The Working Group for the application of UNFC to Nuclear Fuel Resources reported in 2019 that the trigger for writing this publication was the recognition that the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development) requires a ground-up review of all resources critical for the successful delivery of the SDGs in general, but most notably SDG 7, safe affordable energy, and the role of uranium resources in realizing it, as a clean, low-carbon energy source. Any discourse on the future of the uranium industry that sets itself outside or at odds with the purposes of the 2030 Agenda and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change for a realistic 2°Celsius (2C) pathway, and, if possible, a more demanding 1.5°C goal, would be derelict in its duty to address the gravity of the situation the world now faces in regard to urgent and transformative climate action. Unless and until the sustainable energy paradigm for a low-carbon future is set, the triad of proposed benefits from SDG compliance to “People, Planet and Prosperity” will remain largely out of reach.
Regarding “People”, the objective of this report is to provide decision makers with the best technical advice on options for and benefits of the use of uranium as an energy resource as a key component in the 2°C low-carbon stabilization pathways, as called for by the SDGs. The decisions taken are not just concerned with meeting the immediate technical objectives of providing safe, affordable and accessible energy for all through the selection of a locally or nationally appropriate portfolio of energy technologies but also with how best to communicate both the potential advantages but also the related challenges of including uranium in the energy mix. Of the potential advantages, three stand out. First, of critical significance to public health and safety in urban communities, in which more than 50 per cent of the world’s population now lives, is the urgent need to reduce or eliminate the dependency on hydrocarbon fuels which are dominant sources of urban air pollution.
Secondly, as rapidly growing urban communities are experiencing ever greater stresses on land use, uranium as by some distance the densest of energy resources can contribute very significantly to reducing the percentage of land required in densely populated areas for energy generation by fuelling nuclear power plants. Thirdly, the rapidly growing evidence assembled by the conflict over land use for the achievement of food and energy security objectives is causing a major threat to biodiversity on the planet, demands a response as immediate and transformative as climate action. Of the disadvantages, one stands out by far, mistrust and fear of the real intentions of those advocating and using nuclear power. Unless stakeholders can feel reassured and that trust in the safety of nuclear power is assured, it is likely that they will turn against it. What does it take to gain and retain that trust? How can the role of uranium as an energetic resource in helping establish a new environmental-economic equilibrium that simultaneously addresses the demands of climate action, land use and biodiversity be best explained and sustained?
While some countries choose to pursue nuclear energy with a view that it can play an important role in their energy mix, other countries have decided not to depend on nuclear energy because of concerns about its medium and long-term safety, for example as related to short- to medium-term operating risks and, long-term, to waste storage and treatment. This report will assist countries which have already included nuclear energy along with other sources of low-carbon energies in their Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) explain their position in a more comprehensive manner, taking into account issues such as urban public health and land use management, while also meeting the needs of newcomer countries to nuclear fuels and nuclear energy, especially those for which the availability of national uranium resources may be the decisive factor in entering into the nuclear energy space for the first time.
More widely the report shows how integrating uranium resources into the full range of options for sustainable natural resource management as part of climate action and protecting biodiversity can create an innovative platform developing a low-carbon energy plan for sustainable development. Hence it argues that the conventional model of uranium as an energy commodity needs to give way to a new model of uranium as a “critical raw material”, as defined on the basis of potential supply risks and strategic need for meeting the objectives both of SDG 7 and SDG 13, with profound consequences for the future economics of uranium resource recovery and management.
Regarding increased “prosperity” for all as the desired outcome from the 2030 Agenda, the publication of this report as a joint undertaking of ECE and IAEA, is expected to contribute to ECE’s efforts to develop standards and best practices for sustainable energy for current and future generations. Much will depend in the coming few years on decision-makers understanding better why uranium and thorium as potentially infinite fuel resources matter so much to the future prosperity and environmental health of the planet and hence why there is so much to be gained from redesigning the uranium resource pathway both in tangible and intangible terms. Substantial and well-coordinated investment in the main intangible – the global capability to recover and use uranium safely and beneficially – will be the key to future success with a return on investment stretching out long after 2030. How the first steps towards a very significant enhancement in capabilities are already being taken in various countries around the world is one of the significant factors behind the confidence presenting this report for review and comment. Regarding tangibles, perhaps the most promising developments are those associated with developing Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) which are being designed to offer much lower investment thresholds for countries starting in nuclear power generation and an overall more affordable life cycle cost of ownership.
Among the most significant policy initiatives, bringing intangibles and tangibles together in a new paradigm, are those addressing the need for “zero waste” outcomes in all resource recovery and use projects, not just uranium. The policy initiatives include the need to rewrite the uranium narrative in a manner that meets stakeholders needs. It should also address their understandable fears and reasons for their mistrust and highlight the connectivities and co-dependencies between all available sources of energy as well as frame energy policies and good practices according to local and national needs and priorities as much as global principles. In that way, a coherent but locally differentiated set of capabilities and solutions will emerge of direct and significant benefit to the timely delivery of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
This document does not assume, still less take for granted, that uranium resources will in future be included in the set of energy resources the world chooses to rely on. However, it does assume that the argument that has been made to date for its inclusion is at best significantly under performing, and at worst is significantly flawed such that it is no longer fit for purpose. Hence, improving both the communications strategy and its core narrative(s) is perhaps the single most pressing need when it comes to addressing the questions from decision makers as to why they should persist with, and indeed expand, their investment in uranium as a sustainable, low carbon,1 energy source.
Managed & Built by I2M Consulting, LLC | © 2010-
