War a catalyst for growth of nuke vitality: IAEA chief

Despite the continued danger of harm to Ukraine’s largest energy plant because of the preventing between Russian and Ukrainian troops, the battle is appearing as a “catalyst” for deployment of nuclear energy in lots of international locations, particularly these in jap Europe, the top of International Atomic Energy Agency Rafael Mariano Grossi has mentioned.

“I know it is paradoxical… it is not something to be celebrated, but it is happening…,” Grossi advised The Indian Express in an interview on the COP27 local weather change meet in Sharm el-Sheikh.

Asked whether or not the battle in Ukraine, significantly the threats of use of a nuclear weapon or the danger of harm to a nuclear facility, was dampening curiosity in nuclear energy, Grossi mentioned the reverse appeared to be occurring.

“Take (the case of) eastern Europe. The war in Ukraine has been a steroid for (adoption of) nuclear (power). It has made Poland decide to go all the way (opt for nuclear power). No doubts about it. Ukraine (is asking for) more (nuclear power), Czech Republic more, Slovakia more, Romania more, Bulgaria more. All of them. And several of them, almost all of them, with the exception of Poland, are working with Russia (on their nuclear plans). Paradoxical, isn’t it?” Grossi mentioned.

“I wouldn’t say this is something to be celebrated. I am just saying this is happening. Let me put it like this. The war has acted like a catalyst… something that accelerates a process that was already there. Most of the plans (in these countries) already existed. Maybe it is just about the factor of speed. People realise that if energy security is a concern, nuclear power gives you the kind of autonomy or reliability that you need,” he mentioned, including that Egypt, the host of COP27 assembly, was additionally within the course of of putting in nuclear energy.

“In a few years, you would have a very good percentage of electricity of nuclear origin in this country,” he mentioned, referring to comparable plans in international locations like Ghana, Namibia and Kenya.

Grossi mentioned this was occurring regardless of the scenario on the Zaporizhzhia nuclear energy plant in Ukraine remaining at fixed danger of harm because of the battle, or from the compelled outages of exterior energy on the facility that threaten the shutdown of cooling methods and potential launch of radiation.

“The concerns are getting bigger every day. There is continued shelling (in the area)… regular interruptions of external power. Can you imagine a nuclear reactor in India running like this? Forget shelling, even throwing a stone can land you in big trouble… in India, in the United States, or any other country. But here (in Zaporizhzhia) you have (to depend on) diesel generators running for hours (for operating the cooling systems), sometimes even days… sometimes even these are switched off… And then suddenly there is power back, and there is a big sigh of relief… And then this thing starts all over again three days later. It is very serious,” Grossi mentioned. Zaporizhzhia homes the most important nuclear energy facility in all of Europe.

“Zaporizhzhia is a daily drama… It is a tragedy that must be avoided at all costs,” he mentioned.

Grossi mentioned any incident at Zaporizhzhia would almost definitely pressure international locations to rethink their nuclear plans, “especially in democracies where one must win the hearts and minds of voters” to obtain approval. That, he mentioned, could be an enormous setback for the local weather targets as effectively.

“For all the energy planners looking at the energy choices seriously, at least in the industrialised countries, it was obvious before the war, and without the war, that without nuclear you would never get anywhere near the climate change goals. Nowhere near,” he mentioned, citing assessments from Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and International Energy Agency (IEA) whose outlooks for fast transition to wash vitality rely closely on deployment of nuclear energy.

“According to all estimates of IEA, and even the IPCC, we need to at least double the global installed capacity of nuclear to maximise the carbon dioxide abatement. At least double. That is what IEA says. There are other assessments that say nuclear (energy) needs to be tripled or quadrupled… At the moment, nuclear energy forms about 10-11 per cent of supplies globally. This is higher than renewables, but it can be overtaken by renewables soon, given the massive investment that is moving into renewables now. But even then, realistically speaking, we can foresee nuclear rising to about 20 per cent of total capacity within perhaps the next decade or so, if current plans move at the same pace in the United States, in China, in India, in France and in the rest of Europe,” he mentioned.

“The entire eastern European crescent, Poland, Hungary and others are going in for massive investments in nuclear. It might be driven by geopolitical factors. Poland, which does not have any nuclear power now, has just announced a massive contract with Westinghouse (a US nuclear energy company) which is interesting,” Grossi mentioned.