30.01.2013 Views

SODBatch A&B SPM Comments co-chair response final ... - ipcc-wg3

SODBatch A&B SPM Comments co-chair response final ... - ipcc-wg3

SODBatch A&B SPM Comments co-chair response final ... - ipcc-wg3

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Chapter-<br />

Comment<br />

para<br />

Batch<br />

From Page<br />

From Line<br />

To Page<br />

To line<br />

<strong>Comments</strong><br />

IPCC WGIII Fourth Assessment Report, Se<strong>co</strong>nd Order Draft<br />

optimization plus potential <strong>co</strong>ntributions given future expansion of<br />

and large scale investment into nuclear power or do the calculations<br />

assume "real world <strong>co</strong>nditions" <strong>co</strong>nsider the numerous programmes<br />

to fade out nuclear energy and the currently low chances to revert to<br />

an unequivocally positive global investment climate for nuclear<br />

energy? The OECD International Energy Agency (IEA) "World<br />

Energy Outlook 2002" suggests that under status quo <strong>co</strong>nditions<br />

with nuclear energy <strong>co</strong>ntinuing to decline and no new stations built<br />

beyond those 30 or so already planned, its share of world electricity<br />

production would drop from currently about 16% to 12% by 2030.<br />

Consequentially, the relative <strong>co</strong>ntribution to fighting global<br />

warming would also decline. Also the IAEA analysis of the SRES<br />

scenarios suggest that its figures related to nuclear energy increase<br />

are based on assumptions which do not sufficiently represent the<br />

current political and investment climate. Ac<strong>co</strong>rding to IAEA<br />

nuclear power currently presents more of an investment risk in the<br />

relatively liberalized markets of Western Europe and North<br />

America particularly relative to new natural gas fired capacity, as<br />

recent investments in these regions have steered away from nuclear<br />

and most often toward natural gas. Furthermore, IAEA<br />

<strong>co</strong>mmunications <strong>co</strong>nsistently suggest that any increase in avoidance<br />

of GHG emissions through nuclear energy would only be realistic if<br />

calculated with a very long term e<strong>co</strong>nomic perspective and under<br />

the <strong>co</strong>ndition that there is a global revision in political thinking<br />

back to supporting nuclear energy. Currently, the public and<br />

political opinion in many parts of the world is still dominated by<br />

the perception of "high relative <strong>co</strong>sts; perceived adverse safety,<br />

environmental, and health effects; potential security risks stemming<br />

from proliferation; and unresolved challenges in long-term<br />

management of nuclear wastes" (MIT 2002). For Reference: (1)<br />

International Energy Agency (IEA), World Energy Outlook 2002,<br />

IEA, Paris, 2002. (2) Alan McDonald, Keywan Riahi, and Hans-<br />

Holger Rogner, “Elaborating SRES Scenarios for Nuclear Energy,”<br />

Risø International Energy Conference on Energy Technologies for<br />

Expert Review of Se<strong>co</strong>nd-Order-Draft<br />

Confidential, Do Not Cite or Quote<br />

Response suggested by <strong>co</strong><strong>chair</strong>s<br />

Action<br />

for<br />

chapter<br />

Considerations<br />

by the writing<br />

team<br />

Page 116 of 348

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!