Remarks as Prepared for Delivery for Assistant Secretary Spurgeon
Thank you Professor Kunze and I want to thank the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, for inviting me to address the 16th Yearly International Conference on Nuclear Engineering. I also want to recognize the co-hosts of this event, the Japanese Society for Mechanical Engineers and the Chinese Nuclear Society. I am happy to be here with my fellow opening speakers to kick off the week of events and it is especially nice to be here in my home state of Florida.
I want to talk to you from DOE's perspective about what the expansion of nuclear power means to us here in the U.S. and what the prospect of abundant nuclear power means for the global community.
For most of us here the growth statistics for nuclear power are a daily invocation: 20 utilities are projected to build 34 new reactors in the U.S. plans that would total about 45 GWe of clean, reliable, affordable nuclear power enough to power 30 million homes. Those new gigawatts hitting the grid will be essential considering expected electricity demand in the U.S. is forecasted to increase 30% by 2030.
And I just hope ASME has ordered enough "N" stamps so we don't have a three year backlog for them like we now have for ultra-heavy forgings.
Energy is central to our economic growth, our countrywide security, our standard of living and our way of life. We face significant energy challenges today and there is a sense of urgency when Americans are paying 4 dollars a gallon at the pump and increasing energy prices are pushing up the costs of other goods and services. Add to this the need to address global climate change and the enormity of the challenge becomes clear.
The President understands what our nation is confronting and is committed to expanding all sources of energy, and a cornerstone of that expansion is nuclear power. He has stated many times that nuclear power is the only near-term option for producing significant amounts of emissions-free baseload electricity. In fact last year nuclear power avoided almost 700 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions, that is the equivalent of taking nearly all passenger cars off American roadways. Nuclear power makes up 72% of all emission free electricity generated in the United States. This is no trivial statistic considering electricity production makes up 40% of all the world's carbon dioxide emissions.
Significant investment and expansion is needed just to maintain the current 20% share of electricity production that nuclear power currently represents in the U.S. We will need approximately 30 GWe of new nuclear power on line by 2030 to maintain that 20% share, and it is projected that we will need at least 300 GWe of new capacity by 2050 to start turning the corner on carbon emissions, using nuclear power to generate 30% of our electricity.
What this expansion also means in the U.S. is new jobs. I don't have to explain the importance of human capital for all of us here in the nuclear power industry, and all those trades and professions that stand to be invigorated by new nuclear projects. The Department has projected that construction of the currently suggested 15 new reactors could yield approximately: 2,700 pipefitters; 2,900 electricians; 1,800 construction professionals; 600 boilermakers; 2,500 sheet metal workers; and 2,900 iron workers. And keep in mind these job numbers are only for construction. On average, operating a nuclear power facility employs 800 workers and creates hundreds more in the surrounding community. These are high-skill, high paying jobs.
Let me remind everyone that we have built a nuclear supply infrastructure from scratch once before in the U.S. In the year 1973 alone, 41 nuclear plants were ordered and we were well on the way to building a supply infrastructure to construct over 300 plants by the year 2000. When that expansion did not come to fruition our nuclear infrastructure, both in terms of human capital and production facilities atrophied.
Today, there is some question as to whether we have the necessary supply of human capital that is required to support a nuclear renaissance. Groups like ASME are important players in helping to rebuild this capability in the U.S.
It also quickly becomes clear that nuclear power's growth has huge implications beyond our borders. Climate change and energy security are global issues and nuclear power's potential impact should not be understated.
Internationally the growth statistics outpace the United States. Today, 31 countries operate 439 nuclear reactors totaling 371 GWe; 33 new nuclear power plants are under construction worldwide, and when completed will add an additional 28 GWe of new electricity.
We have recently seen projections anticipating 55 total countries operating 630 reactors by 2030. Potentially, a total of 86 countries could have nuclear reactors by 2050. Internationally, nuclear power is moving forward at a rapid pace with each month bringing new, significant announcements.
As nuclear's reemergence gains momentum around the world and in the U.S. there remain 2 important questions: How will used fuel from nuclear power be best managed? And how will the world community deal with the possibility that the expansion may raise the risk of nuclear weapons proliferation? These questions are at the core of not only the U.S. expansion of nuclear power, but also, the United States' future role in nuclear energy on the global stage. Used fuel must be safely managed. Today, that means safely stored, but eventually the U.S. must close the nuclear fuel cycle. Closing the fuel cycle is essential for long-term, continued expansion of nuclear power in the U.S. and around the world, and needs to be accomplished by recycling used nuclear fuel without separating out pure plutonium.
Recycling used nuclear fuel rather than permanently disposing of it in a repository would result not only in utilizing more of the energy in nuclear fuel, but also reduce the volume of high-level waste that requires disposal in a repository, as well as decreasing its radiotoxicity and heat-loading. This increased efficiency in the fuel supply would ensure that even with the expansion of nuclear energy, the potential capacity of any geological repository would be greatly enhanced. The high-level vitrified waste from a recycle facility would also not need to be retrievable, thus removing another design burden from the repository.
Closing the U.S. fuel cycle is one aspect of the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, a vision that looks for the expansion of nuclear energy in a safe and secure manner. GNEP has both broad international and significant domestic aspects. The global aspect of GNEP is manifested through a voluntary international partnership centered on a Statement of Principles. The domestic aspect is aimed at effectively managing both the resources accessible in used nuclear fuel and the associated waste.
The GNEP international partnership now boasts 21 countries and has a well functioning Steering Group and 2 Working Groups focused on Infrastructure Development and Reliable Fuel Services. As more countries consider nuclear power, it is important that they develop the infrastructure capabilities necessary for such an undertaking.
Reliable fuel services would eliminate the need for countries to develop expensive domestic enrichment or reprocessing facilities, thereby creating economies of scale relative to the creation of indigenous facilities, and creates GNEP's most significant contribution to non-proliferation efforts.
Also, I am happy to declare that the 2nd Steering Group meeting will take place this week in the Kingdom of Jordan. The meeting will continue to build on GNEP's momentum and according to the latest count will be attended by 25 countries and three intergovernmental organizations.
Significant technology development and industrial investment will be needed to support nuclear energy's continued advancement and growth to supply America's energy needs. The U.S. is pursuing policies and initiatives to spur domestic and international research and development in advanced reactor technologies, fuels, and separations processes.
We are again looking at an expansion of nuclear energy that we anticipated in the early 1970's. I have already touched on the human capital needs but for an expansion like this, and to ensure nuclear power's growth into the future, the U.S. must rebuild its nuclear infrastructure: the R&D infrastructure, demonstration facilities, commercial operations, and the supporting industries that supplied nuclear power's initial emergence.
Our R&D infrastructure is the foundation on which the future of nuclear energy will be built. It is a simple fact that nuclear R&D facilities in the U.S. have deteriorated from what they once were. I have recently requested a complete and definitive analysis of the capabilities needed to support research and development within the nuclear power enterprise over the next 20 years and beyond. Additionally, I have commissioned the Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee, an independent panel established to advise the Office of Nuclear Energy, to provide input and advice for a multi-year project for the revitalization of our R&D infrastructure. These inputs will allow us to develop a master project with priorities for rebuilding the needed infrastructure. We are taking stock of what we have and what we need, and we are looking at it from an international perspective, keeping in mind that a revitalization in the R&D infrastructure can also benefit from cooperation with our international partners leveraging the significant experience of the international research community through our partnerships to further the entire R&D effort and coordinate development of new R&D facilities.
With a more robust R&D infrastructure and one that employs state of the art technology such as advanced computation and simulation, we position ourselves to develop the advanced reactors and fuel cycle facilitates that will be needed in the future. By harnessing this new computational ability we can greatly reduce the risks and costs of design and deployment and facilitate reduced cost of construction.
A key to maximizing nuclear electric generating capacity by mid-century is our ability to extend the operating lifetime of our nuclear fleet. We will evaluate the requirements to possibly extend the life of our existing fleet of reactors from 60 to 80 years. This includes studying structural component aging, electrical and instrumentation aging, and material degradation. This work will have applicability to both the current fleet of operating reactors and the next generation of nuclear power plants.
Without a robust and dependable research & development backbone, the poised nuclear renaissance can only progress so far. What's more is that the members of the nuclear energy community like many of you gathered here today will be the ones to help ensure that nuclear energy is viable for generations to come by pushing the edge of science and engineering further and further.
Perhaps as equally important to rebuilding our R&D infrastructure is industry rebuilding its industrial and manufacturing capability. Currently Babcock and Wilcox's Mount Vernon, Indiana and Barberton, Ohio facilities are the only domestic manufactures of large, heavy nuclear components with N-stamp accreditation. We need to rebuild our manufacturing capability to include a full range of nuclear components including ultra heavy forgings to free the nuclear renaissance of the potential supply bottlenecks that could stifle its growth.
This nuclear renaissance must be managed to be sustainable through many decades and political Administrations. I sincerely hope my grandchildren do not look back in 2050 and see that nuclear's high-water mark was a handful of Generation III reactors constructed over a decade. Instead, through a concerted and unified effort, we can make that high-water mark hundreds of Generation III reactors, a fleet of Gen IV reactors, and a fully functional used fuel recycling enterprise all to support the Nation's energy needs in perpetuity. Thank you.
