Long-term performance targets for nuclear energy. Part 2: Markets and learning rates

Rogner, Holger; McDonald, Alan; Riahi, Keywan

doi:10.1504/ijgei.2008.019857

Cited by 8 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The second category includes policies to steepen the learning curve by increasing the learning rate." (Rogner et al [26]).…”

Section: [Xii]mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Nuclear Power Learning and Deployment Rates; Disruption and Global Benefits Forgone

Lang

2017

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents evidence of the disruption of a transition from fossil fuels to nuclear power, and finds the benefits forgone as a consequence are substantial. Learning rates are presented for nuclear power in seven countries, comprising 58% of all power reactors ever built globally. Learning rates and deployment rates changed in the late-1960s and 1970s from rapidly falling costs and accelerating deployment to rapidly rising costs and stalled deployment. Historical nuclear global capacity, electricity generation and overnight construction costs are compared with the counterfactual that pre-disruption learning and deployment rates had continued to 2015. Had the early rates continued, nuclear power could now be around 10% of its current cost. The additional nuclear power could have substituted for 69,000-186,000 TWh of coal and gas generation, thereby avoiding up to 9.5 million deaths and 174 Gt CO 2 emissions. In 2015 alone, nuclear power could have replaced up to 100% of coal-generated and 76% of gas-generated electricity, thereby avoiding up to 540,000 deaths and 11 Gt CO 2 . Rapid progress was achieved in the past and could be again, with appropriate policies. Research is needed to identify impediments to progress, and policy is needed to remove them. , and thereby more quickly raises living standards and human wellbeing. As the cost of electricity decreases, deployment rate increases. Transition takes place faster and the benefits are delivered sooner.History is replete with examples of one technology replacing another [2,3]. Large infrastructure transitions have commonly taken around a century [10]. Examples are transitions to canals, railways, highways, oil and gas pipelines, telegraph, and electricity grids. Transitions typically follow an S-curve from 0 to 100% complete, with three phases: accelerating to about 20%, near-linear to about 80%, and decelerating to 100% [3,10]. Electricity grids reached 50% of world population in 1960 and 80% in 2010 [11].The transition to nuclear power began in 1954 with the first reactor connected to the grid. Until the 1970s, it was envisaged that nuclear would emulate earlier energy transitions. For example, Wilson [12] projected that nuclear power would supply 14 to 21% of world primary energy by 2000. However, the transition to nuclear reached 4% by 1970, then stalled [3]. The deployment rate of nuclear capacity is currently less than in 1972; the transition has been stalled for 44 years.The rate that technology transitions take place depends, in part, on the technologies being 'fit-for-purpose' and on the learning rates that occur during the transition period. To accelerate the transition to reliable, cheap, clean, safe and comparatively environmentally benign electricity generation, policies need to focus on ways to improve the learning rates and deployment rates of technologies that meet requirements. Historical learning rates provide insight into what rates may be achievable and what could be done to return to rapid rates.The concept of learning rates, or cost e...

show abstract

“…The second category includes policies to steepen the learning curve by increasing the learning rate." (Rogner et al [26]).…”

Section: [Xii]mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As electricity costs decrease, the deployment rate increases and capacity doublings occur faster. Consequently, costs reduce faster; i.e., we progress more quickly down the learning curve [XV] [26]. Technology transition takes place faster and the benefits are delivered sooner.…”

Section: Policy Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nuclear Power Learning and Deployment Rates; Disruption and Global Benefits Forgone

Lang

2017

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As noted above, no premium is attached to having a high percentage of domestic energy sources, and the scenario assumes no climate change policies that sharply penalise fossil-fired power plants. Specific cost targets associated with the A1T scenario are, as noted at the outset, addressed in a separate paper (Rogner et al, 2008).…”

Section: Implications For Nuclear Energymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The major factors determining the use of nuclear power are, first, economics and, second, the security and diversity of fuel supplies. Specific cost targets associated with the A2 scenario are addressed in a separate paper (Rogner et al, 2008). They are less stringent than in the A1T scenario, reflecting slower technological progress and the extensive drawdown of fossil resources that potentially keeps real costs high.…”

Section: Implications For Nuclear Energymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As noted at the outset, for performance requirements, this paper provides only the initial qualitative steps summarised in Table 5 for the translation of storylines into quantitative performance requirements. In the area of economics, however, a subsequent paper (Rogner et al, 2008) seeks to develop cost targets for new nuclear power designs to be competitive in the mid-century energy markets implied by the selected SRES scenarios as well as cost targets for faster nuclear expansion than in the SRES scenarios.…”

Section: Implications For Nuclear Energymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Long-term performance targets for nuclear energy. Part 1: The global scenario context

Rogner

McDonald

Riahi

2008

IJGEI

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper outlines a range of scenarios describing what the world's energy system might look like in the middle of the century, and what nuclear energy's role might be. The starting point is the 40 non-greenhouse-gas-mitigation scenarios in the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).Four illustrative marker scenarios are selected and include growing but varying contributions from nuclear power to electricity supply, while in some scenarios nuclear energy also supplements hydrogen supply by 2050. For each marker scenario, the paper analyses the generic design features of future nuclear power technologies and fuel cycles consistent with the underlying scenario storylines.

show abstract

Energy, environment, and sustainable development

Dinçer¹,

Öztürk²

2021

Geothermal Energy Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Long-term performance targets for nuclear energy. Part 2: Markets and learning rates

Cited by 8 publications

References 13 publications

Nuclear Power Learning and Deployment Rates; Disruption and Global Benefits Forgone

Nuclear Power Learning and Deployment Rates; Disruption and Global Benefits Forgone

Long-term performance targets for nuclear energy. Part 1: The global scenario context

Energy, environment, and sustainable development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About