undertaken environmental impact assessments for additional nuclear units at their respective sites [27]-an essential prerequisite under Finnish law before any new development can be considered. Two units at the Loviisa site recently received approval for increases in output, as well as 10-year extensions of their operating licenses.

Both the Swedish and German governments have voted for eventual phaseout of all nuclear power capacity. The Swedish government is in the midst of trying to force the first closure at Sydkraft's Barsebaeck plant. The utility is pursuing a number of legal actions to save the reactor from forced closure; however, it is also negotiating with the government on various compensation plans in return for the shutdown of the plant.

The new German government has also called for a phased shutdown of all 19 German nuclear stations, which currently provide more than 30 percent of the country's electricity [28]. The new coalition partners, the Social Democratic Party (SPD) and the environmentalist Green Party, disagree on the progress of the phaseout, with the SPD suggesting it will occur over several decades and the Greens originally demanding that all stations be shut down within 5 years. The coalition agreement does set a deadline of 1 year to complete talks with the nuclear industry on future energy policy, after which legislation will be put in place to close plants without compensation. The German power industry has threatened to sue the government for damages if plants are shut down without their consent [29].

North America

The three nations of North America-the United States, Canada, and Mexico-all have nuclear power programs. The U.S. program is by far the largest in the region. In 1997, the nuclear share of electricity generation in the United States was 18 percent; in Canada it was 14 percent; and Mexico's two units supplied 7 percent of the country's electricity. Total nuclear capacity in the region is expected to decline over the forecast in all cases, as existing units age and are removed from service. By 2020, U.S. nuclear capacity is projected to decrease by 51 percent from the 1997 level in the reference case, due to retirements and the lack of new orders. In Canada, with no new orders projected in the reference case, capacity decreases by 4.0 gigawatts by 2020. Projected capacity in the region in 2020 ranges between 35.1 and 96.5 gigawatts under the different retirement assumptions of the low and high nuclear growth cases.

Ontario Hydro (OH), the operating utility for the majority of the nuclear units in Canada, has begun an extensive program to improve the performance of its nuclear plants. As part of the plan, OH shut down seven of the oldest units-three at the Pickering A site (where a

fourth unit has been dormant since 1996) and four units at Bruce A. Five of the seven were off line by the end of 1997, and the remaining two were shut down in the spring of 1998. The units may be refurbished and brought back on line eventually. The first priority for the utility, however, is to improve performance at the units that remain operable. OH has budgeted $3.5 billion (Canadian) for fossil fuel and purchased power to make up for the planned 5-year shutdown of the older units [30].

The deregulation of the electricity industry in the United States is affecting the Nation's commercial nuclear industry in several different ways: some units have been shut down prematurely; others have been sold; and still others are expected to continue operating beyond current retirement dates. Several units were retired during 1997 and 1998. In August 1997 both the Maine Yankee and Big Rock Point reactors were shut down perma. nently (31, 32). In 1998, Commonwealth Edison permanently closed its two Zion units, and the Millstone 1 unit was retired in Connecticut. The two utilities applying for license renewal are Baltimore Gas and Electric and Duke Power, for the Calvert Cliffs and Oconee plants, respectively. A decision from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is not likely for 3 to 5 years, after an extensive review of technological and environmental issues.

Low-cost nuclear units are competitive with other technologies, and reductions in costs may be possible through improved management. In the first deal of its kind, GPU Incorporated sold its Three Mile Island I unit to the U.S.-British joint venture AmerGen Energy Company. AmerGen was created to buy U.S. plants that may be struggling and improve operations so that they become competitive and commercially successful in the restructured market. It is a partnership between British Energy (operators of 15 nuclear reactors in the United Kingdom's deregulated electricity market) and PECO Energy, operators of the Peach Bottom and Limerick stations in Pennsylvania.

Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union

There were 69 nuclear units operating in the EE/FSU region during 1997, producing 250.7 billion kilowatthours of electricity; 75 percent of the electricity from nuclear plants in the region was generated in the FSU. Reliance on nuclear power varies in this region, with Lithuania supplying 82 percent of its electricity from nuclear power, Russia 14 percent, and Kazakhstan less than 1 percent. Several countries in the region have ambitious plans for additional nuclear capacity, but there are many challenges that are likely to limit new nuclear builds. With the potential for future projects uncertain, the region's nuclear capacity is projected to decline by 5.5 gigawatts between 1997 and 2020. The low and high growth cases forecast a range of outcomes,

57-713 99-34

from a loss of 25.5 gigawatts to a gain of 23.9 gigawatts in total nuclear capacity by 2020.

Romania's first full year of operation of the Cernavoda nuclear station produced 10 percent of total national electricity production in 1997, and the reactor, a Canadian-designed PHWR, achieved a capacity factor of 87 percent [33]. Construction of Mochovce 1 in Slovakia was near completion in 1998. Several teams of international experts planned to inspect the reactor before startup to review safety improvements. The project was completed by Czech and Russian engineers, with limited German and French involvement [34]. The upgraded design attempted to incorporate all essential safety modifications recommended by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Kazakhstan has completed feasibility studies for a plant in the southern part of the country and was expected to make a decision by yearend 1998 on whether to build the three-unit nuclear station [35]. The proposed plant would be designed and constructed with Russian help. Kazakhstan is considering nuclear power expansion because it has substantial uranium reserves, and the main alternative, coal, is very expensive.

Russia is in the midst of an economic crisis, causing potential investors to leave the market and delaying new nuclear construction, which is dependent on private financing. A further concern is that the utilities have been unable to pay workers for several months, driving morale down and causing threats of worker strikes. Additionally, reactor maintenance and repairs have been delayed because of a lack of funds, causing ongoing concerns over reactor safety. Safety of older reactors is also a concern in the Ukraine, where debate continues regarding when the final operating unit at the Chernobyl site will be permanently closed. An agreement was made by the Ukraine to close the station by 2000 in exchange for financing to complete two new nuclear reactors currently under construction. The financing has not come through as promised, however, and Ukraine officials have threatened to keep the Chernobyl unit running until the new reactors are completed and able to replace the power currently provided by the older unit.

References

1. Energy Information Administration, Impacts of the Kyoto Protocol on U.S. Energy Markets and Economic Activity, SR/OIAF/98-03 (Washington, DC, October 1998), p. 75.

2. Washington International Energy Group, A New Nuclear Consensus (Washington, DC, October 1998). 3. Nuclear Energy Agency, Nuclear Power and Climate Change (Paris, France: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, April 1998).

4. "Late News," Nuclear News, Vol. 41, No. 2 (February 1998), p. 17.

5. "Late News," Nuclear News, Vol. 41, No. 9 (August 1998), p. 17.

6. "Sale and Early Closure of Units, A Glimpse at Industry's Future," Nucleonics Week, Vol. 39, No. 30 July 23, 1998). pp. 1, 8-10.

7. A. Salpukas, "Entergy Bid of $80 Million Wins Massachusetts Nuclear Plant," New York Times (Novem ber 20, 1998), p. C2.

8. J. Weil, "BG&E Completes License Renewal Application for Calvert Cliffs," Nucleonics Week, Vol. 39, No. 16 (April 16, 1998), pp. 1, 7-8.

9. J. Weil, "Duke's Oconee Is Second Plant To Seek 20-Year Life Extension," Nucleonics Week, Vol. 39, No. 28 (July 9, 1998). pp. 1, 11-12.

10. R. Carelli, "Nuclear Waste Case Rejected," web site www.abcnews.com (November 30, 1998).

11. M. Grunwald, "Nuclear Waste Disposal Still a Festering Problem," Washington Post (November 22, 1998). p. Al.

12. "White House Statement on Easing of Sanctions on India and Pakistan," web site www.usaengage.org/ news/981107wh.html (November 7, 1998).

13. "Global Industry: Demand for Nuclear Power to Boom," Journal of Commerce, web site www. viewswire.com (February 3, 1998).

14. A. Gimson and R. Highfield, "Greens Plan To Close Down All Germany's Nuclear Power Plants," Electronic Telegraph, web site www.telegraph.co.uk. Issue 1239 (October 16, 1998).

15. "Late News," Nuclear News, Vol. 41, No. 7 (June 1998), p. 17.

16. "Wolsong-3 Goes Commercial at Beginning of July," Nuclear News, Vol. 41, No. 9 (August 1998), p. 28. 17. "Ulchin-3 Connected to Grid Ahead of Schedule," Nuclear News, Vol. 41, No. 2 (February 1998), p. 60. 18. "Korea-Long-Term Power Development Plan Announced," International Market Insight Reports (September 8, 1998).

19. M. Hibbs, "KEPCO CEO Chang Nixes All Sites Chosen as Candidates for Reactors," Nucleonics Week, Vol. 39, No. 43 (October 22, 1998), p. 4.

20. "Contact Signed for Russia To Supply Plant to China," Nuclear News, Vol. 41, No. 2 (February 1998). 21. "Taipower Set To Expand Number of Nuclear Plants," China News (May 18, 1998).

22. A. MacLachlan, "With Bid Evaluation Delayed, Turkish Decision Will Slip," Nucleonics Week, Vol. 39, No. 11 (March 12, 1998), p. 3.

23. "Tokai-1, First Nuclear Plant in Japan, Closes," Nuclear News, Vol 41, No. 6 (May 1998). p. 48.

24. A.S. Martins, "Year in Review: Japan in 1997," Nuclear Review (February 1998), pp. 14-18.

25. "France-Civaux 1 On Line," Nucleonics Week, Vol. 39, No. 2 (January 8, 1998), p. 13.

26. "Dodewaard Closed After 28 Years of Operation," Nuclear News, Vol, 40, No. 6 (May 1997), p. 52.

27. "In Europe, Finns Most Likely To Build New Power Reactor," Nuclear News, Vol. 41, No. 7 (June 1998), p. 40.

28. M. Hibbs and A. MacLachlan, "SPD Won't Set Phase-out Schedule Until Deal Is Cut with Industry," Nucleonics Week, Vol. 39, No. 42 (October 15, 1998). pp. 16-17.

29. "Slow Death for Nuclear Power," BBC News Online, web site http://news.bbc.co.uk (October 15, 1998). 30. R. Silver, "Hydro Submits Detailed Plan for Nuclear Plant Recovery." Nucleonics Week, Vol. 39, No. 19 (May 7, 1998), pp. 2-4.

31. "Maine Yankee: Board Votes for Closure; Decom To Start Right Away." Nuclear News, Vol. 40, No. 10 (September 1997), p. 14.

32. "Late News," Nuclear News, Vol. 40, No. 11 (October 1997), p. 18.

33. "Nuclear Performance Improving," Nuclear News, Vol. 41, No. 3 (March 1998), p. 35.

34. "Fuel Loading Starts at Mochovce-1," Nuclear News, Vol. 41, No. 7 (June 1998), p. 43.

35. "Kazakhstan Sees Nuclear Power Plant Going Ahead," Financial Times: East European Energy, Vol. 84 (September 1998), p. 18.

Low prices for oil and natural gas in world energy markets continued to diminish the potential for rapid development of renewable energy sources worldwide. Oil prices hit 20-year lows in 1998, in part because the Asian economic crisis resulted in lower worldwide demand. Even production cut agreements by some major oil producers, such as Saudi Arabia, Mexico, and Venezuela, failed to provide measurable price recovery during 1998.

On the positive side, the Kyoto Climate Change Protocol proposals to cut greenhouse gas emissions levels may provide an opportunity for growth in demand for renewable energy. Several European Union member countries have pledged to increase the use of renewables, and the European Union itself has pledged to increase installed wind capacity on the continent to 10 gigawatts by 2010 [1]. Overall, however, the International Energy Agency projects that some 853 gigawatts of total installed electricity generating capacity will be required by European members of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development by 2010 [2]. Denmark's Energy 2000 program set a goal of 1.5 gigawatts of installed wind capacity by 2005, and 1.1 gigawatts had been brought on line by the end of 1997 [3, p. 23]. Germany's Enquete Commission on "Preventative Measures to Protect the Earth's Atmosphere" identified 29 measures to help the country reduce carbon emissions by 25 to 30 percent below their 1987 level, including the promotion of wind energy and photovoltaics [4].

Further, there are signs that some large energy companies, such as Enron Corporation, Royal Dutch/Shell, and British Petroleum (BP), are expanding their interest in renewables. In 1997 Enron Corporation acquired the American wind power developer, Zond Corporation, and German wind turbine manufacturer, Tacke Windtechnik GmbH. BP announced plans to increase its solar technology sales to $1 billion within 10 years, including plans to invest $6.5 million (U.S.) in its solar photovoltaic cell production plant in Madrid, Spain, in an effort to double production of solar photovoltaic cells [5]. BP also pledged to reduce the company's greenhouse gas emissions by 10 percent relative to 1990 levels. Royal Dutch/Shell announced a similar objective to be achieved by 2002 [6].

In the IEO99 reference case, projections of hydroelectricity and other renewables include only on-grid renewables. While noncommercial fuels from plant and animal sources remain an important source of energy. especially in the developing world, comprehensive data on the use of noncommercial fuels are not available and. as a result, are not included in the projections. Similarly. dispersed renewables (renewable energy consumed on the site of its production, such as solar panels used for water heating) are not included in the projections because there are few extensive sources of international data on their use.

Major developments affecting the renewables market in 1998 include:

•China and India pledged increases in large-scale hydroelectric development in 1998. China completed its 3.3-gigawatt Ertan hydroelectric station, which began operating in August 1998. Hydroelectric projects currently under construction in China amount to some 32 gigawatts of installed generating capacity. In India, 12 large-scale projects-adding up to 3.7 gigawatts of installed hydroelectric capacity-have been given government approval. All the projects are slated for completion by 2002 [7].

In the United States, the California Energy Commission established a financial support program for renewable energy resources, which will be funded by a small tax per kilowatthour of electricity sold to ratepayers of the State's utilities. The tax, to be levied between 1998 and 2002, should provide renewable projects with some $162 million in financial incentives.

⚫Wind development in Western Europe remains strong, and the region accounted for 75 percent of the world's increment of wind capacity installed in 1997. In 1997, Germany's installed wind capacity reached 2,082 megawatts, surpassing that of the United States for the first time. Spain doubled its installed wind capacity in 1997, reaching 421 megawatts, and Denmark's installed wind capacity reached 1,147 megawatts at the end of 1997.

Regional Activity

North America

In North America, renewable energy use is projected to expand by 34 percent between 1996 and 2020, reaching a combined total of 15 quadrillion Btu for the United States, Canada, and Mexico (Figure 58). Over the forecast horizon, the renewables share of energy used for electricity generation holds steady for the region at 26 percent.

In the United States, much of the growth in renewable energy use for electricity generation is expected to be in the form of municipal solid waste (MSW), wind, and biomass [8]. The increased use of MSW is attributed mostly to the recovery and use of landfill gas (methane). The projected increase in biomass should be divided between industrial cogeneration and gasification combined-cycle units owned by electricity generators.

The U.S. Department of Interior (DOI) has been working to decommission many hydroelectric dams in the country and to restore rivers to pre-dam states. As part of this effort, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in 1997 ordered the removal of the 160-year old

Edwards Dam spanning the Kennebec River in Augusta, Maine [9]. Edwards Manufacturing Company-which receives 97 percent of the dam's revenues-and the State of Maine submitted a plan for removing the dam [10]. This was the first time that FERC used its dam-removal authority [11, 12].

DOI also announced an agreement to remove the 12-megawatt Elwha dam near Port Angeles, Washington, but the removal was delayed indefinitely when the U.S. Congress withheld $22 million needed to finance the project [9]. Although some small dams have been removed successfully-such as the 8-foot Jackson Street Dam used to divert water for irrigation in Medford, Oregon, and Roy's Dam on the San Geronimo Creek outside San Francisco, California-efforts to dismantle many of the larger dams slated for removal have been delayed by Congressional action, including four Lower Snake River dams and a partially built Elk Creek dam in Oregon [13].

The installation of wind capacity in the United States has slowed in recent years, but there are signs that wind power production may increase substantially over the next several years. In 1997, the United States added 11 megawatts of wind capacity, but because of the phaseout of older projects, total installed capacity fell to 1,743 megawatts by the end of the year [14, p. 158]. There are, however, plans to add some 800 megawatts of new projects by the end of 1999 throughout the country (Figure 59). There are commercial wind projects under construction or planned for completion in Minnesota, Iowa, California, Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Texas, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming [15]. Further, a 112.5-megawatt project in