https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/15/business/dealbook-dc-climate-task-force.html Sections SEARCH Skip to contentSkip to site index Business Log in Today's Paper Business|Nuclear Is Back on the Table for a Green Future https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/15/business/ dealbook-dc-climate-task-force.html * Give this article * * Advertisement Continue reading the main story Supported by Continue reading the main story Nuclear Is Back on the Table for a Green Future Shifting from dependency to energy sources that are completely sustainable, affordable and clean isn't technically feasible overnight. Can nuclear power help fill the gap? * Send any friend a story As a subscriber, you have 10 gift articles to give each month. Anyone can read what you share. Give this article * * * Read in app Oksana Markarova, Ukraine's ambassador to the United States, speaking at a DealBook D.C. task force about climate issues. Oksana Markarova, Ukraine's ambassador to the United States, speaking at a DealBook D.C. task force about climate issues. Credit...Valerie Plesch for The New York Times By Vivian Giang June 15, 2022, 8:00 a.m. ET It is the third rail of the energy debate: nuclear. With Russia's invasion of Ukraine, questions about the national security implications of oil and gas have resurfaced, prompting discussions about the most effective way to align climate investing goals with national security goals. "I think some countries fell asleep at the switch on the security part of it, and I think they have acknowledged that," David Turk, deputy secretary of energy, said last week during a discussion with business and policy leaders at the DealBook D.C. policy forum. He added that he hoped "this is not one of those wake-up calls" where "you hit the snooze and then you go back to sleep." Last year, global electricity demand was up by more than 6 percent -- the largest increase since 2010, the U.S. Energy Information Administration reported. The "exceptional demands" were in large part because of strong economic growth and colder winters and warmer summers linked to climate change, the report said. Although available renewable energy sources like wind and solar have been increasing, their contribution is still lower than the increase in global demand. For the United States, that means it may not meet its ambitious plan to have a net-zero carbon economy by 2050. That reality, along with the war in Ukraine, may mean that nuclear is back on the table -- at least in large parts of the world. Andres Gluski, chief executive of the energy company AES, said he believed nuclear power is "part of the solution because of its ability to provide capacity." But, Mr. Gluski said, while "small modular nukes are very interesting," he didn't know whether any small plants had received permits for building. "The thing is, when we're talking about climate change, how much time do we have?" he added. "If it's going to take you 20 years to get a plant built, it's not part of the solution." Others had similar reservations, agreeing that nuclear power -- an energy source that emits no carbon, but one that Americans are conflicted about -- could help fill in the gaps where renewable energy may be lacking, but that it could take years before there is commercial production from the next generation of reactors. By then, it might be too late to make a difference in rolling back carbon emissions and ameliorating the worst effects of climate change. Maria G. Korsnick, president and chief executive of the Nuclear Energy Institute, a trade group that promotes nuclear power, said that the timeline was going to be much quicker than that -- "like in the next year or two." The Russia-Ukraine War and the Global Economy --------------------------------------------------------------------- Card 1 of 7 A far-reaching conflict. Russia's invasion on Ukraine has had a ripple effect across the globe, adding to the stock market's woes. The conflict has caused dizzying spikes in gas prices and product shortages, and has pushed Europe to reconsider its reliance on Russian energy sources. Global growth slows. The fallout from the war has hobbled efforts by major economies to recover from the pandemic, injecting new uncertainty and undermining economic confidence around the world. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development warned that the war was fueling rapid inflation; world growth is expected to slow to 2.9 percent this year from 5.7 percent in 2021. Energy prices rise. Oil and gas prices, already up as a result of the pandemic, have continued to increase since the beginning of the conflict. The sharpening of the confrontation has also forced countries in Europe and elsewhere to rethink their reliance on Russian energy and seek alternative sources. Russia's economy faces slowdown. Though pro-Ukraine countries continue to adopt sanctions against the Kremlin in response to its aggression, the Russian economy has avoided a crippling collapse for now thanks to capital controls and interest rate increases. But Russia's central bank chief warned that the country is likely to face a steep economic downturn as its inventory of imported goods and parts runs low. Trade barriers go up. The invasion of Ukraine has also unleashed a wave of protectionism as governments, desperate to secure goods for their citizens amid shortages and rising prices, erect new barriers to stop exports. But the restrictions are making the products more expensive and even harder to come by. Food supplies. The war has driven up the cost of food in East Africa, a region that depends greatly on exports of wheat, soybeans and barley from Russia and Ukraine. and is already dealing with a severe drought. Western leaders, meanwhile, have accused Russia of weaponizing global food supplies with its blockade of Ukrainian grain. Prices of essential metals soar. The price of palladium, used in automotive exhaust systems and mobile phones, has been soaring amid fears that Russia, the world's largest exporter of the metal, could be cut off from global markets. The price of nickel, another key Russian export, has also been rising. * * * * * * * "We talk about things here, about large nuclear, because that's what's in our head," she said. "I will just say, you are about to see a plethora of different opportunities for nuclear." "There's still going to be a role for large nuclear," she added. But designs for small modular and even micro plants "are coming out in the next few years." Nuclear reactors designed with modular technology can be built much quicker and cheaper than conventional ones, Ms. Korsnick added. While the experts in the room said they believed nuclear energy has a big role to play globally, some said they did not think that was the case for the United States. "I think in parts of the world where coal is still king, like in China and India, and when you have very large annual average growth of demand," nuclear power could be a major player, Tyson Slocum, energy program director at Public Citizen, said. But "we're basically using the same amount of electricity in the United States today that we did over a decade ago," he said. "So building nuclear power in a sort of negative demand environment doesn't make a whole lot of sense." Participants: Oksana Markarova, ambassador of Ukraine to the United States, Embassy of Ukraine; Philippe Etienne, ambassador of France to the United States, Embassy of France; David Turk, deputy secretary of energy, Department of Energy; Justin Friedman, senior adviser for commercial competitiveness in nuclear energy, Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, U.S. Department of State; Andres Gluski, chief executive, AES; Maria G. Korsnick, president and chief executive, Nuclear Energy Institute; Erin Sikorsky, director, the Center for Climate and Security; Tyson Slocum, energy program director, Public Citizen; Daniel B. Poneman, president & chief executive, Centrus Energy; Alan Ahn, senior resident fellow for the climate and energy program, Third Way; Eric L. Veiel, co-head of Global Equity and chief investment officer, T. Rowe Price. Advertisement Continue reading the main story Site Information Navigation * (c) 2022 The New York Times Company * NYTCo * Contact Us * Accessibility * Work with us * Advertise * T Brand Studio * Your Ad Choices * Privacy Policy * Terms of Service * Terms of Sale * Site Map * Canada * International * Help * Subscriptions