CONSULTING

Introduction
A major accident, like those of
Chernobyl and Fukushima, cannot be
excluded anywhere in the world,
including in Europe
Pierre-Franck Chevet, President
French Nuclear Safety Authority
April 2016 9
We must not allow political and
economical considerations to have a
negative impact on the safety of the
Swiss nuclear power plants
Hans Wanner, Director
Swiss Nuclear Safety Inspectorate
March 2016 10
The year 2016, marking the 30th anniversary of the Chernobyl catastrophe (see the Chernobyl+30
Status Report Chapter) and the 5th year since the Fukushima disaster started unfolding (see the
Fukushima+5 Status Report Chapter), strangely might go down in history as the period when the
notion of risk of nuclear power plants turned into the perception of nuclear power plants at risk.
Indeed, an increasing number of reactors is threatened by premature closure due to the
unfavorable economic environment. Increasing operating and backfitting costs of aging power
plants, decreasing bulk market prices and aggressive competitors. The development started out in
the U.S., when in May 2013 Kewaunee was shut down although its operator, Dominion, had
upgraded the plant and in February 2011 had obtained an operating license renewal valid until
2033. Two reactors at San Onofre followed, when replacement steam generators turned out faulty.
Then Vermont Yankee shut down at the end of 2014. Early shutdown decisions have also hit Pilgrim
and Fitzpatrick, likely to close before the end of 2017 and 2019. Utility Exelon, largest nuclear
operator in the U.S., has announced on 2 June 2016 that it was retiring its Clinton (1065 MW) and
Quad Cities (2 x 940 MW) nuclear facilities in 2017 as they have been losing money for several
years. Only days later, Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (PG&E) in California announced that they would
close the two Diablo Canyon units by 2025, replacing the capacity by energy efficiency and
renewables, making the sixth largest economy in the world (having overtaken France in 2016)
nuclear-free. Still in the same month of June 2016, the Omaha Public Power District (OPPD) Board
voted unanimously to shut down the Fort Calhoun reactor by the end of the year—in the words on
one board member, “simply an economic decision”. 11 Nuclear Energy Institute President Marv
Fertel stated in May 2016 that “if things don’t change, we have somewhere between 10 and 20
plants at risk”. 12
9 Le Monde, “Trente ans après Tchernobyl, ‘un accident nucléaire majeur ne peut être exclu nulle part’”, (in
French) , Updated 26 April 2016, see http://www.lemonde.fr/energies/article/2016/04/22/un-accidentnucleaire-majeur-ne-peut-etre-exclu-nulle-part-dans-lemonde_4907303_1653054.html?xtmc=pierre_franck_chevet&xtcr=9,
accessed 30 June 2016.
10 Hans Wanner, “Umgang mit älter werdenden Reaktoren”, Swiss Energy Foundation, as presented at the
Nuclear Phaseout Congress, Zürich, 21 March 2016, see
www.energiestiftung.ch/files/pdf/20160321_npc_hans_wanner.pdf, accessed 30 June 2016.
11 Cole Epley, “‘Simply an Economic Decision’: OPPD to Close Fort Calhoun Nuclear Plant by End of 2016,”
Omaha.com, 17 June 2016, see http://www.omaha.com/money/simply-an-economic-decision-oppd-to-closefort-calhoun-nuclear/article_3fe6ce02-3352-11e6-a426-a7596287dd59.html,
accessed 1 July 2016.
12 EE News, “NEI's Fertel says imminent state, federal policy changes could keep existing plants open”,
17 May 2016, see http://www.eenews.net/tv/videos/2131/transcript, accessed 10 July 2016.
Mycle Schneider, Antony Froggatt et al. 18 World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2016