I am grateful for the opportunity to address this Conference on Emerging Nuclear Energy Systems.

It is very fitting to discuss emerging nuclear energy systems here in Obninsk, where the world's first nuclear power reactor was built and where so much research is pursued. I am often struck by the great versatility which has characterized and still characterizes the Russian nuclear world. Only Russia has built large nuclear reactors for ice-breakers, for desalination of water and for district heating. And it has built so many different types of reactors - light water reactors, channel type reactors and fast reactors, space nuclear reactors such as TOPAZ, heavy metal cooled reactors and others. There is a rich and varied experience in Russia from which new nuclear energy systems may emerge. The world at large should benefit from this experience, just as Russia stands to benefit from the nuclear experience of other countries in the new world without frontiers.

The IAEA is an important focal point where the experience of different countries is reported and shared, and where solutions are sought to many common problems for the current and the emerging nuclear energy systems of the world. I shall try briefly to describe both the problems facing nuclear power in today's world and the potential expanded future use of nuclear power which I see as well as the role of the IAEA.

On the questions of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, let me only make the following comments: With the end of the Cold War, rapid nuclear disarmament and near universal adherence to non-proliferation, we can reasonably expect that nuclear energy will be increasingly associated in the public's mind with beneficial uses rather than with weapons. A good deal of work remains, however, in this process. Nuclear disarmament must continue and accelerate. Agreement on a complete ban on the testing of nuclear weapons is expected this year. It should be followed without delay by negotiations of a prohibition of the production of fissionable material for weapons - a cut-off. Further nuclear disarmament will facilitate universal adherence to non- proliferation. And the cases of Iraq and DPRK have convinced governments that they must strengthen the safeguards system of the IAEA to give it greater capacity to detect - and deter - any secret nuclear development. Confidence in the nuclear sphere requires effective international verification. It also requires joint efforts against the trafficking in nuclear material, equipment and technology - to prevent any possible nuclear terrorism and radiation hazards to the public.

I shall now discuss the future of nuclear power for peaceful uses. I see it as mainly influenced by the following factors:

1. The safety in the operation of nuclear power plants and in the disposal of nuclear waste - and the public's perception of this safety;

?

2. The future demand for energy, especially electricity;

?

3. The economic competitiveness of nuclear power;

?

4. The environmental competitiveness of nuclear power;

?

5. The interest of countries to diversify their energy sources and to obtain a measure of energy independence.

The future demand for energy must be the starting point of any discussion of emerging energy systems. I shall therefore begin with some data on this matter.

?

There is general agreement that energy use will increase very significantly, especially in developing countries, where the population increase will be great and present energy use is low. Demand for electricity will grow particularly fast - again with most of the growth taking place in the developing world. Annual electricity use in Bangladesh and Tanzania is less than 100 kWh/per person. In Sweden it is about 15 000 kWh. From 1960 to 1990, the share of electricity in the global energy consumption has grown from 17 to 30% and the annual use of electricity per capita has almost tripled - from 765 to 2225 kWh per person. Even so two billion people in the world still do not have access to electricity in their homes. According to the World Energy Council, the global use of electricity can be expected to increase by 50 to 75% by the year 2020.

Today, the burning of coal, oil and gas provides about 63% of the world's electricity. Hydro power follows with 19.5%, nuclear with about 17% and geothermal with about 0.5%. Contributions from other sources such as solar, wind and bio-mass are not now significant - less than 0.1% altogether. Despite welcome improvements in the economy of these renewable sources, they are not expected to become economically competitive and capable of providing a significant part of the world's energy and electricity needs within the next few decades. An important factor today and in the future is energy conservation. Demand management and greater efficiency in the generation and use of energy are employed as means to reduce the need for new generating facilities. Nevertheless, on a world-wide basis, construction of many new power generating facilities will be needed. What energy systems will emerge and on what basis will the choices be made?

?

In the past the choice of energy option was easy: the cheapest energy was the best energy. Today, comparisons between different options for energy and electricity generation require the weighing of all costs, not only economic, but also health and environmental impacts of energy production and use. In addition, other factors, like energy independence, capital intensity and public opinion, often must be considered. In many countries this choice is so politically difficult that governments tend to avoid it or, at least, delay it.

The IAEA has a long tradition of analysing and planning energy and electricity systems. This analysis used to focus on the direct economic cost. With more factors now being relevant, the Agency has in recent years developed a full energy chain analysis, that permits comparison of fuel and energy choices - their costs and their impacts on health and environment - from resource extraction to final use. In a field that is sometimes emotionally charged it is important to be able to make such objective comparisons between different options. Our programme - DECADES - which was developed in co-operation with several other international organizations, provides Member States with a methodology - software, extensive databases and guidance - to enable them to compare possible fuel and plant choices and their impacts. The users can see which energy options are most immune to fuel price increases, taxes on CO₂ emissions, etc.

Applying this tool for objective comparisons, we find in many situations that nuclear power is both an economically viable and environmentally friendly source of energy. This does not guarantee that it is selected, however.

?

There was a rapid expansion of nuclear power through the 1970s. With the Three Mile Island accident in 1979, the less than expected increase in demand of electricity in the 1980s and the Chernobyl accident in 1986, the expansion rate of nuclear power has slowed markedly. By the end of 1995, 437 nuclear power units were in operation in 30 countries in the world and Taiwan (China). Another 39 units were under construction.

While nuclear power construction has been stagnating in the Western industrialized world, the growth of nuclear power in East and South Asia has continued. China has brought three reactors in operation in the last four years and initiated an ambitious nuclear program, which will increase the installed nuclear capacity from 1% to 6% of the total installed capacity. Japan has brought eight nuclear reactors in operation since 1991. In the Republic of Korea, the nuclear power development programme accelerates - with five plants under construction. According to the long-term power plan of the Republic of Korea, another 18 nuclear units will be added by 2006. India s programme continues with ten operating nuclear power plants and four units under construction. Pakistan has one plant in operation and started the construction of another plant in 1993.

These figures should not, however, conceal the reality that the use of fossil fuelled energy - both for electricity generation and other purposes - has expanded even more. According to the International Energy Agency of the OECD, gas is the fastest growing fossil fuel. Its use is expected to increase by 55% in absolute terms from 1992 to 2010. In the same time period the annual coal production is also expected to increase dramatically.

While some countries are thus expanding their nuclear power capacity rapidly, a few governments are decided opponents of nuclear power. Most have a wait-and- see attitude. Nuclear power has become more expensive due to many new safety features that have been required and fossil fuels have remained inexpensive. The chief objections to its wider use are not economic, however. The most important factors are safety in reactor operation and waste disposal. Nuclear power will not become an important emerging energy system unless safety in operation and waste disposal is convincing and the public perceives it to be so.

?

The Summit held in Moscow last April expressed the determination of that meeting to ensure nuclear safety everywhere - in power plants, in the storing and transport of nuclear material and in the prevention of weapons proliferation and trafficking in nuclear material. The declaration of Moscow refers repeatedly to the activities of the IAEA as the Agency is one of the most important mechanisms for co- operation among the States of the world in the field of nuclear safety. The Agency may be said broadly to aim at creating a global nuclear safety culture through the adoption of binding conventions, the elaboration of recommended standards, the provision of advisory services and the exchange of experience and information. It is not alone in this endeavour. Operators, collaborating within the World Association of Nuclear Operators (WANO), and regulators pull in the same direction - toward a global nuclear safety culture, which will ensure inter alia that there are no significant radioactive releases into the environment from power reactors, waste disposal installations or other nuclear facilities.

Legally Binding International Agreements

A fundamental component of the emerging global nuclear safety culture is a number of legally binding conventions concluded under IAEA auspices. The Vienna Convention on Civil Liability dates back to the 1960s. A new convention on liability has been under negotiation within the IAEA for several years and is expected to be ready within a year. The Convention on Physical Protection of Nuclear Material was developed in the late 1970s. It is still relevant - not least to the problem of trafficking. In 1986, in the months after the Chernobyl accident, the Convention on Early Notification of a Nuclear Accident and the Convention on Assistance in the Case of a Nuclear Accident or Radiological Emergency were drawn up in record time. The Convention on Nuclear Safety, the latest addition to this basic nuclear law infrastructure, is expected to enter into force this year. Twenty two States have now ratified it. Russia is in the process of doing so. The adoption of this Convention in 1994 was an important event. It requires States parties to fulfil a number of obligations relating to regulation, management and operation of nuclear power. A central provision calls for peer review at meetings held at least every three years of national reports demonstrating fulfilment of the various obligations.

A Convention on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management is presently under negotiation and a draft may be ready for adoption early in 1997. As with the Convention on Nuclear Safety, basic requirements are laid down and it is envisaged that national reports will be submitted and be subject to international peer examination; countries would also report on their inventories of radioactive waste and undertake to deal with any existing unsatisfactory waste situations. A question that is still open is to what extent nuclear waste from the military sector is to be covered by the Convention.

Non-binding Common Safety Standards

Even with several international conventions in operation, nuclear and radiation safety remains first and foremost a national responsibility. However, this does not preclude the international formulation of harmonized safety approaches. Safety standards, recommendatory in nature, have been a principal mechanism for achieving the desired harmonization and they form an important second component of the global nuclear safety culture. Let me mention three examples.

At the end of 1994 the new International Basic Safety Standards (BSS) for Protection Against Ionizing Radiation and for the Safety of Radiation Sources were adopted after many years work. They form the basis for many national regulations. The IAEA's Nuclear Safety Standards (NUSS) programme has resulted in some 60 non-binding standards and supporting guides dealing with the principal aspects of nuclear power safety - from the siting to the operation of plants. The NUSS documents are the basis for a number of national laws and regulations.

The first document in a comprehensive series of Radioactive Waste Safety Standards (RADWASS) was issued late in 1995. The series will address the important question of radioactive residues from past activities.

Review and Advisory Services

The provision of peer review and advisory services by international experts - the third component of the international nuclear safety culture - has proved important to enable national operators and regulators to draw on the nuclear safety experience available worldwide. Among the services of the IAEA are missions by Operational Safety Review Teams (OSART), providing plant operators with recommendations and suggestions for strengthening safety performance but also identifying good practices that might be usefully followed by others. Teams for the Assessment of Safety Significant Events (ASSET) have been much used for comprehensive investigations of incidents in the operation of nuclear power plants.

I might mention that international expert review teams have visited all 15 sites which have Soviet-designed nuclear power units in the countries of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union.

Sharing of Information on Nuclear Safety

The sharing of safety relevant information is the fourth component of a global nuclear safety culture. The correct understanding and assessment of nuclear accidents and incidents is an important part of experience sharing and learning from each other. International meetings provide fora for such exchanges.

Let me mention in this context the large and important international conference entitled that was held in April in Vienna. It was co-sponsored by the IAEA, the World Health Organization and the European Commission. It covered not only the health consequences, but also the environmental, social, economic and political impacts of the accident, the remedial measures taken after the accident and the safety of the containment structure surrounding the destroyed reactor. Against the background of the public and political debate that still rages 10 years after the accident and the widely diverging views expressed in that debate, it was gratifying that this conference of over 1000 experts from many different specialities agreed on so many things. It was concluded that the most significant radiation-induced health effect of the accident was an increase in thyroid cancer among children affected by fallout from the initial radioactive cloud. It was also concluded that there have been no measurable increases so far in the incidence of leukaemia or other blood disorders and that, except for significant stress-related symptoms, the primary indicators of health are similar in contaminated and uncontaminated areas.