Lambert here: What could go wrong. Although 3% a year through 2026 seems like rather a short time-frame. Readers?
By Tsvetana Paraskova, a writer for Oilprice.com with over a decade of experience writing for news outlets such as iNVEZZ and SeeNews. Originally published at OilPrice.com.
The nuclear energy industries in Russia and the West have remained interdependent after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which partly explains Europe’s unwillingness to impose sanctions on Russia’s nuclear sector, the World Nuclear Industry Status Report showed on Thursday.
“Despite repeated calls—notably by the European Parliament—the nuclear sector remained exempt from sanctions—a clear indication of dependency on Russia in the field,” according to the annual industry report which assesses nuclear energy developments in the world.
The authors of the report found that interdependence between Russia and its Western partners remains significant.
For example, Russian state firm Rosatom is implementing all 13 nuclear power reactor construction sites started outside China over the past five years. As a result, Western providers of parts for the nuclear industry, such as France’s Arabelle turbines, do not have any foreign customers besides Rosatom, the report noted.
“The close mutual industrial and market interdependencies between the Russian nuclear industry and its Western counterparts at least partially explain European hesitations to impose sanctions on the nuclear sector,” the report reads.
The Russia-West interdependence remains as many allies of the U.S. and the EU—with the notable exception of Germany—have turned to nuclear to step up energy security and depend less on energy commodities since the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Despite being an industry notoriously known for years of delays and huge cost overruns, a global nuclear power renaissance is underway.
The comeback of nuclear energy is expected to drive a record-high electricity generation from nuclear in 2025, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said early this year.
Even as some countries phase out nuclear power or retire plants early, global nuclear generation is expected to rise by nearly 3% per year on average through 2026, according to the IEA. The key growth drivers will be the completion of maintenance works in France, restart of some nuclear power plants in Japan, and new reactors coming online in China, India, South Korea, and Europe, among others.
4 comments
Comments are closed.
And why shouldn’t they be? Makes all the current stupidity look what it is.
In the UK Milliband seems to pulling the plug on further nukes ( Anglesey), which I had assumed it was because he is a nut job. Now after Starmer’s exploits in Washington I realise his boss is an even bigger nut job.
Take a look at the appallingly poor competence and our current politicians and it becomes obvious that the West is ill suited for this kind of sanctions war.
I strongly suspect that the Russians are likely less dependent on the West than the article implies and that any sanctions will badly backfire on the West. The article cites Arabelle.
Keep in mind that the Russians retain most of the industries and technical know how to build the reactors themselves. This was inherited from the USSR.
The Chinese are the world’s largest turbine manufacturing companies.
https://www.blackridgeresearch.com/blog/list-of-global-top-steam-turbine-manufacturers-makers-companies-distributors-suppliers-in-the-world
Any ill-advised Western sanctions would mean that the Russians would work with Chinese firms and quickly replace the Arabelle turbines.
By contrast, the West does not have the easy substitute for the Russians.
There is some brave PR in the West about this:
https://www.power-technology.com/news/us-ready-to-replace-russian-uranium-following-ban/
But it takes time to set up and expand existing industries to replace the Russians. Any delays could easily result in a uranium shortage and blackouts.
Needless to say, since that article was published, the US has allowed exceptions.
https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/market-insights/latest-news/electric-power/071924-doe-allows-nuclear-company-centrus-to-import-russian-uranium-in-2024-25
That’s a sign that things will not be ready in time for any Western sanctions war. That’s the poor caliber of the Western political elite.
Excerpts from another story of uranium tales, corruption of Bill and Hillary Clinton, and where the real Russiagate begins for HRC: From the NYT “Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal” By Jo Becker and Mike McIntire, April 23, 2015
“The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.”
“But the untold story behind that story is one that involves not just the Russian president, but also a former American president and a woman who would like to be the next one.”
“At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.”
“Beyond mines in Kazakhstan that are among the most lucrative in the world, the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.”
“As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors.”
“And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.”
“Still, the ultimate authority to approve or reject the Russian acquisition rested with the cabinet officials on the foreign investment committee, including Mrs. Clinton — whose husband was collecting millions in donations from people associated with Uranium One.”
There is even more to the story and worth the read:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html
Some slightly longer term nuclear power generation plans for countries mentioned in the article:
– India, +70% by 2029
– China, +360% by 2060
– Russia, +30% by 2042
– South Korea, -100% by 2062
The numbers are quite rough, be warned. Hard to try to come up with comparable number from open sources in a short time.