R.A. Meserve Carnegie Institution,
Washington, D.C., United States of America Email: rmeserve@pst.ciw.edu
I would like to thank Chairman Zhang and Deputy Director General Taniguchi for their helpful introductory remarks. As the President of this Inter-national Conference on Topical Issues in Nuclear Installation Safety, I am also very happy to welcome you all.
I understand that I was asked to serve as the President of this Conference as a result of my role as Chairperson of the IAEA’s International Nuclear Safety Group (INSAG) — a group that is intended to provide informed advice to the world community on nuclear safety issues. I join you at this conference largely to learn your perspectives on some of the issues that INSAG must address.
I will try this morning to set out the context for our discussions over the course of the next week. There are approximately 440 nuclear power plants around the globe, contributing roughly 16% of the world’s total supply of electric power. Because of the importance of electricity as a foundation for societal activities and for economic growth, nuclear energy provides an important contribution to the well-being of the world’s peoples. Indeed, the electric energy from nuclear power plants is all the more important when it is recognized that nuclear power does not present many of the environmental problems associated with other major sources of energy. In particular, it provides the means to meet growing energy needs throughout the globe without the generation of greenhouse gases and the resulting disruptive effects of climate change. Moreover, nuclear technology and materials offer diverse and significant benefits in many health and industrial applications.
Nuclear technology has particular significance here in China. The Chinese economy is expanding at a faster rate than that of any other major country, with attendant huge demands for electricity generating capacity. I understand that China plans to build 30 new nuclear power plants by 2020 and internal Chinese studies estimate that, by 2050, China will need as much as 300 GW of additional nuclear power — not much less than the current world
MESERVE
10
total capacity of 350 GW of nuclear power. If this dream is realized, China will lead the world in its reliance on this clean source of electricity supply.
The world’s reliance on nuclear power presents special challenges and special obligations. Nuclear technology can present significant risks without care being taken in design, construction and operation. Although accidents are more common in the handling and use of nuclear materials than in electric power generation, the public has a particular concern about an accident at a nuclear power plant. And because an accident at a nuclear power plant could have transnational effects, there is strong international interest in ensuring that such plants are designed, constructed and operated with close attention to safety. Indeed, it is a commonplace but nonetheless valid observation that a nuclear accident anywhere will have consequences around the globe, if only through indirect impacts on public opinion. There is, therefore, both a local and an international interest in ensuring nuclear safety.
As a general matter, the safety performance of nuclear power plants continues to show steady gains. Safety indicators — that is, measures of such things as actuations of reactor safety equipment, availability of safety related equipment and unplanned shutdowns — have shown steady improvement over a period of decades. These improvements are no doubt the result of heightened management attention to safety, improved maintenance, better training, more sophisticated diagnostic and other technology, safety upgrades and increased international exchange of operating experience by way of the IAEA, the OECD/NEA, the World Association of Nuclear Operators and conferences like this one. This improved performance is impressive and, as a general matter, should be reassuring.
Indeed, there is an interesting and important correlation between improved safety performance and improved economic performance. At the same time that safety, in the aggregate, has improved, the average capacity factors for nuclear power plants have also improved. The fact that safety and superior economic performance are linked to each other is not surprising, since each is dependent on reliable equipment, careful maintenance and training, and attention to detail. The important lesson is that it is good business to strive for the highest levels of safety even when measured solely by the contribution to the bottom line.
Nonetheless, despite the favourable trends with the indicators, we cannot rest comfortably on the assumption that our safety obligations are fully satisfied. In fact, there are significant safety challenges with which the world’s nuclear enterprises must grapple now and in the years ahead. In the past few years, there were several noteworthy events that warrant careful examination to ensure that the appropriate lessons are learned. Some of these events occurred in plants that had an otherwise impressive operational and safety
OPENING SESSION
11 record and that were operated by organizations with extensive experience. And some of these events were in countries with strong and capable regulators.
These facts are both troubling and humbling. The events show that no one can assume that the task of ensuring nuclear safety has been successfully accom-plished. We have much hard work ahead of us. The events underscore the reality that constant vigilance is required by all who are engaged in the nuclear enterprise.
Indeed, the events reinforce that the general trends of favourable safety indicators, while desirable, should not be allowed to provide false comfort. We face many challenges. Let me mention just a few.
Firstly, there is the challenge presented by ageing nuclear power plants.
Plant and equipment can deteriorate as a result of continuing use and the ravages of time. Some plants were built without the safety features or charac-teristics that are integral to more modern designs. There also are fewer suppliers of nuclear equipment and services, and the acquisition of spare parts and components of appropriate quality can sometimes be difficult.
Nonetheless, there is the necessity of ensuring that all operating plants have and maintain an adequate safety margin over the whole life cycle of the facility.
This is a continuing challenge, particularly as a result of the complacency that can arise from uneventful past operations and the costs associated with extensive repairs or construction of replacement facilities.
Secondly, in many parts of the world, the nuclear infrastructure, including in particular the human resources involved in the nuclear enterprise, is deterio-rating. While older workers can provide experience and informed judgement, there is a need to ensure that their specialized skills are replicated in a younger generation. Indeed, the sustainability of the nuclear enterprise requires a continuing influx of new recruits and the current flow is simply too small to meet the need. In this context, we observe that, in comparison with 20–30 years ago, there is a smaller cadre of highly qualified experts, fewer graduates in nuclear engineering from the world’s universities, and less global financing for safety research. Focused effort to rebuild the nuclear infrastructure, including important human resources, is necessary if nuclear safety is to be maintained and enhanced.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, every operator and every regulator must fight to overcome the complacency that can arise from uneventful past operations. Nuclear technology is not forgiving and even nations with the most advanced nuclear programmes have found that there must be constant attention to safety. It is often appropriately observed that backsliding in safety performance is inevitable unless there is a continuing effort for safety improvement. Hence, the focus of this conference is on the
MESERVE
12
very issue of ensuring continuous improvement of nuclear safety in a changing world.
The nuclear industry has learned that the effort must include not only careful maintenance and thorough training, but also the establishment of an appropriate ‘safety culture’ in design, construction and operation. Safety must be the highest priority and there must be in place a management structure and set of incentives that serve to ensure that everyone associated with a nuclear facility understands and seeks to pursue safety.
In this context, operators must resist any economic pressures to cut back attention to safety matters. The harsh reality is that every nuclear plant requires continuing investments in staff, systems and equipment. Perhaps equally importantly, there must be special efforts to ensure that expert knowledge is continually being applied both by operating organizations and by regulators. Knowledge relating to safety is increasing as we learn from operating experience, from safety research and from revised safety analyses using improved tools. But that new knowledge is of little value unless it is applied in a process of ongoing safety improvement.
The need to apply new safety insights is the reason why we are gathered here today. We have a common interest in ensuring that the safety of all nuclear plants is enhanced. No one country has exclusive control of the information from which we can and should learn. This conference is intended to provide a forum in which insights from around the world can be discussed and analysed so that we all can benefit.
We will hear in a moment from some experienced and knowledgeable observers of the world safety scene. They will set the stage for our discussions.
As Mr. Taniguchi has indicated, we will then have four topical sessions to illuminate various aspects of the challenge that is before us. Our final session will attempt to pull together these disparate threads and to chart a course of action for the future.
I look forward to an exciting week and I welcome the opportunity to learn from all of you in the days ahead.
13