The IAEA at 30

Nuclear power development:History and outlookEvents have changed the global prospects for nuclear power

by N.L. Char and B.J. Csik

To trace the history of nuclear power development,one can look back to four decades of effort in a changingworld. Much has been done, much has been achieved,and many lessons have been learned. More than 400nuclear power plants are currently in operation in26 countries, supplying about 16% of the world's elec-tricity^ demand, and some 4500 reactor-years ofexperience have been accumulated. In some countries,nuclear power has become the most important source forelectricity. But the progress of nuclear power from anidea to a commercial reality has not been an easy one.It has been full of events, with many successes and alsosome failures. Unfortunately, the failures make betternews for the media and therefore catch the attention ofthe public. The success stories are seldom publicized.

The 1950s have seen the start of the penetration ofnuclear power into the electricity market. It was a periodof great enthusiasm, intensive research and develop-ment, with hopes for providing the world with a cheapand practically inexhaustible alternative source ofenergy. The peaceful use of the atom became a symbolof progress and benefit to humanity, and co-operationbetween nations became a reality on an unprecedentedscale. Science, scientific achievements, and scientistswere looked upon with favour by the media and highlyregarded by the public. By 1960, there were 17 nuclearpower reactors in operation with a total electrical capac-ity of 1200 megawatts (MWe) in four countries: France,the USSR, the United Kingdom, and the United States.Nuclear power programmes had been launched inanother six countries.

Early robust growth

During the 1960s nuclear power achieved the statusof a technically proven and commercially viable energysource. By the middle of the decade, electric power utili-ties were placing their orders for nuclear plants on aroutine basis, and by 1970 there were already 90 nuclearunits operating in 15 countries with a total capacity of

Mr Char is Director of the IAEA Division of Nuclear Power andMr Csik is a staff member of the division.

IAEA BULLETIN, 3/1987

16 500 MWe. The trend of expanding the use of nuclearpower continued further during the 1970s. On an aver-age, construction started on some 25 to 30 new nuclearunits each year. By 1980 there were 253 operatingnuclear power plants with 135 000 MWe total capacityin 22 countries. In addition, some 230 units with morethan 200 000 MWe were under construction at that time.

It was the oil price shocks of the 1970s that gave a bigboost to the promotion and further development ofnuclear power. Energy planners started to accord amuch greater role to nuclear power in their quest forsuitable substitutes to burning oil and to assure a morediversified energy supply for the world. These plans,however, were often not realistic enough; other factorsalso tended to affect adversely the development ofnuclear power.

The mark of higher oil prices

Rising oil prices also brought an all around priceincrease in commodities. As a result, the cost of energyfrom all sources, including nuclear plants, increasedvery significantly. The economy slowed down every-where. Energy and electricity demand growth ratesconsequently decreased, and many countries, especiallythe highly industrialized ones, found that they neededless generating capacity additions than planned. Energyconservation . measures were intensified widely inindustrialized countries. This, in turn, had an influenceon the overall demand growth rates for electricity. Withthe accumulation of experience in building and operatingnuclear plants on an industrial-commercial scale,various technological problems made their appearancein early prototypes and demonstration nuclear powerunits. The generic problems that appeared had to besolved and consequently investment costs and construc-tion times for new plants increased significantly.Utilities were often not adequately prepared to face thechallenge of managing nuclear projects and operatingtheir nuclear plants, and there were some signs of com-placency. Concerns regarding nuclear safety alsoincreased and regulatory requirements became more andmore stringent. .

19

The IAEA at 30

However, attitudes toward nuclear power differedamong countries. Some countries maintained theirvigorous programmes, a few countries stopped furtherexpansion in nuclear power, while many othersproceeded with a slowed-down programme. The reasonswere not only due to safety concerns but to other factorsas well, such as financial constraints, reduced demandgrowth rates, and issues of public and political accep-tance. The impact of TMI was not just negative. Therewas also a positive side to it. The lessons learnedundoubtedly resulted in many improvements in thedesign, construction, and operation of nuclear plants,both with respect to safety and reliability. IAEA tookmuch initiative in enhancing international co-operationin these aspects.

Then followed a period when nuclear power showedsigns of good recovery and the statistics improved. Atthe beginning of 1986, 7 years after the TMI accident,nuclear power plants all over the world had collectivelycrossed 3500 reactor years of operational experiencewithout a single fatal accident, and the target of 4000

Unit two of the Arkansas Nuclear One power plant in the USA. Theintake canal about a half mile from the Arkansas river Is a popularfishing spot. The plant provides electricity to about 280 000 cus-tomers, and Is among more than 100 operating nuclear plants in theUSA. (Credit: AIF)

Heightened awareness and concerns

As nuclear power emerged from the rarifiedatmosphere of the laboratories, as its "scientific"glamour diminished, and as it was transformed duringthe 1970s into a hard industrial reality, the publicbecame increasingly aware, interested, and concerned..Association with the bomb, destruction, danger,invisible radiation, secrecy, and fear of the unknownadded to the disfavour towards nuclear power. Environ-mental concerns had increased sharply, especially in thehighly industrialized countries, and environmentalistorganizations blossomed and quickly turned their atten-tion to nuclear power as a suitable target to be attacked.The media, and a part of the public and many politiciansgradually developed a sometimes reasoned but mostlyemotional opposition to nuclear power in many coun-tries. Public acceptance became a major issue for thepromotors of nuclear power. The often quoted "ChinaSyndrome" became a cliche for the anti-nuclear lobbieseverywhere. It was then, in 1979, that the first majoraccident in any nuclear power plant occurred, at theThree Mile Island (TMI) plant in the United States.

This shook up the nuclear industry worldwide. Thenegative (to nuclear power) trends of the late 1970s werefurther reinforced, and though installed nuclear capacitykept increasing as plants went into operation, new con-struction starts became fewer and many projects onorder or even under construction were suspended orcancelled.

Nuclear power growth:

Year

195119521953195419551956195719581959196019611962196319641965196619671968196919701971197219731974197519761977197819791980198119821983198419851986

1951-86

Construction!

Units

1

26

39

1276

10685

101016233817372222233540291521212312202010131

starts

GWe

0.10.50.10.8

1.50.60.91.01.1

1.31.4

3.03.57.4

15.226.112.724.916.119.318.329.838.027.214.518.219.721.411.619.114.59.39.90.8

Note: Reactors cancelled or suspended are not considered

QWe • gigawatts-electric

Connectionsto the

Units

1

11

3562

107898

106

116

1616202615191820

8

21231823343423

grid

GWe

0.10.10.20.30.60.11.00.41.11.61.22.11.13.53.37.38.8

12.516.910.214.113.315.87.0

15.320.414.319.131.731.823.3

20 IAEA BULLETIN, 3/1987

The IAEA at 30

reactor years was keenly anticipated in the nuclear com-munity to wipe off the memory of the TMI accident.

But once again nuclear power was to receive a cruelblow. On 26 April 1986, the world's worst knowndisaster in nuclear power plants occurred at Chernobyl,in the Ukraine, with loss of life and much release ofradioactivity which crossed national frontiers. The veryfoundations of nuclear power and its future took a severejolt. The impact of this accident was strongly felt world-wide and all its consequences are yet to be perceived.More than a year, however, has passed since Chernobyl,and the immediate effects can now be evaluated with atleast some historical perspective.*

Recent trends

Current trends do provide some indications on whatthe outlook for nuclear power might be.

During 1986, 23 reactors with 23 300 MWe wereconnected to the grid in 8 countries; of these, 15 wereconnected after April. Connections to the grid in 1987are proceeding reasonably on schedule. Only three reac-tors ̂ were suspended or cancelled^whileTinder construe^tion (one in the Philippines and two in the USA). ExceptChernobyl-4, no operating nuclear power plant was shutdown. At the end of 1986, there were 133 reactors underconstruction with 118 000 MWe in 23 countries. Thereis every indication that the construction of most, if notall, of these plants will effectively proceed to comple-tion. By 1990 a total of 480 units with 350 000 MWe are'expected to be in operation. This means a 25 % increaseof current installed nuclear capacity. In addition, some50 units will be under construction, without countingnew construction starts.

Trends in the nuclear power field also show thatemphasis is shifting from design and construction toplant operation. Efforts are certainly being put intoimproving current nuclear plant designs as well asdeveloping new concepts. There are also efforts under-way to streamline construction methods and proceduresin order to reduce construction time and investmentcosts, and to improve quality.

More and more emphasis is being placed on plantoperating performance as well. The last few years haveseen a constant improvement of performance, a trendthat is continuing. Safety, reliability, and quality are theprincipal aspects where improvements are beingpromoted and achieved worldwide by the nuclear indus-try. The Agency is also gradually shifting its emphasistowards the operations area, in line with the needs of theMember States. Activities in plant operations personnelqualification, man-machine interface, quality assurance,and especially operational safety are receiving increasedattention.

* See the IAEA's Nuclear safety review for 1986 for a fuller discus-sion of the Chernobyl accident. The review is available for purchasefrom the IAEA Division of Publications. (See the Keep abreast sectionfor ordering information.)

44

42

40

38

36

34

32

30

28

| 26

| 24

"o 22

| 20

* 18

16

14

12

10-

8

6-

2-

0-

New construction starts: 1971—87

\2A Actual starts

| | Projected start

Source: IAEA PRIS

1972 74 76 78 80 82 84 86

Not only the number but also the age of the operatingnuclear power plants is increasing. During the 1990s thenuclear industry will have to face the alternatives ofplant life extension or decommissioning and this isanother area that will gradually be receiving greaterattention, also within the Agency's programmes.

New connections to the grid: 1971-9036

34

32

30

28

26

24

\ 22

} 20

> 18

: 14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

\//\ Actual connections

I | Projected connections

Source: IAEA PRIS

26

13 / ,

Vt.

IB / .

34

J45,

1972 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90

IAEA BULLETIN, 3/1987 21

The IAEA at 30

Future role

Regarding the future role of nuclear power, forecastsbased on plants in operation and under construction canbe made with reasonable accuracy. It can also beassumed that plants once connected to the grid willremain in operation until the end of their lifetimes, withsome possible exceptions due to national policy deci-sions. Sweden is-the only country which has a policy ineffect of phasing out nuclear power. The question hasbeen raised in a few other European countries, but todate no political decisions had been taken to phase outnuclear power in any of them. Austria is the onlycountry in the world that after starting a nuclear powerprogramme outlawed it, forbidding its only nuclear plantto be put into operation. In the Philippines, constructionof the first plant was suspended.

Any forecasts beyond the middle 1990s have to takeinto account new construction starts, and this is whereestimates become speculative. Assumptions have to bemade regarding national policy decisions and thedevelopment of nuclear power programmes.

Currently, 23 countries have clearly stated intentionsto proceed with their ongoing nuclear programmes,including identified projects in various planning stages,nine others may not have firmly defined follow-upprojects, but it seems most of them intend to proceed. Itis to be noted that 19 countries produce more than 10%of their electricity with nuclear plants; of these 12produce more than 20%, with 3 countries at the top pro-ducing more than 50%. In addition to the countrieswhich already have nuclear power programmes, some15 other countries have stated the intention to gonuclear. All are actively engaged in planning studies,

Estimates of total and nuclear electrical generating capacity

1986 1990Low and high estimates

1995 2000

TotalGWe

Nuclear

GWe %

Total

GWeNuclear

GWe <

TotalGWe

Nuclear

GWe

Total

GWe

Nuclear

GWe %

North America

Western Europe*

Industrialized

Pacific

Eastern Europe

Asia

801

530

216

459

243

95.8 12.0

101.4 19.1

25.8 12.0

35.6 7.8

11.6 48

881943

556590

233253

535556

310324

117117

122122

3131

6161

1414

1312

2221

1312

1211

4.64.4

9701075

608660

262293

631682

403451

123132

134160

4049

84111

1920

1312

2224

1517

1316

4.74.4

10621188

666721

297330

725806

499604

Industrializedcountries

1904 254.3 13.4

131148

153190

5470

108150

2733

1212

2326

1821

1519

5.45.4

Latin America

Africa and

Middle East

World total

136

112

2497

1.6

1.8

273.7

1.1

1.6

11.0

175181

144

150

2834

2996

2.22.2

1.B

1.8

350

350

1.31.2

1.3

1.2

12

12

230252

184209

3288

3621

5.65.6

1.8

3.0

407

481

2.42.2

1.0

1.5

12

13

289341

223

279

3760

4269

7.59.1

1.8

3.9

482

604

2.62.7

0.81.4

1314

20862218

322322

1515

23322561

366434

1617

25952873

423527

1618

Developingcountries

• In CPE-Europe"

• Others

• Total

88

505

593

5.7

13.8

19.4

6.4

2.7

3.3

104

107

644

670

749777

11

11

17

17

27

27

10

10

2.6

2.5

3.7

3.5

124132

833

927

956

1059

16

18

25

28

4147

13

14

3.0

3.1

4.3

4.4

140

156

1025

1238

1165

1395

24

28

36

48

60

76

17

18

3.5

3.9

5.1

5.5

Nuclear programme in Austria has been interrupted, and the reactor is not included.

•• Developing countries in the Centrally Planned Economies (CPE) in Europe: Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary.

Note: High figures were estimated by taking the total capacity of all plants in operation plus those under construction with announced grid connection dates not later thanDecember 1990. Low figures were estimated by IAEA using the following procedure. An average construction time for plants already in operation was computed for each country(Source: IAEA PRIS). For every plant under construction, the average construction time was added to the actual construction start date to obtain estimated completion date. Plantsfor which the estimated completion date, obtained by this procedure, is later than December 1990 were not included In the low capacity estimates for 1990.

22 IAEA BULLETIN, 3/1987

The IAEA at 30

with some of them at an advanced stage of negotiatingthe acquisition of their first units.

The assessment of national plans and intentions toeither proceed with ongoing nuclear power programmesor to go nuclear provides grounds for an optimistic viewof the future of nuclear power. However, it must also betaken into account that during 1986 construction wasstarted on only one plant (Japan, Ikata-3). Also, it seemsthat though 10 construction starts were scheduled for1987, some of them might be delayed. Experience hasshown that programmes have been slowed down, thatprojects tend to be delayed, and that some countries findit very difficult to effectively launch their nuclear powerprogrammes even though their firm intention to do so ismaintained unchanged year after year.

Forecasters of nuclear power development havebecome very cautious during the last years as realityobstinately refused to follow their predictions. Cur-rently, the IAEA's forecast for the year 2000 is 480 000to 600 000 MWe of installed nuclear capacity (low andhigh estimates). This means 90 000 to 120 000 MWe ofnew construction starts during the next 5 to 7 years insome 35 to 40 countries. An average -of-20 000 to30 000 MWe to start construction each year does notseem to be excessive; this figure is based on individualcountry programmes and plans, and there certainly isadequate manufacturing capability available to handlethe number of projects involved.

The forecast does imply faith in the gradual recupera-tion of the nuclear industry from the negative effects ofthe recent past, and a reversal of the trend of diminishingnew construction starts. This faith in nuclear power isnot an expression of what one would like to happen, itis based on the objective assessment of a series offactors.

Experience also has shown that the aftereffects ofaccidents do not last forever; reasonable and responsibleattitudes tend to prevail. Energy and electricity demandkeeps growing, as does the recognition that conservationmeasures and "new and renewable" energy sourceshave only a limited role to play. Nuclear power hasretained its economically competitive status, and plantperformance is steadily improving all over the world.

To help meet projected electricity demand, many countries Intend topursue the nuclear power option. (Credit: French NuclearNewsletter)

Nuclear power has been called a "mature" techno-logy in the past, perhaps somewhat prematurely, butnow it does seem to merit this adjective. It doesconstitute a viable alternative energy source and theefforts that are being expended on national levels andthrough international co-operation do provide reason-able assurance that nuclear power will retain itsviability.

The Agency constitutes a channel through whichinternational co-operation has been promoted and effec-tively implemented during three decades. This channelis open and will continue to remain so in the future.

IAEA BULLETIN, 3/1987 23

The IAEA at 30

Services for safety evaluationAs the only worldwide intergovernmental

nuclear energy organization, the IAEA is in aunique position to examine and advise on currentand evolving safety issues that could have an inter-national impact. From the very beginning, strictsafety standards have provided a basis for theoverall good safety record of nuclear powerplants. The IAEA's Basic Safety Standards (BSS)for radiation protection and the Nuclear SafetyStandards (NUSS) for nuclear power plants havebeen adopted entirely or in part by many MemberStates as the basis for national regulations. Theyare also mandatory for projects receiving Agencyassistance. The Agency's authority is also recog-nized in the area of radioactive waste transporta-tion. Its Regulations for the Safe Transport ofRadioactive Materials have served as standardscontributing to a strong safety record in this field.They have been adopted not only by nationalgovernments, but also by international organiza-tions concerned with transports, such as the Inter-national Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) andInternational Maritime Organization (IMO).

Since the early 1980s, the IAEA has strength-ened its safety evaluation services for nuclear plantoperations, radiological protection, and radio-active waste management in response to the needsof Member States and international developments.Five specific programmes have been launched:

• IAEA-IRS: This Incident Reporting Systemprovides an exchange of nuclear plant operationsexperience in Member States on safety-relatedissues, to draw out the lessons learned, and to dis-seminate information among participants. Regularmeetings for in-depth discussions of particularevents are held involving participation from theCouncil for Mutual Economic Assistance(CMEA), Nuclear Energy Agency of the Organi-zation for Economic Co-operation and Develop-ment (NEA/OECD), and developing countries.

• OSART: These Operational Safety ReviewTeams conduct on-site missions to a nuclear plantupon the request of the Member State. Typically,about 10 specialists visit a plant for 3 weeks toreview various aspects of plant operation and toassist the national authorities in assessing theplant's safety practices against other successfulones.

• ASSET: IAEA recently initiated this newservice — Assessment of Safety Significant EventsTeams — to provide plant operators and regulatorswith independent analysis and guidance regardingspecific events that have occurred, their causesand safety implications, and corrective actions thatwere taken for operational safety.

Nuclear power for electricity generation:

World total:283 823 megawatts-electric

IAEA advisory missions in nuclear plant safety, radiation

OSART RAPAT ASSET WAMAP

Brazil 1985Bulgaria 1987Canada 1987Chile 1985China 1984Colombia 1987Dominican Republic 1986Ecuador 1986Egypt 1986Finland 1986France 1985Germany, Fed. Rep. of 1986, 1987Greece 7987Hungary 7988 1987Iceland 1986Iraq 1984Italy 1987Jordan 7987

Notes: Missions are done at the request of the Member State. Years in italicdenote planned or proposed missions. The missions listed here under theseprogrammes are in addition to other ongoing IAEA activities in these fields.

24 IAEA BULLETIN, 3/1987

The IAEA at 30

406 operating reactors in 26

Total capacity (megawatts-electric)

44 693 |30 516 |

w - 26 877 |A 18 947

wif ^ 1 % 1

% \ *-

IP fSource

countries

• • ••• •2 086 I

10 214 |9646 |

559915486 15380 •49181293212799 12310 I18421169411632 11273112351115419351632 1626507125

IAEA PRIS. data pr<

Number of units

USA (103)

France (49)USSR (53)Japan (36)Germany, Fed. Rep. (21)Canada (19)UK (38)Sweden (12)Spain (8)Belgium (8)

Korea, Rep. of (7)Taiwan, China (6)Switzerland (5)Czechoslovakia (7)Finland (4)South Africa (2)Germany, Dem. Rep. (5)

Bulgaria (4)Italy (3)Hungary (3)

India (6)Argentina (2)Yugoslavia (1)Brazil (1)Netherlands (2)Pakistan (1)

11 mi nary as of 1 August 1987.

protection, and radioactive waste management

OSART RAPAT ASSET WAMAP

Kenya 1986Korea, Rep. of 1983, 1986 1987Malaysia 1985Mexico 1986,1987 1986Netherlands 1986, 1987Nicaragua 1985Pakistan 1985Panama 1986Peru 1987Philippines 1985 1987Poland 7987Portugal 1986 1987Spain 7987Sudan 1987Sweden 1986Syrian Arab Republic 7987Tanzania 1987Turkey 1985 7987United States 1987Venezuela 1986Yugoslavia 1984 1986Zaire 1986Zambia 1986

• RAPAT: The need in developing countries forstronger radiation protection programmes led tothe creation of Radiation Protection AdvisoryTeams in 1984. Teams visit a Member State uponrequest to assess radiation protection programmesand activities relative to all uses of radioactivematerial, identify specific needs and priorities, andto suggest practical long-term actions in trainingand other areas. Team expertise includes IAEAstaff and participants from the World HealthOrganization (WHO) and the International Com-mission on Radiological Protection (ICRP).• WAMAP: To complement its ongoing activitiesin the field and to extend the range of its technicalassistance and services, the IAEA initiated aWaste Management Advisory Programme in1987. These teams of three to four highly qualifiedexperts from the Agency and its Member Statesvisit developing countries on request to review andevaluate national activities. Their emphasis is onpromoting practical approaches to the integrateddevelopment of safe radioactive waste manage-ment systems.—

Requests from Member States for many ofthese services have increased markedly since theaccident of Chernobyl in 1986. More completereports on nuclear power and safety will befeatured in the forthcoming edition of the IAEABulletin (Vol. 29, No. 4). The edition willinclude a special report on the IAEA's Interna-tional Conference on Nuclear Power Performanceand Safety, scheduled for 28 September to3 October 1987 in Vienna. More than 600 par-ticipants are expected.

Nuclear plant incident reporting system(IAEA-IRS)

Participants:ArgentinaBrazilBulgariaCzechoslovakiaFinlandGerman Dem. Rep.HungaryIndiaKorea, Rep. ofNetherlandsPakistanSpainUnited KingdomUSSRYugoslavia

Participants through thtBelgiumFranceGermany, Fed. Rep.ItalySwedenUnited StatesCanada

Since:May 1983November 1983February 1983January 1985May 1983January 1984October 1984June 1984February 1983June 1983August 1984January 1983March 1986September 1984May 1986

i NEA/OECD:February 1983June 1983July 1983March 1985October 1983August 1985July 1986

Reporting and meeting participants:JapanSwitzerland

IAEA BULLETIN, 3/1987 25