciences ............................................................................................. 52 Figure 36 – International Comparison of Manufacturing GDP Trends Among Peer Nations ...................... 53 Figure 37 – Trends in Canada’s Trade Balance ........................................................................................... 54 Figure 38 – BERD and Innovation Among Canada’s Peer Nations ............................................................. 55 Figure 39 – Country Paper Production vs. Population and Per Capita GDP ................................................ 56 Figure 40 – Relation between Patenting and Publishing Activities ............................................................. 56 Figure 41 – Nuclear S&T Enabled Professor Publications (Total Publications 2007 to 2013) ..................... 57 Figure 42 – Nuclear S&T Enabled Materials Science and Manufacturing GDP Growth ............................. 58 Figure 43 – Alignment of US and Canada Research Specialization ............................................................ 59 Figure 44 – Nuclear S&T Enabled Material Science Research by Field of Research .................................. 59 Figure 45 – Nuclear S&T Enabled Research Publications (2007-2013) ....................................................... 60 Figure 46 – Canada’s Nuclear S&T Material Science ARC Compared with Nuclear S&T Overall .............. 60 Figure 47 – Percentage of Canada’s International Collaborative Papers that focus on Nuclear S&T Enabled Materials Science Research ................................................................................................... 61 A Report on the Contribution of Nuclear Science and Technology (S&T) to Innovation Figure 48 – International Collaboration Tendencies .................................................................................... 61 Figure 49 – Overview of Federal Funding for R&D ..................................................................................... 63 Figure 50 – Direct Expenditure in Support of Business R&D ..................................................................... 64 Figure 51 – Federal Government Expenditure in Support of Academic R&D ............................................. 64 Figure 52 – Opinions of Canada's S&T Experts on Canada's
Recommended publications
  • Inventory of Rad Waste in Canada 2012.Qxd

    Inventory of Rad Waste in Canada 2012.Qxd

    Inventory of Radioactive Waste in Canada Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office Ottawa, Canada 2012 Inventory of Radioactive Waste in Canada March 2012 LLRWMO-01613-041-10003 CC3-1/2012 978-1-100-54191-4 Inventory of Radioactive Waste in Canada Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office 1900 City Park Drive, Suite 200 Ottawa, Ontario Canada K1J 1A3 Inventory of Radioactive Waste in Canada Executive Summary This report presents the inventory of radioactive waste in Canada to the end of 2010. It is intended to provide an overall review on the production, accumulation and projections of radioactive waste in Canada. The data presented in this report has been gathered from many sources including regulatory documents, published reports and supplemental information provided by the nuclear regulator, waste producers and waste management facilities. Radioactive waste has been produced in Canada since the early 1930s when the first radium mine began operating at Port Radium in the Northwest Territories. Radium was refined for medical use and uranium was later processed at Port Hope, Ontario. Research and development on the application of nuclear energy to produce electricity began in the 1940s at the Chalk River Laboratories (CRL) of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL). At present, radioactive waste is generated in Canada from: uranium mining, milling, refining and conversion; nuclear fuel fabrication; nuclear reactor operations; nuclear research; and radioisotope manufacture and use. Radioactive waste is primarily grouped into three categories: nuclear fuel waste, low- and intermediate-level radioactive waste, and uranium mining and milling waste. In accordance with Canada’s Radioactive Waste Policy Framework, the owners of radioactive waste are responsible for the funding, organization, management and operation of long-term waste management facilities required for their waste.
  • CHAPTER 13 Reactor Safety Design and Safety Analysis Prepared by Dr

    CHAPTER 13 Reactor Safety Design and Safety Analysis Prepared by Dr

    1 CHAPTER 13 Reactor Safety Design and Safety Analysis prepared by Dr. Victor G. Snell Summary: The chapter covers safety design and safety analysis of nuclear reactors. Topics include concepts of risk, probability tools and techniques, safety criteria, design basis accidents, risk assessment, safety analysis, safety-system design, general safety policy and principles, and future trends. It makes heavy use of case studies of actual accidents both in the text and in the exercises. Table of Contents 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 6 1.1 Overview ............................................................................................................................. 6 1.2 Learning Outcomes............................................................................................................. 8 1.3 Risk ...................................................................................................................................... 8 1.4 Hazards from a Nuclear Power Plant ................................................................................ 10 1.5 Types of Radiation in a Nuclear Power Plant.................................................................... 12 1.6 Effects of Radiation ........................................................................................................... 12 1.7 Sources of Radiation ........................................................................................................
  • + 2020 Annual Information Form

    + 2020 Annual Information Form

    Denison Mines Corp. 2020 Annual Information Form March 26, 2021 ABOUT THIS ANNUAL INFORMATION FORM This annual information form (“AIF”) is dated March 26, Table of Contents 2021. Unless stated otherwise, all of the information in this AIF is stated as at December 31, 2020. About this AIF .................................... 1 About Denison ................................... 6 This AIF has been prepared in accordance with Canadian Developments over the Last Three securities laws and contains information regarding Years ................................................. 8 Denison’s history, business, mineral reserves and The Uranium Industry ........................ 17 resources, the regulatory environment in which Denison Mineral Resources and Reserves 24 does business, the risks that Denison faces and other Mineral Properties ............................. 27 important information for Shareholders. Athabasca Exploration: Sampling, Analysis and Data Verification ........... 102 This AIF incorporates by reference: Denison Operations ........................... 107 Manager of UPC ................................ 111 Denison’s management discussion and analysis (“MD&A”) for the year ended December 31, 2020, Denison Closed Mines Group ........... 112 Environmental, Health, Safety and Denison’s audited consolidated financial Sustainability Matters ........................ 112 statements for the year ended December 31, 2020, Government Regulation .................... 114 Risk Factors ...................................... 120 both of which
  • To Read Report

    To Read Report

    McMaster Nuclear Reactor McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1 NPROL-01.01/2024 Annual Compliance Monitoring and Operational Performance 2018 Summary Data for Public Information Approved/Issued by: Christopher Heysel, P. Eng, Director Nuclear Operations & Facilities McMaster University, Nuclear Research Bldg., Room A332 Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1 Tel: 905 525-9140 ext. 23278 [email protected] Annual Compliance Monitoring & Operational Performance 2018 Executive Summary The McMaster Nuclear Reactor (MNR) was operated safely, securely and effectively in 2018. MNR continued to support the educational and research goals of the University throughout the year specifically in the areas of nuclear science, environmental science, medical and health physics, engineering physics, health sciences, radio‐chemistry, bio‐chemistry and radiation biology. The costs associated with the safe and secure operation and maintenance of the facility were offset through a variety of irradiation services and medical isotope production activities. Reactor availability was 79.6% with no major unplanned outages taking place during the year. There were no lost time injuries, near misses or major safety findings in 2018. Doses to workers and releases to the environment remained ALARA throughout the year. Specific radiological and environmental safety goals were met or exceeded in 2018. As part of MNR’s outreach program more than 2000 visitors toured through the facility in 2018. Many visitors were students from local high schools and universities who were given the unique experience of seeing the “blue glow” of an operating reactor core and an introduction to nuclear sciences. Major activities scheduled for 2019 will include further commissioning of beam line for the McMaster Intense Positron Beam Facility (MIPBF) and instrument installation support for the McMaster University Small Angle Neutron Scattering (SANS) facility.
  • The Nuclear Sector at a Crossroads: Fostering Innovation and Energy Security for Canada and the World

    The Nuclear Sector at a Crossroads: Fostering Innovation and Energy Security for Canada and the World

    THE NUCLEAR SECTOR AT A CROSSROADS: FOSTERING INNOVATION AND ENERGY SECURITY FOR CANADA AND THE WORLD Report of the Standing Committee on Natural Resources James Maloney Chair JUNE 2017 42nd PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION Published under the authority of the Speaker of the House of Commons SPEAKER’S PERMISSION Reproduction of the proceedings of the House of Commons and its Committees, in whole or in part and in any medium, is hereby permitted provided that the reproduction is accurate and is not presented as official. This permission does not extend to reproduction, distribution or use for commercial purpose of financial gain. Reproduction or use outside this permission or without authorization may be treated as copyright infringement in accordance with the Copyright Act. Authorization may be obtained on written application to the Office of the Speaker of the House of Commons. Reproduction in accordance with this permission does not constitute publication under the authority of the House of Commons. The absolute privilege that applies to the proceedings of the House of Commons does not extend to these permitted reproductions. Where a reproduction includes briefs to a Standing Committee of the House of Commons, authorization for reproduction may be required from the authors in accordance with the Copyright Act. Nothing in this permission abrogates or derogates from the privileges, powers, immunities and rights of the House of Commons and its Committees. For greater certainty, this permission does not affect the prohibition against impeaching or questioning the proceedings of the House of Commons in courts or otherwise. The House of Commons retains the right and privilege to find users in contempt of Parliament if a reproduction or use is not in accordance with this permission.
  • Mcmaster Nuclear Reactor Frank Saunders, Manager General Orientation

    Mcmaster Nuclear Reactor Frank Saunders, Manager General Orientation

    McMaster Nuclear Reactor Frank Saunders, Manager General Orientation Model of McMaster Nuclear Reactor and Nuclear Research Building Page 1 of 12 McMaster Nuclear Reactor General Orientation Purpose: Provide insight into what a research reactor looks like, how it is run and made secure. Page 2 of 12 McMaster Nuclear Reactor General Orientation General Information: < American Machine & Foundry design - 1958 < Operates up to 5 megawatts thermal power < Pool type - Materials Test Reactor < Highly Enriched Fuel - 94%; changing to Low Enriched - < 20% < Full containment building < Building is approximately 2 feet reenforced concrete < Three personnel doors and one cargo door only entrances through building < Each entrance is through an airlock with two steel doors < Eighteen staff < Operating 80 hours per week < Radioactive labs are in Nuclear Research Building Page 3 of 12 McMaster Nuclear Reactor General Orientation Reactor Building Layout Page 4 of 12 McMaster Nuclear Reactor General Orientation Reactor pool as seen from above Page 5 of 12 McMaster Nuclear Reactor General Orientation MNR core and support structure in north pool as seen from bottom of south pool Page 6 of 12 McMaster Nuclear Reactor General Orientation Exterior of MNR Pool and Beam Ports as seen from North End Page 7 of 12 McMaster Nuclear Reactor General Orientation MNR core in normal position at bottom of North Pool Page 8 of 12 McMaster Nuclear Reactor General Orientation Security and Access Control: < Physical security provisions are mandated under the Physical Security Regulations of the Atomic Energy Control Act < All entrances to the reactor are locked or under surveillance at all times < Reactor facilities are monitored by a state of the art security system with local and remote alarms < Access to the reactor is permitted through only one door (ramp).
  • CMD19-H100-8.Pdf

    CMD19-H100-8.Pdf

    CMD 19-H100.8 File/dossier : 6.01.07 Date : 2019-08-30 Edocs pdf : 5983279 Oral Presentation Exposé oral Submission from Nuclear Waste Mémoire d’Action Déchets Nucléaires et Watch and Inter-Church Uranium Inter-Church Uranium Committee Committee Educational Cooperative Educational Cooperative In the Matter of À l’égard de Saskatchewan Research Council, Saskatchewan Research Council SLOWPOKE-2 Reactor Installation nucléaire SLOWPOKE-2 Request by the Saskatchewan Research Demande du Saskatchewan Research Council Council to authorize the decommissioning of afin d’autoriser le déclassement du réacteur the SLOWPOKE-2 reactor SLOWPOKE-2 Commission Public Hearing Audience publique de la Commission September 26, 2019 Le 26 septembre 2019 This page was intentionally Cette page a été intentionnellement left blank laissée en blanc Decommissioning of Saskatchewan Research Council SLOWPOKE-2 Reactor (Ref. 2019-H-100) Nuclear Waste Watch and Inter-Church Uranium Committee Educational Cooperative’s Submission to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission Prepared by: Jessica Karban Legal Counsel, Canadian Environmental Law Association August 30, 2019 ISBN: 978-1-77189-996-3 Publication No. 1290 Report from NWW & ICUCEC | 2 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendation 1: In order to facilitate public participation, all Commission Member Documents (CMDs) and accompanying references should be made available on the CNSC’s website at least 60 days in advance of intervention deadlines and remain on the website for future public use. Recommendation 2: Based on our review of applicable requirements governing decommissioning in Canada, we request that the CNSC: 1. Develop a principled overall policy framework underpinning a robust, clear, and enforceable regulatory regime for the decommissioning of nuclear facilities as well as the waste that arises from nuclear and decommissioning activities; 2.
  • Denison Mines Corp

    Denison Mines Corp

    Denison Mines Corp. 2019 Annual Information Form March 13, 2020 ABOUT THIS ANNUAL INFORMATION FORM This annual information form (“AIF”) is dated March 13, Table of Contents 2020. Unless stated otherwise, all of the information in About this AIF .................................... 1 this AIF is stated as at December 31, 2019. About Denison ................................... 5 Developments over the Last Three This AIF has been prepared in accordance with Canadian Years ................................................. 7 The Uranium Industry ........................ 15 securities laws and contains information regarding Denison’s history, business, mineral reserves and Mineral Resources and Reserves 22 resources, the regulatory environment in which Denison Mineral Properties ............................. 26 does business, the risks that Denison faces and other Athabasca Exploration: Sampling, important information for Shareholders. Analysis and Data Verification ........... 88 Denison Operations ........................... 94 This AIF incorporates by reference: Manager of UPC ................................ 99 Denison Closed Mines Group ........... 99 Denison’s management discussion and analysis (“MD&A”) for the year ended December 31, 2019, Environmental, Health and Safety Matters .............................................. 100 which is available under the Company’s profile on Government Regulation .................... 102 SEDAR (www.sedar.com) and on EDGAR Risk Factors ...................................... 107 (www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml)
  • Comparative Life Cycle Analysis of Base Load Electricity in Ontario

    Comparative Life Cycle Analysis of Base Load Electricity in Ontario

    [Type text] Canadian Energy Research Institute Comparative Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Base Load Electricity Generation in Ontario Seyed Jazayeri Paul Kralovic Afshin Honarvar Abbas Naini Jon Rozhon Rami Shabaneh Thorn Walden Prepared for the Canadian Nuclear Association October 2008 Relevant • Independent • Objective COMPARATIVE LIFE CYLE ASESSMENT (LCA) OF BASE LOAD ELECTRICITY GENERATION IN ONTARIO ii Canadian Energy Research Institute v TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES..........................................................................................................IX LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................XI ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..............................................................................................XIII EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................. XV ES1.1 Background .........................................................................................................xv ES1.2 Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................xv ES1.3 Methodology........................................................................................................xv ES1.4 The Process LCA ................................................................................................. xvi ES2 Power Generation in Canada ................................................................................ xvi ES3
  • A Comprehensive Approach to Elimination of Highly-Enriched

    A Comprehensive Approach to Elimination of Highly-Enriched

    Science and Global Security, 12:137–164, 2004 Copyright C Taylor & Francis Inc. ISSN: 0892-9882 print DOI: 10.1080/08929880490518045 AComprehensive Approach to Elimination of Highly-Enriched-Uranium From All Nuclear-Reactor Fuel Cycles Frank von Hippel “I would be prepared to submit to the Congress of the United States, and with every expectation of approval, [a] plan that would ... encourage world-wide investigation into the most effective peacetime uses of fissionable material...with the certainty that the investigators had all the material needed for the conducting of all experiments that were appropriate.” –President Dwight D. Eisenhower at the United Nations, Dec. 8, 1953, Over a period of about a decade after President Eisenhower’s “Atoms for Peace” speech, the U.S. and Soviet Union exported research reactors to about 40 countries. By the mid-1970s, most of these reactors were fueled with weapon-useable highly-enriched uranium (HEU), and most of those with weapon-grade uranium. In 1978, because of heightened concern about nuclear proliferation, both countries launched programs to develop low-enriched uranium (LEU) replacement fuel containing less than 20 percent 235U for foreign research reactors that they were supplying with HEU fuel. By the time the Soviet Union collapsed, most of the Soviet-supplied research reactors outside the USSR had been converted to 36% enriched uranium but the program then stalled because of lack of funding. By the end of 2003, the U.S. program had converted 31 reactors to LEU, including 11 within the U.S. If the development of very high density LEU fuel is successful, it appears that conversion of virtually all remaining research Received 12 January 2004; accepted 23 February 2004.
  • National Neutron Strategy-Draft

    National Neutron Strategy-Draft

    DRAFT FOR CONSULTATION A National Strategy for Materials Research with Neutron Beams: Discussion on a “National Neutron Strategy” This consultation draft was updated in February 2021, following the outcomes of the Canadian Neutron Initiative Roundtable: Towards a National Neutron Strategy, organized in partnership with CIFAR on December 15–16, 2020. 1 DRAFT FOR CONSULTATION This Canadian Neutron Initiative (CNI) discussion paper and associated Roundtable Meeting are produced in partnership with CIFAR. We also thank the following sponsors: 2 DRAFT FOR CONSULTATION Contents 1 Executive summary and overview of the national neutron strategy ................................................... 5 2 Consultation on the strategy ................................................................................................................ 9 3 The present: A strong foundation for continued excellence .............................................................. 10 3.1 The Canadian neutron beam user community ........................................................................... 10 3.2 McMaster University ................................................................................................................... 14 3.3 Other neutron beam capabilities and interests .......................................................................... 15 4 Forging foreign partnerships ............................................................................................................... 17 4.1 Global renewal of advanced neutron sources ...........................................................................
  • Nuclear France Abroad History, Status and Prospects of French Nuclear Activities in Foreign Countries

    Nuclear France Abroad History, Status and Prospects of French Nuclear Activities in Foreign Countries

    Mycle Schneider Consulting Independent Analysis on Energy and Nuclear Policy 45, allée des deux cèdres Tél: 01 69 83 23 79 91210 Draveil (Paris) Fax: 01 69 40 98 75 France e-mail: [email protected] Nuclear France Abroad History, Status and Prospects of French Nuclear Activities in Foreign Countries Mycle Schneider International Consultant on Energy and Nuclear Policy Paris, May 2009 This research was carried out with the support of The Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada (www.cigionline.org) V5 About the Author Mycle Schneider works as independent international energy nuclear policy consultant. Between 1983 and April 2003 Mycle Schneider was executive director of the energy information service WISE-Paris. Since 2000 he has been an advisor to the German Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Reactor Safety. Since 2004 he has also been in charge of the Environment and Energy Strategies Lecture of the International Master of Science for Project Management for Environmental and Energy Engineering at the French Ecole des Mines in Nantes, France. In 2007 he was appointed as a member of the International Panel on Fissile Materials (IPFM), based at Princeton University, USA (www.fissilematerials.org). In 2006-2007 Mycle Schneider was part of a consultants’ consortium that assessed nuclear decommissioning and waste management funding issues on behalf of the European Commission. In 2005 he was appointed as nuclear security specialist to advise the UK Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM). Mycle Schneider has given evidence and held briefings at Parliaments in Australia, Belgium, France, Germany, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland, UK and at the European Parliament.