ARCHIVES HISTORIQUES 
DE LA COMMISSION 
 
 
 
COLLECTION RELIEE DES 
DOCUMENTS "COM" 
 
 
 
 
COM (85) 401 
 
 
 
Vol. 1985/0 153 
  
 
Disclaimer  
Conformém ent au règlement (CEE, Euratom) n° 354/83 du Conseil du 1er février 1983 
concernant l'ouverture au public des archives historiques de la Communauté économique 
européenne et de la Communauté européenne de l'énergie atomique (JO L 43 du 15.2.1983, 
p. 1), tel que modifié par le règlement (CE, Euratom) n° 1700/2003 du 22 septembre 2003 
(JO L 243 du 27.9.2003, p. 1), ce dossier est ouvert au public. Le cas échéant, les documents 
classifiés présents dans ce dossier ont été déclassifiés conformément à l'article 5 dudit 
règlem ent. 
In accordance with Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 354/83 of 1 February 1983 
concerning the openi ng to the public of the historical archives of the European Econom ic 
Community and the European Atomic Energy Communit y (OJ L 43, 15.2.1983, p. 1), as 
amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1700/2003 of 22 September 2003 (OJ L 243, 
27.9.2003, p. 1), this f ile is open to the public. Where necessary, classified documents in this 
file have been declassified in conformity with Article 5 of the aforementioned regulation.  
In Übereinstimmung mit der Verordnung (EWG, Euratom) Nr. 354/83 des Rates vom  1. 
Februar 198 3 über die Freigabe der historischen Archive der Europäischen  
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft und der Europäischen Atomgem einschaft (ABI. L 43 vom  15.2.1983,  
S. 1), geändert durch die Verordnung (EG, Euratom) Nr. 1700/2003 vom 22. Septem ber 2003  
(ABI. L 243 vom 27 .9.2003, S. 1), ist diese Datei der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich. Soweit  
erforderlich, wurden die Verschlusssachen in dieser Datei in Übereinstimmung mit Artikel 5  
der genannten Verordnung freigegeben.  
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
C0M(85) 401 final  
Brussels, 23 July 1985
NUCLEAR INDUSTRIES  
IN THE COMMUNITY
Illustrative Nuclear Programme
under Article 40 of „the Euratom Treaty  
_______________ 1984______________
to
gether with the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee
of the 30 may 1985
C0M(85) 401 final

N_0_T I C E
The Commission adopted on 22 November 1984 a document on the  
"Nuclear Industries" in the Community: Illustrative Nuclear  
Programme under Article 40 of the Euratom Treaty^*5.  In  
accordance with this Article/ the document has been submitted  
to the Economic and Social Committee for their opinion/ and  
was adopted by that Committee in its plenary session of  
30 May 1985.
This present document reproduces the text adopted by the  
Commission in 1984 accompanied by the opinion of the Economic  
and Social Committee.
<*) Doc. C0MC84) 653 final.

CONTENTS
GENERAL BACKGROUND  
A. INTRODUCTION
B*  THE ROLE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY IN THE ECONOMY  
OF THE COMMUNITY ---------
1.
 Present share of nuclear energy in the energy mix
2. The strategic importance of nuclear energy
3. The economic benefits of nuclear energy
a) the competitiveness
b) the balance of payments
c) the macroeconomic impact
C*  OBJECTIVES OF THE ILLUSTRATIVE PROGRAMME
1. The outlook for 1995-2000
2. The future in the longer term
WHAT ATTAINMENT OF THE OBJECTIVES INVOLVES:
THE COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The role of the public authorities and the electricity  
producers
2. Uranium supplies
3. The nuclear fuel industry
a) Enrichment
b) Fuel-element fabrication
c) Reprocessing and temporary storage of spent fuel
d) Radioactive wastes
4. The transport of nuclear fuel
5. The construction of nuclear power stations
ANNEX: REVIEW OF AND PROSPECTS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF  
NUCLEAR ENERGY IN THE COMMUNITY

- I -
GENERAL BACKGROUND
1. This Illustrative Nuclear Programme, presented pursuant to Article 40
(1)of the Euratom Treaty, is the third to be published by the Commission.  
Its predecessor dates back to 1972. Between the two there have been two  
severe oil crises, each followed by deep uncertainty about the outlook  
for energy in the Community.
2. Since the nuclear industry was still at an initial stage of development  
in the early 1970s, emphasis was laid in the last illustrative programme  
on the need to set up rapidly a nuclear industry infrastructure capable  
of supporting increasing use of nuclear energy.
3. Today there is a different problem. The European nuclear industry covers  
all essential aspects of nuclear power-plant construction and fuel-  
cycle services. Hence the task is now to ensure the full utilisation  
and further expansion of this industrial capacity with a view to
(1 )
Article 40: "In order to stimulate action by persons and undertakings and to
facilitate coordinated development of their investment in the nuclear  
field, the Commission shall periodically publish illustrative prog­
rammes indicating in particular nuclear energy prediction targets  
and all types of investment required for their attainment.
The Commission shall obtain the opinion of the Economic and Social  
Committee on such programmes before their ptblication."

- II -
increasing the security of the Community's energy suppLy under the  
best possible conditions. The question must, however, be viewed against  
the background of a changed situation and a new energy outlook. During  
the decade following the oil shock of 1973, major changes took place in  
the macroeconomic situation and in the structure of the Community in­
dustry, as well as in the pattern of energy demand and the efficiency  
with which energy is used in the Community. These changes and their  
implications for the future form a new framework for the development of  
the nuclear industry in the years to come.
4. During the period since the oil shock, the Commission vigorously  
promoted the development of nuclear energy as part of the Community's  
energy strategy. In this connection it suffices to recall, in addition  
to the extensive R&D programmes decided and implemented, the energy  
policy objectives for 1985 and 1990,  approved in 1975 and 1980  
respectively, and the Council Resolutions of 1980 on fast breeder  
reactors, nuclear waste management and the reprocessing of spent fuel.(2)
5. At the onset of the 1980s, when taking stock of the "nuclear aspects of  
the energy strategy", the Commission noted that the use of nuclear energy  
continued to be a fundamental option for the Community. They expressed  
this point of view to the Council in a communication of February 1982 
and, after reviewing all aspects of the nuclear industry, the Commission  
set out the measures that it intended to take in respect of each of  
them.
6. In July 1982, the Council expressed its opinion on that communication  
and stated, in particular^ :
These changes were analysed in detail by the Commission in two communications to  
the Council: C0MC84) 87 and 88 final of 29 February 1984.(2)
0J N° C 153, 9.7.1975; 0J N° C 149, 18.6.1980; 0J N° C 51, 29.2.1980.
G)
8552/F/82 (Presse 109), 13.7.1982.

- Ill -I
"The Council agrees with the Commission's analysis of the role of  
nuclear energy in the Community's overall energy strategy, on the  
understanding that it is for each Member State to make its own  
decisions on this matter at national level."
"The Council acknowledges that the development of electricity production  
from nuclear resources has economic advantages and is aware of the  
advantages to be gained therefrom by industrial operators through  
having access to competitive sources of energy."
"The Council notes the Commission's analysis of the respective roles  
of economic operators and national and Community authorities in the  
nuclear field. In this connection, it stresses that the realisation of  
nuclear energy programmes on the necessary industrial scale firstly  
requires States to make a clear political choice on the objectives  
and means to be used; the Community provides a framework within which  
these States can find useful references and a grouping whose solidarity  
can be an effective instrument."
7. It was in the same communication that the Commission announced its  
intention to resume publication of the Illustrative Nuclear Programmes.
8. PINC is a document in which the Commission describes and analyses the  
situation of the nuclear industry and sets out the prospects for its  
medium- and longer-term development. It is a frame in which to appreciate  
the cohesive nuclear policy initiatives which have been taken, especially  
decisions on investments in nuclear installations (particularly those  
referred to in Article 41 of the Euratom Treaty) and within which the  
Community's financial instruments can be brought into operation.
*
Acronym derived from "Programme Indicatif Nucléaire pour la Communauté" Illustrative  
Nuclear Programme for the Gommunity.

- IV -
PINC is also intended to be a reference and guideline document:
.  a reference for those who wish to. know and understand the facts  
about the nuclear industry within the Community;
.  a guideline for those who, in the Member States, are more directly  
involved in the economic development of the nuclear industry and  
who will find in the document the position of the Commission with  
regard to that development.
Its periodic publication at appropriate intervals will enable the  
requisite continuity of action to be ensured in the course of time,  
account being taken of developments in the overall economic context.  
Since the frequency of publication depends on the rapidity with which  
these developments occur, it is conceivable, for example, that a report  
on the execution of PINC '84 will be published in two years' time, to  
be followed, two years later, by the publication of a new PINC.
The main thrust of PINC hinges on two fundamental aspects of nuclear  
energy and points to a certain number of implications for the operators  
and, from a political standpoint, the Member States.
The first aspect is the nuclear objective for 1995 in relation to the  
perspective of the year 2000. For the Community as a whole, PINC  
estimates that the contribution of nuclear energy in 1995 will be about  
40% of electricity production and, beyond that date, it foresees an  
appreciable growth in that contribution, reaching 50% around the turn  
of the century. This energy objective would imply that the Member States  
will have taken firm decisions by 1987, at the latest, with a view  
to creating and placing in service a nuclear capacity of at least  
25 GWe between 1991 and 1995.
The second aspect relates to the more distant future. According to PINC,  
long-term security of energy supplies, in particular electricity  
generation which will be based to a large extent on nuclear power,  
presupposes that the Community's industry, in twenty years' time, will 
be able to provide the electricity producers with fast-reactor power-  
stations capable of economic performances comparable to those of the  
light-water-reactor power-stations at that time (2005).

- V -
The implications concern:
- the rôle of the public authorities and the electricity producers;
- uranium supplies;
- the nuclear fuel industry; and
- the nuclear power-station construction industry.
These implications are dealt with in the final chapter of PINC.

INTRODUCTION
It is a basic task of the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom)  
to "contribute to the raising of the standard of living in the Member  
States, ... by creating the conditions necessary for the speedy establish­
ment and growth of nuclear industries" (Article 1 of the Euratom  
Treaty).
The development of nuclear energy, therefore,js aimed at contributing  
to economic growth and industrial and technological developement. The  
role of the Community as such, and of the Commission in particular, is  
to establish and maintain an effective framework for cooperation on  
nuclear energy matters and to propose new measures where necessary.
In the case of nuclear energy, a sophisticated technology, it is  
extremely important to have available a clear and specific reference  
framework. A nuclear power-station can take a decade to plan and con­
struct. Once constructed, it must be operated in total safety for 30  
years or more. The operator must be confident that fuel and fuel cycle  
services will be forthcoming during that period and that it will be  
possible to deal with spent fuel and nuclear wastes satisfactorily.
All this requires clear political commitments to provide for continuity  
of industrial achievement and maximum utilisation of technological-, ·  f
skills. The experience acquired in the Community shows that, if these  
conditions are present, investments in nuclear energy bring returns  
which make it possible to mobilise the considerable financial resources  
required.
This PINC first of all points out the role of nuclear energy in the  
economy of the Community. The Annex "Review of and prospects for the  
development of nuclear energy in the Community" describes the  
evolution of that sector since 1973. PINC then presents the Commission's  
views as to the share of nuclear energy in meeting the Community's

-  2 -
electricity requirements up to the end of the century and, finally,  
proposes specific objectives for 1995, the target date considered  
by the Commission in defining the Community's new general energy  
objectives.
6. The Programme also deals with the continuous development and application  
of advanced nuclear-energy production technologiesyand, with the aim
of preparing in good time for the longer-term future of that sector,  
defines a specific objective for the purpose of bringing about the  
economic maturity of fast breeder reactors.
7. The Commission, however, is fully aware of the fact that the develop­
ment of nuclear energy in the Community also depends on two factors,  
among others,, which determine the public acceptance of the nuclear  
industry:
i) the safety achieved in nuclear installations and protection of  
the public health;
ii) the existence of safeguards on the use of nuclear materials.
8. The Commission is paying careful attention to both of these factors,  
which were dealt with in detail in a general communication to the  
Council on 9 February 1982:
"An energy strategy for the Community: the nuclear aspects"
(C0M(82) 36 final).
9. In addition, these factors were subsequently the subject of two  
specific Commission communications:
"The Community's role as regards the safety of nuclear installations  
and the protection of public health" (CjOM(83) 472 final of 22 July 1983);
cil on the implementation of the  
ratom and its Member States with"Report from the Commission to the Coun  
verification agreements concluded by Eu  
the International Atomic Energy Agency" (C0MC83) 36 final of  
27 January 1983).

- 3 -
The specific case of the safe transport of nuclear fuel.was dealt with in a  
communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the  
Council:
"The transport of radioactive materials in the European Community"
(C0MC84) 233 final of 26.April 1984).
Finally, the Community's research and development programmes relating  
to nuclear fission energy are chiefly concerned with the safety of  
nuclear installations and health protection and with safeguards on  
the use of materials.
It is for this reason that these topics are not reviewed further in  
the PINC.

- 4 -
B. THE ROLE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY IN THE ECONOMY OF THE COMMUNITY
1. Present share of nuclear energy in the energy mix
10. From 1973 to 1984, the nuclear contribution towards meeting the Community's  
total demand for energy increased from less than 2% to over 10%. Nuclear  
energy's share of electricity production now exceeds 25%. Furthermore,
the Community's nuclear power capacity accounts for about one third of  
worLd capacity. These figures speak for themselves and show that nuclear  
power has become an essential part of the European energy strategy.
11. On the basis of the investment programmes that are being implemented at  
present (late 1984), it may reasonably be estimated that, in 1990, the  
capacity of the nuclear power stations in service - close to 100 GWe net -  
will cover about 35% of electricity production in the Community and meet  
about 14% of the Community's overall demand for energy. This will make
is possible to easily attain the objective set by the Community in  
1980, i.e., to have nuclear energy and solid fuels together producing  
70 to 75% of the electricity by 1990.
12. This.will be a remarkable achievement. Considered against the background  
of the Community as a whole, this overall capacity does mask, however,
a considerable diversity in the national situations. In 1990, some  
countries will still not be producing any electricity by nuclear means,  
while in the same year, others will be using nuclear energy as the main  
source of their electricity. The status of the current nuclear power  
programmes in the Member States concerned is presented in the following  
table.
2. The strategic importance:df nuclear energy
13. The supply of uranium, the raw material for nuclear energy, has two  
positive aspects in political terms from the standpoint of the Community,  
which has to import three-quarters of its nuclear fuel:
i) the world uranium market is supplied by countries other than those  
which provide the Community with hydrocarbons (oil and natural gas);
ii) those countries are not situated in one and the same geographical  
area nor do they fall within one and the same sphere of political  
influence.

- 4 bi s -
The share of nuclear energy in the Comnunity's electricity and  
energy balance: present status and probable increases
|  1983 | BDFItNL'  < 
UKEUR-10
Installed nuclear  
power capacity  
(GWe)3.511.127.21.30.58.4 51.9
Share of electricity  
production  
(%)45.717.748.33.25.917.0 22.4
Share of total  
energy balance  
<%)15.06.721.61.31.66.8 8.6
1990 BDFItNLUKEUR-10
Installed nuclear  
power capacity  
(GWe)5.421.754.83.30.512.5 98.2
Share of electricity  
production  
(%)5531708627 35
Share of total  
energy balance  
(%)18.012.736.53.11.69.0 14.1

- 5 -
!P_DLa£t 2. c£L_tenns, uranium supplies at world level are based on known  
resources of ore that can be worked at an acceptable cost and are capable  
of meeting foreseeable requirements for about 20 years. As regards un­
discovered resources, it is believed that they will meet the requirements  
likely to arise during the 20 years that will follow. In order for these  
resources to be placed on the market, it is still necessary that the  
appropriate investments that are required for their identification and  
production be made in good time.
14. The use of uranium, for its part, has two important aspects:
i) Uranium can be stored in large quantities at low cost,without giving
rise to practical difficulties, on account of the great energy
density of the material. At present, there are stocks in the
Community capable of meeting the requirements of present-generation
reactor types, e.g. light-water reactors (LWRs) and gas/graphite
(1)reactors (Magnox or UNGG and AGRs), for four to five years.
ii) When it is used in these types of reactor, the uranium expends  
only a very small fraction £l - 2%) of its energy content. The  
remainder, which can be utilised only in a new reactor type, the  
fastJareecler_re_actor (FBR) at present being demonstrated, represents  
a considerable quantity of material, most of which is in the form of  
spent fuel from reactors of the present generation which has  
accumulated since the start of commercial operation. This feature  
makes it possible to consider the nuclear energy produced by fast  
breeder reactors as virtu_al_ly^ r_enewable_ energy.
3. The economic benefits of nuclear energy
15. The economic benefits of nuclear energy must be evaluated from the  
standpoint of three closely-related aspects: competitiveness, balance  
of payments and macroeconomic impact.
a) The competitiveness of electricity of nuclear origin is constantly  
being closely studied by the public authorities and the electricity  
producers, and the Commission is intimately involved in these  
evaluations. The results of the evaluations are in agreement: when  
there is an open choice between nuclear fuel, oil and coal as energy  
sources for the power station to be constructed over the next few years
UNGG. French abbreviation for "natural-uranium, gas-graphite"  
(equivalent to the British Magnox);
AGR: advanced gas-cooled reactor.

-  6 -
and intended for Large-scale and continuous electricity production,  
nuclear energy is advantageous.
(1 )16. The economic advantage of nuclear power over coal varies from one
Member State to another with the economic conditions in each country,
in particular the specific cost of labour, the scale and type of the
nuclear programme implemented and the standardisation effected, the
number of units installed on one site and the characteristics of the
site, the administrative procedures required for the various installation
phases (from construction to power run-up) and the price of the fuel used
(2)(domestic coal or imported coal)
On the basis of the study carried out in 1983, using the appropriate  
assumptions for each country in the calculations, it has been shown  
that the additional cost of electricity produced from coal in comparison  
with the cost of electricity of nuclear origin is as follows^:
Belgium 51% 
Federal Republic of Germany 74% 
France 88% 
Italy 30% 
Netherlands 36% 
United Kingdom 43%
17. As regards the breakdown of the total electricity production cost, the  
average for the Community is as follows:
Nuclear Coal
Investment 57% 21%
Operation 15% 8%
Fuel 28% 71%
(of which uranium accounts  
for less than 10%)
Total 100% 100%
The slight impact of nuclear fuel costs - particularly uranium - on the  
cost of the kWh is a factor which stabilises the cost of electricity and
(1)
Electricity produced from petrolean products is more expensive in ill countries  
than that produced from coal.
(2)
Irrespective of any effects of environmental protection regulations which may be  
important with respect to the production of electricity from coal.
G)
For the case of power stations entering into service in 1990.

- 7 -
has a moderating effect on increases in the cost of other energy  
sources.
18. The production cost of electricity of nuclear origin is characterised
by high fixed investment costs and by low variable operating costs.
The main contribution to be made by nuclear power is to "base-load
operation", in other words that of production of electricity at
maximum possible plant power for the longest possible period of the
year. This field represents appreciably more than half of the
(1 )Community's electricity production. However, the advantage of the
cost of nuclear power is now such that the nuclear power stations
remain competitive, even with a utilisation factor lower than that
adopted for evaluating the production cost of the kWh (approximately
3 000 hours/year instead of 6 500 hours/year). This considerably
increases - to over 65% - the share which nuclear power can contribute
(2)economically to meeting electricity requirements.
19. b) Independent of the cost of producing the electricity, the balance of
payments plays a major role in the economies of countries with limited in­
digenous energy resources.The proportion of this cost accounted for by  
the - presumably imported - primary energy source varies widely  
according to whether that material is uranium (accounting for less  
than 10% of production costs), coal (approximately 70%) or oil 
(approximately 80%). The assumptions concerning the long-term trends  
in the costs of these materials are certainly open to discussion and
Even if the fraction is deducted which is covered by so-called  
"cheap" electricity production (for example hydroelectric, lignite,  
etc.), the marginal cost of which is low but the available quantities  
of which are limited.
This is why control systems adapted to rapid load variations will be  
fitted progressively to the oldest reactors which have already been  
partly amortised.

-  8 -
it is easily understood that such discussions can becom e animated  
if  the impact that an error of assessment -  aLways possible in view  
of the lifetim e of a power station -  can have on cost estimates for  
o il -  and even coal-fired stations is considered. O n  the other hand,  
it cannot be disputed that a given amount of e le ctricity w ill cost  
the Community as a whole less -  even considerably Less -  currency  
i f  it  is generated by nuclear power stations.
20. In addition to the favourable effect on the balance of payments  
mentioned above, which could be termed a "passive" effect since it  
results in avoiding excessive expenditure, there is an "active" effect  
which results from exploiting -  to a greater extent than is done at  
present -  the capacity of the European industry to export power  
stations, equipment and services in the nuclear sector, particularly  
fuel cycle services.
21. c) The macroeconomic impact of nuclear energy results from the fact that
it enables e le c tric ity  to be produced at a cost that depends very  
lit t le  on fluctuations in the world energy source materials market.
The low level and the s ta b ility  of the cost promote the competitive­
ness of the e lectricity consuming industries downstream and, further­
more, naturally constitute an incentive to the wider use of electricity,  
most particularly for industrial purposes. Finally, the fact that the  
raw material (uranium) accounts for very li t t le  of the cost of  
electricity of nuclear origin m eans that a very great part of that  
cost arises from the value added by European industries.
There is also a very appreciable qualitative impact which  
results from the extremely high value of the technology employed in  
a ll phases of nuclear activity: design, workshop and on-site con­
struction, operation and maintenance. This value characterises a ll  
branches of engineering: nuclear, c iv il, mechanical, ele c tric al, .  
chemical and electronic, and also data-processing and software in­
dustries, with a spinoff effect for large industrial sectors  
in the countries concerned.

-  9 -
C . OBJECTIVES O F  T H E  ILLUSTRATIVE P R O G R A M M E
1. The outlook for 1995-2000
22. In order to serve as a useful reference point in the development of  
nuclear energy, the objectives of the programme must relate to a  date such  
that, taking into consideration the time required to construct nuclear  
installations, the corresponding decisions w ill have to be taken over
the next three years: 1985, 1986 and 1987. In this connection, the  
Commission considers that the target date of 1995 should be retained.
23. The Commission, however, acknowledges that, apart from giving precise  
quantitative objectives on which decisions are to be taken in the short  
term, it is necessary to provide the development of nuclear energy a longer  
term perspective which, in this case, w ill extend at least to the turn
of the century. Without th is , the time required to amortise the  
financial and technological efforts that such development needs, and to  
m ake these efforts pay, would be insufficient.
24. If  the present forecasts m ad e by the M em ber States prove to be correct, only
about one third of the Community's total energy requirements w ilt be met
(1 )by imported o il in 1990. However, the possibility that the Community's  
o w n  o il production m ay start to fa ll in a few years' time could create  
a  renewed upward trend in o il imports. The Community's vulnerability to  
o il market disturbances consequently requires further structural changes  
in the energy supply pattern which promote, in particular, wider use of  
e le c tric ity , the production of which is nuclear energy's essential role,
25. B y 1990, this form of energy should account for about 35%  of e le c tric ity  
production in the Community, but, on the basis of the considerations set  
out in the previous Chapter, it  should have been possible to attain a  
m uch more substantial objective by that time and the nuclear industry  
would have been in a position to construct the corresponding capacity
A s compared with 63%  in 1973.
(2)

-  10  -
without any problems. This development, however, has not occurred, as  
a result of uncertainties in the dem and for energy and owing to d iffic u ltie s  
of various origins, particularly the acceptability of nuclear energy to  
the public and the conflict between the powers of local authorities and  
national authorities. Moreover, in certain cases, prio rity w as given to  
using domestic sources of fossil fuels.
26. In view of the existance of such d iffic u ltie s , care must be taken not to  
set too optimistic a  quantitative objective. It  is for this reason that  
the Commission proposes the adoption of the following lines of development  
for nuclear energy:
(i) to produce about 40%  of Community ele c tric ity  in 1995, and
( ii)  subsequently to increase its share in e le c tric ity  production  
to 50%  around the turn of the century.
27. The analysis of the energy supply and dem and picture carried out by the  
Commission services in the Light of new  long term energy objectives in­
dicates that electricity consumption in the Community could reach 1  470  
TWh^ by 1990 and 1  650 T W h  by 1995, whereas the present level is in the  
vicinity of 1  230 TW h. It  emerges from this that the average annual growth  
rate up to 1995 w ill be about 2,3%„ This value might subsequently turn out  
to be a pessimistic one and, i f  so, the evaluation of the corres­
ponding requirements for investments in e le ctricity production might
have to be revised upward.
28. In order to exceed the 40%  share of the total e le c tric ity  production of
1  650 T W h  estimated for 1995, the nuclear power stations would have to
produce over 660 TW h. This would require that a nuclear capacity of at  
(2)least 120 G W e  be installed by that date. In comparison with the  
capacity of 98 G W e  scheduled to be in service by 1990, this m eans that
* 1  T W h  (Teraw att hour) = 1012W h  = 109 kW i = 10^ M W h  = 103 G W h .
'ihis estimate is based on the assumption of a modest increase in the average load factor  
of the Community's nuclear power stations, which  will increase from 61%  in 1982 to  
63%  in 1995. There are som e indications of a probable improvement in the load factors,  
particularly the positive results seen in the experience accumulated by the reactor  
operators and the decrease in the share of new power stations (those most beset by  
teething problems) compared with the total num ber of power stations installed. O n the  
other hand, i t  cannot be expected that a ll the nuclear power stations  will cover only  
base-load demand; this tends to Limit the achieveable load factors.

-  11 -
the net increase in the nuclear power capacity between 1990 and 1995  
w ill have to be greater that 22 G W e . Taking into account a  loss of 3 to  
4 G W e  resulting from the decommissioning of old nuclear power stations  
which is likely to take place in the firs t half of the 1990s, it can be  
seen that:
The total requirement for additional nuclear power capacity  
w ill exceed 25 G W e  between 1991 and 1995.
29. It  emerged from the Commission's consultations with the sectors con­
cerned that the development of nuclear power production capacities in  
the individual M em ber States could be expected to be as follows:
In service  
1990„ .  .  .  Cf)  Decommissioning
1990-1995N e w  capacity  
1990-1995In service  
1995
G W e G W e Reactors G w e Reactors G W e
B 5.4 0.010 1 1.3 1 6.7
D 21.7 0.016 1 3.3 3 25.0
F 54.8 1.3 3 10.9 8 64.4
I 3.3 0.460 2 8.0 8 10.8
N L 0.5 - - 1.0 1 1.5
U K 12.5 2.051 12 1.1 1 11.6
Total 98.2 3.8 19 25.6<2) 22 120.0
Should these forecasts be realised, it is evident that the  
m inim um  nuclear objective for 1995 w ill involve an intensity of effort  
which w ill vary widely from one Member  State to another.
T h e  estimate is based on an assum ed plant lifetime of 30 years. This is only a  
reference point. The power stations m ay actually be kept operating longer or be  
decommissioned earlier.
A  45%  nuclear share of electricity production by 1995 would require the installation  
of additional nuclear capacity amounting to about 40 G W e  between 1990 and 1995.

-  12  -
2. The future in the Longer term
30. The reactors of the present generation w ill be progressively improved  
and w ill continue to be constructed for several further decades. In  
parallel, other, "advanced" types of reactor should reach industrial  
maturity. Thus  high-temperature reactors (HTRs), capable of providing  
industrial heat for advanced technological applications, could eventually  
be used for the special purposes of coal liquefaction, stimulation of o il  
flow in highly viscous deposits, reduction of metal oxides, etc. It  is,  
however, the fast breeder reactors, which, in the long term, seem  most  
likely to be foremost in power production.
31. The fast breeder reactors (FBRs) which, in comparison with reactor types  
of the present generation, are likely to multiply the energy potential  
of uranium by a  factor of over 50, are undergoing technological develop­
ment in most countries which possess considerable industrial potential  
(e .g ., the USA, the U S S R  and Japan). Such development, however, is most  
advanced in the Community, where this reactor concept has reached the  
demonstration stage with a reactor possessing a capacity close to that  
of the most modern current reactors (Superphinix, 1  200 MW e).
32. The present situation in the uranium market does not require that F B R s  
be placed in commercial operation in the short term. Moreover, the  
economic performance that these reactors could attain n ow
should m ake them competitive with coal-fired power stations, but not with  
the reactors at present being constructed in the Community.

-  13 -
33. However, after the target year 2000,  it w ill be very advantageous to  
possess a reactor type, such as the FB R , which w ill be capable of  
reducing the Community's dependence on uranium imports and of setting  
a reasonable ceiling to any rise in the price of that raw material; in  
other words, a  type that w ill enable satisfactory uranium supply con­
ditions to be maintained for as long  as possible.
34. In a ll events, in view of the already very advanced stage of development  
of the F B R  type, it would not be judicious to wait until d iffic u lties  in  
the supply of uranium seemed likely to arise before preparing for the  
commercial introduction of such reactors, especially since that transition  
can be achieved with limited cost only i f  the efforts of a ll the parties  
concerned in various capacities, Member  States, producers, designers and  
constructors, are properly programmed and coordinated within the Community.
35. In consequence, the Commission proposes that investments in F B R s  have
the objective of making this type of reactor economically competitive  
by 2005.
36. B y that date (2005), the Comm unity industry should be in a position to
offer the electricity producers commercially viable F B R  power stations
capable of producing power at a  cost at least comparable to that of the
power produced by power stations equipped with traditional reactors
(1)constructed at that time.
In this event the firs t competitive F B R  power stations would enter  
into service towards 2015.

-  14 -
37. T o  this end, the appropriate industrial strategy m u st be carefully w orked out: the  
entire system which characterises the concept, including the fuel cycle, should
b e taken into consideration an d  the installations to b e ordered should b e defined.
38. The C om m ission considers that a  reasonable scenario w ould be as follows:
- econom ic and financial feasibility study of a  program m e for the construction of  
a  small number  of pow er stations to b e constructed consecutively. It w ould  
appear that four stations would b e m o st appropriate;
-  their design w ould b e progressive and m a k e  the m ost of the experience acquired
during the construction and operation of previous pow er stations, starting with
(1)Superphénix which will enter into service in 1985;
- a  plant for reprocessing their irradiated fuel elements, with a  capacity suit­
able for establishing with adequate certainty the cost of that reactor type's 
fuel cycle, would b e operational at the appropriate time.
39. In order to possess sufficient operating experience in respect of the five (5) in­
stallations covered by the program m e sketched out above.
it would b e advisable for the construction of the next F B R  pow er station
to be started in 1987 and fo r the reprocessing plant to b e in service
before 2000.
★  ★ ★
40. The decisions to be taken in the immediate future will have an  effect o n  the  
energy situation in Europe well beyond the next three decades. There is nothing  
unusual about  this if reference is m a d e  to the time constants of energy in­
dustries. The particular aspect of the proposed strategy is that it is aim ed at  
bringing about  a n  essential change within one energy sector, the nuclear sector,  
w hich achieved industrial maturity and full econom ic competitiveness only a  
decade ago. Because of that aspect it is indispensable that the investors benefit  
from the full support of the authorities, it being understood that the res­
ponsibility for the implementation of this strategy, in particular the founding  
of it , rests with them.
(1) The progressive development which should characterise the design of the four  
pow er stations in the series following o n  from Superphénix could be achieved  
in tw o m ain phases, each involving tw o pow er stations of similar design con­
structed over periods of time that are fairly close together. The positive  
effects of su ccessio n  (two design stages between Superphénix and the competitive  
pow er stations) and those of series construction (two similar pow er stations  
at each stage) w ould thus be combined, while the opportunities for international  
cooperation would be multiplied.

-  15 -
41. The agreement on cooperation, signed on 10 January 1984 by five  
Member  States (Belgium, France, Ita ly , the Federal Republic of Germ any  
and the United Kingdom), reflects that fact and show s that the States  
concerned are aware of the need for their commitment to that change.
Corollary of the longer-term objective: plutonium managem ent
42. All uranium-fuelled nuclear power stations, whether the uranium is  
natural or enriched, produce plutonium within the fuel elements. This
is the case, in particular, with P W R s  and FBRs, on which the development  
of nuclear power in the Community w ill henceforth be mainly based.
43. All the M em ber States -  and the Comm unity its e lf - have chosen the option  
of reprocessing spent  fuel elements which, among  other advantages,  
possesses that of recovering the plutonium by m eans of which the F B R s  
can m ake use of a ll the uranium's energy content.
44. Although there is a  certain measure of interdependence between the  
implementation of programmes for the construction and operation of  
nuclear power stations and that of the reprocessing plant, it is not  
possible to ensure that the flow of available plutonium w ill correspond  
exactly to the dem and arising from the F B R  programme. It  is currently  
estimated that the F B R  objective proposed above w ill absorb only part  
of the plutonium to be produced by the reprocessing plants between n o w  
and the end of the century.
45. Temporary storage of the excess plutonium can be considered, although it  
gives rise to a technical problem as a  result of the radioactive decay  
characteristics of one of the plutonium isotopes.
46. This characteristic provides an additional reason for seriously con­
sidering another use of plutonium, namely, in reactors of the present  
generation; this is termed "plutonium recycling".

-  16 -
47. This technique, which has reached the stage of industrial application
in the Community, is certainly not as efficient as the F B R  technique in
extracting energy from uranium, but it  does enable substantial savings
(1)to be made  in uranium consumption and in enrichment services.
Finally, only part of the plutonium used in this w ay is consumed, so that  
thermal recycling w ill not compromise subsequent development of the F B R  
concept.
48. Intensified intra-European cooperation in this fie ld  would m ake it  
possible to obtain the m axim um  benefit from a ll the technological ex­
perience acquired by the various Community partners and from already  
existing investments.
Amounting to about 10 to 15%  of the estimated requirements for uranium and enrichment  
services up to the year 2000; savings would be of the order of 2 to 5%  on the cost of  
nuclear kW h.

-  17 -
W H A T  A TTA IN M E N T O F  T H E  O B JE C TIV E S  INVO LVES:
T H E  C O M M ISSIO N'S RECOMMENDATIONS
49. Attainment of the objectives set out in the previous chapter, whether  
it involves the shorter-term objectives, 1995-2000, or the longer-term  
objective is within the capacity of the economies of the C om m unity  
Member  States and within the range of their technologies. It does,  
however, presuppose programming appropriate to the time scale of the  
problems raised.
The role of the public authorities and the electricity producers
50. Firstly, attainment of these objectives clearly involves continuation
of the efforts m ad e in the C om m unity by the public authorities to promote  
the development of nuclear energy. It also involves, m ore specifically,  
and with a  view to rationalising nuclear policies within the Com m unity,  
consultations between Member  States and between electricity producers  
with regard to their program m e decisions and investments. A  realistic  
price for electricity will be needed to obtain the required level of
. . .  * (Dfinancial investment.
51. Regarding investment choices, the Com m ission considers that the acquisition  
by electricity producers of holdings in nuclear power stations installed
in neighbouring countries m ust be encouraged, since it enables the increase  
in the nuclear power capacity to be spread over a  period of time in  
accordance with the specific requirements of certain countries or even  
of certain regions. The examples that already exist are very encouraging  
and indicate that a  certain amount  of program m ed reciprocity - the  
principle of "mutual investments" - will give the partners equal  
benefits.
52. In addition, the cross-frontier acquisition of holdings provides the  
industries in the partner countries with an effective m eans of achieving  
the international cooperation that has long been desired. It also offers  
the electricity producers the opportunity to obtain greater benefit from
having an interconnected grid, the capacity of that grid beinq adapted in g oo d  
time to handle thé expected volum e of power transfers.
See the report by the Com m ission services o n  the application in  
M e to b e r States of the principles of energy pricing in the C om m unity  
(C O M  84(490) of 18.9 .84.

-  18 -
53. For its part, the Commission undertakes to take every in itia tiv e  in its  
power, at the appropriate time and to the extent necessary, to further  
the application of the strategy set out in the preceding chapter. In  
particular, the nature and size of the investment needed to attain the  
objectives could imply a  requirement for both Community and national  
financial instruments.
2. Uranium s u p p lie s ^
54. A s  regards the general uranium supply situation, although the supply and  
dem and situation is known, it  is s t ill d iffic u lt to predict h o w  the market  
w ill fluctuate.
The Community is heavily dependent on outside sources for its supply of  
uranium. To mitigate the effects of uncertainties in the market on uranium  
supplies, it is desirable for these to continue to be obtained under  long­
term contracts. Such contracts can have a stabilising effect on the market  
to the benefit of both producers and consumers.
55. A s regards more specifically security of supply from the standpoint of  
resources, although companies in the Community have made  considerable  
financial investment in mining activities throughout the world, the cut­
backs in prospecting that can n ow  be observed are likely to m ake the  
Community even m ore dependent on those few countries which possess mines  
capable of being worked at low cost. It must thus be hoped that the  
decrease in expenditure on exploration, which, i f  continued, would lim it  
the necessary diversification of the Community's supply sources, is only  
a temporary phenomonen.
A n  analysis of this subject is presented in the Annex.

-  19 -
In view of the foregoing, it is desirable for the Community to im­
plement a  supply strategy capable of:
-  encouraging the M em ber States and the companies involved
. to continue their prospecting activities both within their o w n  
territo ries and outside the Community;
• to continue these activities, if necessary with Community support,
on a  scale which is independent of the state of the market at any
given moment, bearing in mind the expected requirements of the
electricity producers and the considerable lead times required to  
bring new  mines into production;
-  encouraging the companies active in this sector to pursue inventory
policies likely
. to offset market fluctuations and any interruption of supplies  
from non-Community supplier countries;
. to lessen any tensions that exist between the Community and the  
supplier countries in respect of supplies, while providing the  
latter with stable and predictable outlets for their products,  
thereby assuring them of a  reasonable return on their investments  
and of a  regular income.
The nuclear fuel industry  
Enri chment ^^
O n  the basis of existing capacities and of the investment programmes  
that are being implemented, it is estimated that the world supply of  
enrichment services w ill exceed dem and until at least the middle of the  
next decade. In consequence, decisions relating to n ew  investments,  
with the exception of those concerning the industrial-scale demonstration  
of advanced technologies that ensure a  significant reduction in costs,  
do not have to be taken before the end of this decade. The need for  
new  investments in existing processes beyond this period cannot,  
however, be excluded.
(1)
A n  analysis of this subject is presented in the Annex.

-  20  -
58. In the Long term, this sector m ay see the emergence of new  technologies  
which are more economical and provide greater fle x ib ility  in adapting  
investments to demand. For this reason, it is advisable to continue  
research and development work in this fie ld  on an adequate scale in  
the Community.
59. In view of the state of the market and of its development prospects,  
which are likely to compromise the economic v ia b ility  of the European  
undertakings in this sector, the Commission proposes that an exchange  
of views take place at Community level between the parties concerned.
In this connection, it  wishes to point out that an appropriate structure  
exists in which such an exchange of views could take place; this is  
the Standing Committee on Uranium Enrichment (C O PEN U R ) set up by the  
Council on 22 M ay 1973.
(1 )b) Fuel-element fabrication
60. 1) A s  regards the fabrication of enriched uranium oxide fuel elements,
it  is necessary to extend the calls for bids to suppliers other than  
those w h o  supplied the firs t cores as part of the order for the  
reactor.
In addition, there is an advantage in continuing the development of  
new  types of fuel elements which w ill m ake it possible to increase  
uranium burn-up and the duration of the reactor cycles.
2) The development and fabrication of uranium and plutonium mixed-  
oxide fuel elements should be vigorously pursued, firs t with a  
view to promoting commercial recycling in L W R s  of the materials  
resulting from reprocessing (uranium and plutonium) and later with  
the purpose of optimising the entire F B R  fuel cycle. In this  
connection, close cooperation between designers, fuel manufacturers,  
reprocessors and e le c tric ity  producers should be encouraged.
A n  analysis of this subject is presented in the Annex.

-  21  -
(11c) Reprocessing and temporary storage of spent fuel
61. A  Large part of the dem and for reprocessing services from users
within the Community and elsewhere is already covered by firm
contracts between Community users and service suppliers. However/
in spite of the uncertainties inherent in any estimate/ the growth
prospects are such that a  competitive market could eventually arise
in this sector, as indicated in the report by the ad-hoc Committee
(2)on the Reprocessing of Irradiated Fuel (CO R EC O M ).
(2)62. The Commission's recommendations that accompanied the publication
of the C O R E C O M  report are s t ill valid in their entirety. In particular/  
that:
-  decisions be taken and implemented as soon as possible to ensure  
that programmes for the construction of the capacities required  
for the storage of irradiated fuel be completed by the appropriate  
time;
-  a ll possible w ays of setting-up reprocessing fa c ilitie s  capable of  
coveringthe needs expressed in several Member  States be explored;
-  industrial cooperation within the Community be encouraged by  
adopting as open an attitude as possible to the question of  
technology transfers and exchanges of experience/ particularly in  
the fie ld  of plant safety.
63. Although commercial reprocessing of mixed-oxide (uranium-plutonium)  
spent fuel from existing reactors can be carried out in plants which  
reprocess uranium oxide fuel, it is necessary to continue work on  
developing methods to the stage of industrial maturity for the  
reprocessing of spent fuel from fast breeder reactors. A  demonstration  
plant/ capable of dealing with spent fuel from several FBRs/ should  
be constructed in accordance with the objectives set out above (see  
paragraph 40).
(1)A n  analysis of this subject is presented in the Annex.
(2). . . .  .  .. ________Co
mmunication from the Commission to the Council/ C0M(82) 37 final  
of February 1982.

-  22  -
d) Radioactive wastes^ )
64. The m anagem ent of radioactive wastes is covered in the PINC because it is
one of the industrial operations of the nuclear fuel cycle. The safety
aspects have been dealt with in the "Com m unity plan of action for radio-
(2)active wastes" approved by the Council o n  18 February 1980 , which covers
the period from 1980 to 1992 and which was, in 1983, the subject of a  first  
progress report
It is recalled (see paragraphs 7 to 9) that the safety aspects of nuclear  
energy, about w hich public opinion is particularly sensitive, were the  
subject of a  recent communication.
65. The m anagem ent of low- and medium-activity radioactive waste (excluding alpha-  
contaminated waste), w hich accounts for almost 9 5 %  of the conditioned waste  
produced today in the Com m unity, benefits from long industrial experience.  
However, it is obviously advisable to allow it to continue to benefit from  
technological progress.
Decisions concerning the selection and opening-up of n e w  sites for the dis­
posal of wastes in this category will have to be taken in good time.
66. Satisfactory results have been obtained with the treatment and conditioning  
of radioactive waste contaminated by long-lived alpha emitters and of  
high-activity waste (for example vitrification). It is nonetheless necessary  
to continue current research an d  development w ork in order to optimise  
these results. A s  regards the disposal of such wastes, the w ork conducted
at national and C om m unity level by the C om m ission through multiannual  
research and development program m es has m a d e  it possible to confirm the  
feasibility of setting-up storage installations in deep  geological  
formations. It is necessary to supplement and further validate these  
studies, particularly by implementing the development and demonstration  
of the techniques.
67. A  regional approach to the problem of waste disposal, involving several  
countries, could offer certain advantages insofar as it would prevent  
costly storage projects from being undertaken prematurely and o n  a n  
individual basis. S u ch  a  solution would s e e m  to be indispensable in the  
case of countries that have limited nuclear program m es.
A n  analysis of this subject is presented in the Annex.  
Official Journal of 29.2.1980, C  51.
C O M (83) 262 final.

-  23 -
The real problem arising from a  regional approach is the fact that,  
at present, no country is willing to agree to the final storage of  
waste from another country on its territo ry.
Since the countries concerned are Community Member  States, it would  
be desirable, in a  sp irit of mutual assistance, to seek solutions that  
would enable one country to store waste originating in other countries,  
while complying with the principle of equitable reciprocity in the long 
term. The application of this principle would enable storage centres  
to be set up under  the best possible conditions, taking into account  
the varying requirements of the different Member  States' nuclear  
programmes. In addition, it  would enable the most appropriate geological  
units in the European substratum to be used.
68. Studies underway at Community level, such as the definition of equivalence  
between different types of waste which is being undertaken with a  view
to setting-up specialised storage fa c ilitie s  for certain waste types  
irrespective of their origin, are an important element in a  Comm unity  
approach to the disposal of radioactive waste along the lines indicated  
above. The Commission believes that these studies should aim at providing  
concrete results which would m ake it possible to set up a  waste disposal  
system of the regional type described above.
(1 )4. The transport of nuclear fuel
69. The transport of nuclear fuel in a ll its forms -  from ore to radio­
active waste, and including, in particular, uranium hexafluoride,  
irradiated fuel elements and plutonium -  is an essential part of the  
nuclear supply system.
?0. It  is hence of v ita l importance for the Member  States to take the  
requisite measures so that the transport operations, carried out by  
specialised operators in fu ll compliance with the safety standards,  
never suffer from administrative obstacles that result in d ifficu lties  
or delays. This concern certainly applies to cross-frontier operations,  
but it  can also apply to operations within a  country.
(1)............................................................. .......A  
short analysis of this topic is contained in the annex.

-  24 -
. . .  .  (1)The construction of nuclear power stations
71. The existing situation within the Community is characterised by the  
fact that two reactor types, P W R  and FBR, have been mainly, but not  
exclusively, chosen as the basis for the development of nuclear energy  
in the foreseeable future.
72. Such near-uniformity increases the technological understanding of  
the designs in question and, as a  result, strengthens s t ill further  
the confidence already placed in them. It  should also fa c ilita te  
intra-Community trade in equipment and the implementation of joint  
construction projects. Both of these are -  in principle at least -  
permanent objectives of the Community strategy for the development  
of nuclear energy with, as a corollary, the promotion of exports.
73. it  must nonetheless be kept in mind that an essential basis of this  
strategy is the laying down o f common  design and construction rules  
based on data that have already had their valid ity confirmed in a  
considerable number  of cases.
74. The predominance of P W R s  and FBRs, together with the option of re­
cycling in the former plutonium that has not been allocated to the  
la tte r, occurs at a time when,  even in the case of Member  States with  
the m ost ambitious nuclear programmes, the prospects for the nuclear  
market are tending to look bleaker rather than brighter. The industry  
is entering a  transitional phase where the size of the market is deter-
h  mined by developments in the overall economy and not by any measures
it  m ay take. It must, therefore, progressively diversify its  production,  
in particular to m ake a  suitable place for the FBRs.
It  is unfortunate that the adaptation required by this transition has  
to take place at a  time of general excess construction capacity. This  
excess also affects conventional power stations that could otherwise  
j have provided an emergency outlet for the nuclear construction industry.
A n  analysis of this topic is contained in the annex.

-  25 -
75. A s regards the FBRs, it seem s that the present situation is favourable  
to the setting-up of an industrial structure, the style and capacities  
of which would be commensurate with the needs of the European market.  
A s  has been the case with the construction of Superphénix, there w ill  
be opportunities for those particularly qualified firms in a ll the  
countries involved.
76. The industrial rationalisation required does not necessarily have to  
result in an integrated structure, but neither should it  reject such  
a possibility from the outset.
In any case it should result in the creation of a  true common  market  
in FBRs, even though, at present, certain M em ber States are not  
seeking to construct reactors of that type on their te rrito ries.
77. it  is most desirable that the rationalisation in question, the object  
of which is to provide the industry concerned with the construction  
of FB R s in the Community with an appropriate structure, should not
be restricted to that particular sector. It  should also take account
of the P W R  sector and rationalise i t .  D ifficu lt though this task m a y
(1 )be, it  w ill have to be accomplished sooner  or later
N.B.: Rationalisation of this sort m ay involve concerted practices  
likely to co m e under Community rules on competition: the  
principle of prohibition laid dow n in Article 85 (1) of the  
E E C  Treaty implies that the Commission w ill keep a  check on  
concerted practices. The Commission may, of course, grant an  
exemption on the basis of Article 85 (3) in certain  
circumstances in view of the objects and economics of the  
sector.
( 3 )

N U C L E A R  INDUSTRIES
IN T H E  C O M M U N IT Y
Illu s tra tiv e  Nuclear Programme  
under Article 40 of the Euratom Treaty
1984
A N N E X
R EVIEW  O F  A N D  P R O S P E C T S  F O R  
T H E  D E V E L O P M E N T  O F  N U C L E A R  E N E R G Y  IN T H E  C O M M U N IT Y

C O N T E N T S
Page
1. The role of electricity in the econom y 1
2. Nuclear energy production 3
(a) Progress since 1973  3
(b) The outlook for 1990 9
3. Uranium supplies 12
4. The nuclear fuel industry (fuel-cycle services) 15
(a) Conversion 15
(b) Enrichment 16
(c) Fuel-element fabrication 18
(d) Reprocessing 19
(e) Radioactive waste 23
(f) The transport of nuclear fuel 26
5. Nuclear reactors: design and construction 28
(a) Reactor types 28
(i) The types already developed 28
( ii)  The concepts of the future 30
(b) General outlook for the industry 35
(c) Maintenance of nuclear power stations 38
(d) Decommissioning and the industry 39
5. Thermonuclear fusion 40

-  1 -
R EVIEW  O F  A N D  P R O S P E C T S  F O R  T H E  D E V E L O P M E N T  O F  N U C L E A R  E N E R G Y  IN T H E  C O M M U N IT Y
1. The role of electricity in the econom y
1. Electricity is an essential part of the Community's energy infrastructure  
and plays an increasingly important role in the economic development of the  
Communi  ty.
2. Since 1973, and in particular since 1979, there has been a  very appreciable  
decrease within the Community in the ratio of the dem and for energy to the gross  
domestic product. Since the gross domestic consumption of energy fe ll by about  
56 Mtoe between 1973 and 1983 whereas the gross domestic product increased by  
208 000 million E C U  (at 1975 value), the rate of energy intensity (the quantity  
of energy required for the production of one unit of value added) dropped from  
0.83 kgoe/ECU (1973) to 0.66 kgoe/ECU (1983).
3. This development is a  result of the energy savings achieved in the
"residential and te rtia ry ", "transport" and "industry" sectors and of the  
profound modification of the structure of economic activity: decrease in
the share of the activities which are large consumers of energy and increase  
in the share of the services.
4. A s  regards electricity consumption, there has been an opposing trend  
which reflects an increase in the share of e lectricity in total energy  
consumption and a  greater contribution by electricity to the Community's  
economy. In 1973, 0.94 k W h  w as consum ed for every E C U  of the G N P . In 1983,  
that figure increased to 0.99 kW h/ECU.
5. Maintenance of the relationship between economic growth and the growth  
in electricity consumption depends on market factors such as:
-  the future opportunities for specific uses of electricity (lighting, power  
and traction, certain industrial processes, control functions, e tc .);

-  2 -
the rate of electricity savings achievable through the introduction of  
more efficient equipment;
- the cost of e le c tric ity , the trend of relative energy prices and the  
resulting competitiveness of electricity in applications in which it is  
capable of replacing other energy sources (for example heating, air  
conditioning and transport).
The role of electricity w ill also depend on the choice which certain  
M em ber States w ill make, particularly as regards the development of  
nuclear energy which can be delivered only through that medium.

-  3 -
2. Nuclear energy production
(a) Progress since 1973
6. At the time of the firs t o il crisis in 1973-74, the industrial-scale  
application of nuclear energy w as s t ill in its in itia l stages. With the  
rapid rise in o il prices, concern about  the costs of producing electricity  
by using o il reinforced existing concern about security of supplies.
A s  a result, ambitious programmes were put in hand to reconvert to coal  
and to m ake large-scale use of nuclear energy in the e le ctricity generating  
industry.
7. Neither the e le ctricity demand  prospects on which the nuclear programmes  
were based nor the nuclear construction programmes have turned out as expected.  
The downward revision of the estimates of e lectricity dem and and so m e adverse  
public opinion resulted in considerable reductions in the nuclear programmes.
8. In spite of these developments, nuclear energy has significantly increased  
its role over the last ten years. In  1973, only 5 %  of e le ctricity production  
in the Community w as of nuclear origin, by 1978 that share had doubled to  
1 0 %  of the total and reached 22.4% in 1983.
9. The increasing importance of nuclear energy has been particularly  
evident in the Community in comparison with developments in the other main  
industrialized countries such as the United States and Japan (see Fig. 1).  
In 1973, the shares of e lectricity production in the Community and the

-  4 -
United States accounted for by nuclear energy were approximately equal
(4%  and 5% , respectively)· In Japan that share w a s  som ew hat less (2%).
In 1983, the share of nuclear energy in the Com m unity reached 22.4% as
already mentioned, whereas in the United States and Japan it did not
1exceed 12.6% and 18% , respectively.
10. Total (net) nuclear generating capacity in the Com m unity increased
2from 10 G W e  in 1973 to 52 G W e  in 1983. This increase occurred mainly in  
France (+ 24.3 GW e), but there were also significant capacity additions in  
the Federal Republic of G erm any (+ 8.8 GW e), the United K ingdom  (+ 4.1 G W e )  
and Belgium (+ 3.5 G W e ) (see Fig. 2).
11. These developments had a  substantial impact o n  the Community's energy  
balance. W hereas nuclear energy in 1973 accounted for only 2 %  of total  
energy consumption, its contribution had increased to 9 %  in 1983. Together  
with energy conservation efforts, the development of North Sea oil production  
and increased use of natural gas, nuclear energy has helped to reduce the  
Community's dependence o n  imported oil from 6 2 %  in 1973 to 3 2 %  in 1983.
12. This overall progress, however, m asks very considerable differences  
between the M em b er States (see Fig. 3).
13. Strongly determined to promote the development of nuclear energy,
France and Belgium have already carried out large-scale restructuring of  
their electricity production systems. In 1983, they produced 4 8 %  and 46% ,  
respectively, of their electricity from nuclear energy as com pared with 8 %  
and 0.2% in 1973.
14. Progress has also been achieved in the Federal Republic of G erm any  
and the United Kingdom , although the program m es in those countries have  
suffered significant delays. In Germany, the nuclear share of electricity  
production increased from 4 %  in 1973 to 1 8 %  in 1983, while in the United  
K ingdom  the corresponding increase w a s  from 9 %  to 17% .
15. Only m odest increases in the contribution of nuclear energy have been  
achieved in Italy and the Netherlands, from 2.2% of the electricity produced  
in 1973 to 3.2% in 1983 in the case of the former and from 2 %  in 1973 to 6 %  
in 1983 in the case of the latter.
Statistical Office of the European Communities.  
G W e : Gigawatt electric =  1  000 M W e .

- 5  -
Fig. 1
Nuclear Share in Electricity Production in  
EUR-10, US A , Japan
EUR-10 USA Japan  
N------------------ r v---------------------- '
19
7322.A7o
12.67.187.
EUR-10 USA Japan  
N--------------------- v---------------------- '
19
83
Source: Statistical Office of the European Communities

-  6 -
Fig. 2
Nuclear Generating Capacities  
in the Community
-50 GWe
u
03CL
03C J
c nc
·* - ·
03Ι­Ο ;cω
O- 2 0
03jb
u3-1 0
F.R.otX>
Q  -IT A L Ÿ 'ÎT nÊ' HERLAND
1973FRANCE
O P T E D
KINGDOM
T T T T T T tTTT
BELGIUM
i >  i i i i I 1FRANCE
UNITED-
KINGDOM
•ΝΕΤΗERLANDrm T T T iT T
BELGIUM
ITALY100 GWe
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
NFTHFRl AND 0
1983 1990
Source: Statistical Office of the European C om m unities (years 197i a n d  1 9 C _ > )
Conir.iission's estimate (year 1990)

Fig. 3
Nuclear Share in Electricity Production in the Community
and in the Member States
Solid fuels share in electricity production in the Community and in the member states tx
E U R -1 0 B DK D F GR IRL I L NL UK
1973 (2) 40 78". 2 2". a 3 57? 63.0 •ïçÇ f; 34.7 24.4" 3.8 36 7& 6~7o~63.0 '
1983 (2) 46 3 1 95 63.5 20 64 21.5 13.0 35 25 71.5
1990(3) 4 1 34 90 54 14.5 y 80 55 24 63 42 66
(1) Hard coal, Brown coal and derived gases
Source: S ta tistic a l O ffice of the European Communities (1983 data are provisional)  
(3) Source: M em ber States' forecasts

-  8 -
Four Member  States, namely Denmark, Ireland, Greece and Luxembourg, have  
not adopted nuclear energy programmes.
16. There are various explanations for this disparity:
- public opposition of varying intensity to nuclear energy;
- relations between central government and local authorities, which could  
be better in so m e cases;
- the use of a  fossil source of domestic energy for electricity production
in certain M em ber States, particularly the Netherlands, the Federal Republic  
of Germany and the United Kingdom.

-  9 -
(b) The outlook for 1990
17. In the context of their joint efforts to reduce the Community's  
dependence on o il, the M em ber States have agreed that electricity production  
should be based mainly on solid fuels and nuclear energy from the 1990s onward.
18. According to the M em ber States' forecasts for 1990, the switch from o il
to nuclear and solid fuels, already well under w ay in the electricity
production sector, w ill continue throughout the present decade, mainly owing
to the increase in nuclear energy production (+ 83% ) and, to an appreciably
lesser extent, of coal production (+6%) over the present levels (1983).
A s  a result, nuclear energy and coal should be contributing equally to 71 %
1of net electricity production in the Community by the early 1990s.
19. B y the end of 1983, there were 95 nuclear reactors in the Community  
with a  total capacity of 52 G W e . B y  1990, 128 reactors with a  total capacity  
of 98 G W e  should be in operation in the Community. Although the risk of  
further delays in the nuclear programmes cannot be ignored, there is a  good  
chance that this capacity w ill actually be available by 1990, as a ll new  
reactors planned for entry into service by that date are already under  
construction.
20. Nuclear energy production should represent 144 million tonnes of o il  
equivalent (Mtoe) and be sufficient to cover 1 4 %  of the total energy  
requirements in 1990. This m eans that, within the Community, nuclear energy  
production would reach the sam e level in primary energy terms as hard coal  
production (144 Mtoe) and exceed production both of natural gas (114 Mtoe)  
and of o il (106 Mtoe). This stresses s t ill further the importance of  
nuclear power as an energy source for the Community.
The objective for the Community is that, by 1990, 70-75% of primary  
energy inputs into electricity generation should be provided by solid fuels  
and nuclear energy. Measured on this basis, solid fuels and nuclear energy  
should account for 81%  of electricity generation in 1990 according to M em ber  
States' forecasts. If  this is measured in relation to net electricity  
production, which is the point of comparison of most interest to the  
electricity sector and that chosen throughout the illu s tra tiv e  programme,  
a combined share of 71%  is obtained for nuclear energy and coal for the  
sam e situation.

-  10  -
21. The upturn in the contribution of nuclear energy w ill occur exclusively
in those M em ber States which already have a  large-scale nuclear energy  
programme, chiefly France (+27.6 GWe), the Federal Republic of Germ any  
(+10.7 G W e ) and the United Kingdom  (+4.2 GWe). In this decade, the existing  
disparities between the M em ber States as regards the use of nuclear energy  
w ill continue to widen. In view of the long lead times involved in nuclear
pow ei—plant programming, it w ill not be possible to reverse this trend before
1990. This should be a  primary concern of M em ber States which, at that time,  
w ill s t ill be largely using o il and imported natural gas for electricity  
production.
22. O n  the other hand, by the end of this decade, it is likely that the  
nuclear power production capacity in certain M em ber States such as France w ill  
have increased rapidly until it  is in excess of what is needed to meet the  
base-load dem and for e lectricity up to which point the competitive advantage of  
nuclear power is at its greatest. In such a  case, it would be advantageous
to broaden the market for base-load electricity supplies in order to improve  
the economics of nuclear electricity production.
23. In this context, it is interesting to note that certain States share
investments (acquisition of holdings in nuclear power stations) and share
the e le ctricity produced. This practice is an advantageous variant of  
cross-frontier electricity sales, which, in any case, should be encouraged  
whenever it enables supply conditions to be improved from the two standpoints  
of price and security.
It should be noted, however, that progress m ade in nuclear plant design and  
operation n ow  permits nuclear power plants to be used also for "load following".

-  11  -
24. Lastly, as regards the prospects for nuclear e le ctricity generating  
costs, the forecasts m ade by the Community's electricity producers, in  
which the Commission w as also involved, show  that the cost per k W h  of  
nuclear electricity generated by plants to be placed in service in 1990  
is less than that of electricity produced with coal and m u ch  less than that  
of electricity produced with petroleum products. These estimates also show  
that the fuel cost accounts for Less than one third (28%) of the total cost  
of the k W h  (see paragraphs 16 and 17 of PINC). The shares of the various  
components that go to m ake up the fuel item are as follows:
- Natural uranium :  3 0 %
- Conversion :  2 %
- Enrichment :  30 %
- Fabrication :  1 2 %
- Reprocessing : 30%*
- Materials recovered
during reprocessing :  - 4 %
N.B. The above are average values within quite large ranges because the  
calculation assumptions varied from one producer to another.
It is apparent from this breakdown that the raw material for nuclear fuel,  
i.e . natural uranium, accounts for less than 10 %  of the total cost of the  
k W h  (30%  x  28%  = 8.4%).
The reprocessing item includes, among  other things, v itrific a tio n  of fission  
products and the conditioning, transport, interim storage and final disposal  
of waste.

-  12  -
3. Uranium supplies
25. Uranium is a  strategic material subject to national controls, the  
only significant use of which is in electricity generation; the uranium  
market, which c a m e  into existence relatively recently, is naturally very  
sensitive to developments in the field of nuclear energy. Uranium possesses  
very great energy density and physical and chemical characteristics which  
m ake it easy to store. It is thus possible, to store m u c h  greater quantities  
of energy than is the case with fossil fuels.
26. The uranium market has been characterized over the three decades of  
its existence by two periods of intensive growth (1959 and 1978), separated  
by a  sharp depression (1972) and followed by a  sudden  drop in prices in  
1983-84, which w a s  accompanied by a  drop in production. In this context,  
the existence of considerable stocks of uranium is such as to influence  
the market.
27· Supplies to the Com m unity over the next decade will account for virtually  
one-third of the uranium requirements in the western world, while those to
A
the United States will account for a  further third. The Com m unity m eets
almost all these requirements by m ean s of long-term contracts. European
industry has considerable interests in the major uranium-producing areas
and, in the exporting countries, it contributes towards the production of
quantities of uranium of the sa m e  order of magnitude as all the Community's
2import requirements. However, this should not be taken to m e a n  that the  
Com m unity has unlimited access to these potential supplies, since the export  
of uranium is subject to political conditions.
28- The uranium mining industry is a  particularly concentrated industry,  
with six countries (USA, Canada, South Africa, Australia, Niger and Namibia)  
holding 8 0 %  of the reserves that can be worked at a  cost of less than $80/kg U  
and accounting for 9 0 %  of world production. Som e  50 companies are involved in  
uranium production (most of them  American), and five companies (Cogem a,
France; RTZ, United Kingdom; Nufcor, South Africa; Energy Resources of  
Australia; and Keylake Mining, Canada) control over 6 0 %  of the world  
production capacity.
Requirements in 1990 can be estimated as 17 500 t/U for the Community,
16 800 t/U for the United States and 16 200 t/U for the rest of the world.
It is estimated that, in 1990,  the Community's production capacity, mainly  
located in France, will be 4 000 t/U; it will cover close to 2 5 %  of  
requirements at that time, the remaining supplies (75% ) having to be imported.

-  13 -
29. Most of the commercial transactions in uranium (about 90%, this proportion  
being greater in the Community) are conducted under long-term contracts.
"Spot" transactions account for the remainder. In view of the existing  
situation, which is characterized by substantial stocks and the closure
of unprofitable mines, a "secondary market" has been created which is  
slowing dow n the recovery of uranium prices. The drop in prices on the  
"spot" market, although it m ay appear beneficial in the short term to the  
buyers, its e lf gives rise to risks for the future, since the producers,  
deprived of financial resources, w ill sharply decrease their prospecting  
expenditure. A s  regards long-term contracts, the prices involved are Less  
subject to sudden change and the general trend which is n ow  emerging is as  
follows: to avoid, on the one hand, excessive commitments on the part of
the buyers which would result in periods of surplus likely to depress the  
market and, on the other hand, to enable producers' profits to be stabilized  
in order to ensure regular supplies.
30. A s  regards the conditions governing uranium supplies, it should firs t  
of a ll be kept in mind that the producer and/or consumer countries can be  
divided into countries which are solely producers (Australia, Niger, G abon  
and Namibia), countries which are producers and low-level consumers (Canada  
and South Africa), countries which are both producers and consumers (France  
and the U S A ) and countries which are solely consumers (other Community  
M em ber States).
A m o n g  the producing (and exporting) countries, policies for development  
of the uranium mining industry m ay be widely influenced by concerns relating  
to the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons or by the desire to obtain  
substantial revenue (in the case of developing economies). These factors  
give rise to a wide diversity of supply conditions affecting countries  
which import uranium.
31. Although the western world's uranium production capacities in operation,
V
under construction or planned at the end of 1983 are sufficient to cover  
requirements up to the middle of the next decade, the present cut-back in  
exploration must not be treated lightly in view of the considerable time  
(about ten years) required to bring a  uranium mine into production.
World uranium output in 1983 amounted to 37 200 t , and the world production  
capacity by 1990 can be estimated as 50 300 t.

-  14 -
32. The world's resources of Low-cost uranium that are know n at present  
are capable of covering the western world's requirements for about 20 years,  
and half of them are located in Canada, Australia and South Africa.
However, the concentration of resources in such a  small number of producing  
countries and the cut-back in prospecting which followed the drop in prices  
could, if  they were to last, run counter to any policy of diversification  
and thus of security of supply. It is thus a  matter of concern for those  
M em ber States that are implementing a nuclear power programme and are heavily  
dependent on outside sources of supplies.
This does not take account of the conditions imposed by certain producers  
which are likely to affect the price paid by the consumers (taxation,  
floor price fixed by the governments, etc.) and to restrict the use of  
uranium.
(4)

-  15 -
4. The nuclear fuel industry (fuel-cycle services)
32 bis. The firms within the Community have developed an industrial  
potential in respect of a ll stages of the fuel cycle downstream of uranium  
production, the latter being mainly carried out outside the Community  
{see paragraph 27 above):
- uranium conversion;
- uranium enrichment;
- fuel fabrication;
-  storage and reprocessing of irradiated fuel;
-  management and disposal of radioactive wastes;
- transport of nuclear materials.
(a) Conversion
33. Conversion, which accounts for only a small part of the total fuel-cycle  
cost (2%), is nonetheless an essential stage in the cycle and possesses
its o w n  specific industrial characteristics.
34. Five companies are currently carrying out conversion operations in the
western world, two of them within the Community: British Nuclear Fuels Ltd.,
in the United Kingdom, and Comurhex, in France. In 1982, the average rate  
of u tiliza tio n  of such installations throughout the world w as about 80% .
35. 55%  of the capacity available within the Community is enough to cover  
the Community's o w n  requirements. The rate of u tiliza tio n  of the European  
installations solely to cover the Community's o w n  internal requirements  
should increase gradually to 75%  by 1990. The conversion industry is also  
an exporting industry which meets the requirements of European countries  
outside the E E C  and those of non-European countries.
The European industry also carries out conversion of uranium recovered  
during reprocessing.

-  16  -
36. It  m ay thus be said that conversion requirements within the Community  
w ill be adequately met. Furthermore, the capacities can be increased rapidly,  
if  necessary, by expanding existing plants.
37. However, the European companies in this sector w ill in future have to  
cope with keener competition from certain uranium-producing countries which  
insist, or try to insist, on their uranium being sold in forms that have  
been processed beyond the ore-concentrate stage.
(b) Enri chment
38. Uranium enrichment is an activity of considerable economic and po litical  
importance. This stage is responsible for about 30%  of the total cost of the  
fuel cycle in the case of reactors fuelled with enriched uranium, which  
account for almost the entire installed nuclear capacity within the Community.
39. Until 1979, the Community w as almost completely dependent on outside  
suppliers for its enriched uranium. The United States dominated the world  
market until the U S S R  entered the commercial scene in the early 1970s.
40. This situation has changed fundamentally since the setting-up of two
multinational groups for enrichment within the Community: Eurodif and Urenco.
The entry into service in 1979 of the Eurodif plant, the capacity of which
is 10.8 million separative work units (S W U ) per year or 40%  of the American  
capacities, and the current phased implementation of the investment programme  
decided on by the Urenco group m ake it possible, not only to meet the  
Community's requirements, but also to possess capacities sufficient to export  
this very high value-added service. In consequence, imports of enriched  
uranium have decreased considerably from the 100%  needed to meet requirements  
in the 1970s to less than 25%  in 1983.
B y 1983, these investments had resulted in a  capacity of about 1  million S W U .

41. Industrial competition is extremely tough on a ll the world markets owing  
to the extent of the existing production capacities. At present, it  
opposes American and European producers, and it is probable that the  
Japanese w ill join the fray within the next decade. The present  
enrichment service capacity available on the world market, about
42 million SWU/year, w ill probably continue to remain in excess of  
requirements until the middle of the next decade, w hen those requirements  
w ill have increased from about 25 million SWU/year today to over  
40 million SWU/year.
42. Furthermore, the conclusion of major long-term enrichment contracts
1with the U S D O E  in the 1970s, under conditions fixed by the suppliers  
which included the obligation to sign long-term contracts at least eight  
years before firs t delivery, resulted in the building-up of substantial  
stocks of enriched uranium by the users, and this has led to the emergence  
of a  secondary market. This market, on which the electricity producers  
sell their excess quantities, is at present characterized by substantial  
discounts in comparison with the sole o ffic ia lly  published price (that of  
the American producers).
43. Research under w ay in the fie ld  of enrichment gives grounds to  
believe that new  technologies could m ake it possible within the next  
decade to reduce production costs significantly.
United States Department of Energy.

-  18 -
(c) Fuel-element fabrication
44. This stage comprises the operations which result in the production  
of complete fuel elements ready to be inserted into reactors and is  
responsible for about 12 %  of the cost of the fuel cycle.
45. In the case of light-water reactors, which account for over 75 %  of
the installed capacity, fuel-element fabrication reached industrial maturity  
several years ago.
46. At present, there is substantial excess capacity in the Community, and  
a  further capacity expansion w ill not be necessary before 1990. Since the  
period required for constructing a plant is less than five years, a  
decision to m ake new  investments in this sector should not have to be taken  
for so m e years to come.
47. Although a  certain opening of the uranium fuel-element fabrication  
market has recently been discernible in the Community, the industrial  
structures are s t ill predominantly national.
48. A s  regards meeting internal requirements, the European market is  
virtually self-su fficien t, and this situation w ill continue as long as  
the European producers possess sufficient industrial and development  
capacity to maintain their hold on the market in the Community M em ber States.
49. The industrial expertise in fabrication acquired in the Community should  
in future enable the manufacturers to obtain a  greater share of orders on  
markets outside the Community. However, it can be seen that there is also  
worldwide excess production capacity and competition is very keen on a ll
the export markets.
50. The cladding and certain structural components of the L W R  fuel element  
are m ade of zircalloy, a  zirconium alloy. A s  regards production of  
zircalloy elements, the plants within the Community have been capable of  
meeting requirements so fa r, and it is possible to increase production  
capacities rapidly as soon as it becom es necessary in order to satisfy  
requirements up to 1990.

-  19 -
51. The fabrication of plutonium fuel elements requires special  
installations. The existing plants are low-capacity plants capable of  
meeting current requirements arising from the operation of pilot and  
industrial-scale demonstration fast breeder reactors and from plutonium  
recycling activities in light-water reactors (thermal recycling).
52. The existing plants have m ade it possible to acquire the technical  
experience needed in order to be able to construct larger units for the  
development of a fast breeder programme and of a  large-scale programme for  
the thermal recycling of plutonium.
53. The fabrication of fuel elements for the family of high-temperature  
reactors at present being developed has reached industrial maturity. The  
existing plant in the Community possesses a capacity sufficient to meet  
current requirements. The available technology can be applied to plants  
with a greater capacity.
(d) Reprocessing
54. Since the early days of nuclear energy, reprocessing has been  
considered as an essential stage in the nuclear fuel cycle, since it  
enables the entire energy content of uranium to be exploited by successive  
recycling of the residual uranium, an operation m ade possible through
the use in fast breeder reactors of the plutonium generated during  
irradiation of the fuel. Moreover, the recycling in thermal reactors of  
the uranium and plutonium recovered through reprocessing also has  
considerable potential, since it allows uranium consumption and the use  
of enrichment services to be reduced.
Lastly, reprocessing fa c ilita te s  radioactive waste management, since it  
enables the fission products contained in the irradiated fuel elements  
to be separated and treated selectively in accordance with their  
specific properties.

-  20  -
55. Considerable experience has been acquired in the Com m unity with  
the industrial-scale reprocessing of metal fuel from natural-uranium- 
fuelled nuclear power stations. This experience derives from the  
reprocessing of the approximately 35 000 tonnes of uranium so far  
dealt with in France and the United Kingdom .
56. The reprocessing of enriched uranium-oxide fuel from m odern  
nuclear power stations has reached a  stage at which it can be applied  
on an industrial scale.
2O n  the one hand, about 1  800 tonnes of fuel of this category from  
reactors throughout the world have been reprocessed to date,  
three-quarters of it in the Community, mainly in the French installations  
at La H ague (920 t ) , in the G erm an and British installations and  
at Eurochemic (see the following paragraph).
Furthermore, the continued improvement of technical and economic  
performance and of the safety of the operating installations sh o w s  
that reprocessing has n o w  proved its e lf.
In the Community, this sector has hence been capable of solving the  
problems arising from the technical, regulatory and financial constraints  
encountered in the past which often continue to beset reprocessing  
elsewhere in the world.
57. The,experience thus acquired has enabled the French, British  
and G erm an reprocessors^ to implement the following projects in the  
Com m unity:
- two plants with a  capacity of 800 tonnes per year each in France,  
namely the reconstruction and expansion of the existing plant with  
a  concomitant increase in its capacity to 800 tonnes per year  
(U P  2-800) and the construction of a  n ew  unit of the sa m e  capacity  
(U P  3), at present under w ay at C a p  de la Hague;
The quantities involved in reprocessing are assessed as tonnes of  
.uranium contained in the fuel elements.
'T h e  electrical energy produced per tome of enriched uraniun-oxide fuel is about ten  
times as great as that produced per tome of natural uranium metal fuel. In other  
words, to produce the sam e quantity of electricity, a nuclear plant operating on metal  
.fuel would generate ten times as m u ch  spent fuel as one operating on enriched oxide fuel,  
’■ fiese companies are also partners in the com pany "Uhited Reprocessors", which w as set ip  
in 1971 and had its statute approved in 1975 by the Com m ission pursuant to the rules on  
competition set out in the E E C  Treaty in order to facilitate the harmonious growth of  
the uranium-oxide fuel reprocessing inckjstry.

-  21  -
- a plant with a capacity of 350 t per year, the construction of  
which is scheduled to start in 1985 in Germany;
- a plant with a capacity of 1 200 t per year (Thorpe) which is  
under construction at Sellafield in the United Kingdom.
The projects already under way are financed in advance, through  
contracts, by customers on a pro rata basis in respect of the  
services to be provided over a period of ten years of plant  
operation. To these projects can be added the Belgian plan to  
modernize, expand and place in service again the Eurochemic plant,  
which became the property of Belgium in 1978.
On the basis of the start-up schedules put forward for the various  
projects, it may be expected that about 4 000 tonnes and 12 000 tonnes  
of oxide fuel will have been reprocessed in the Community by 1990  
and 1995, respectively.
58. The plants now available within the Community are used, on the  
one hand, for the reprocessing of fuel discharged from nuclear  
power stations in the Community (14 000 tonnes in 1990 and  
25 000 tonnes in 1995) and, on the other hand, for the reprocessing  
of fuel from non-Community countries (about 7 000 tonnes to be  
delivered between now and 1990).
In view of the way in which reprocessing capacities have been expanding  
and of the quantities of fuel to be dealt with (those arising in  
the Community and those from non-Community countries to be reprocessed  
under contract), it may be estimated that about 17 000 to 20 000 tonnes  
of irradiated fuel will have to be stored in the Community during  
the 1990-95 period.
Part of that fuel is already the subject of reprocessing contracts  
and, in consequence, will be reprocessed after 1995. As regards  
the remainder of that fuel, any reprocessing thereof will depend  
on the decisions to be taken by the electricity producers on a case-  
by-case basis.

-  22  -
59. Thanks to the interim storage facilities, it will be possible  
to store such quantities of fuel in the Community. At present,  
the reprocessors have begun to construct, or are planning, large-  
scale interim-storage capacities on the sites of the reprocessing  
plants. In addition, many electricity producers have increased  
the storage capacities of existing spent-fuel ponds at operating  
power stations, and the most recent plans for new power stations  
often make provision for storage capacities capable of accommodating  
fuel discharged over a period of up to ten years or even more of  
powei station operation. Finally, storage facilities located on  
sites separate from those of reprocessing plants or of nuclear power  
stations are already in service or are being constructed in the  
Community.
60. The cost of the commercial reprocessing of oxide fuel accounts  
for about 30% of the cost of the fuel cycle, allowance being made  
for the conditioning of the wastes and any credit from the recovered  
fissile materials.
61. As regards the fast breeder reactors, a modern pilot plant for  
the reprocessing of irradiated fuel from reactors of that type is  
under construction at Marcoule (TOR). This plant was preceded by  
pilot installations which, for several years, ensured that the  
Dounray reactor in the United Kingdom and the Phenix reactor in  
France could operate with a virtually closed cycle.

- 23 -
(e) Radioactive waste
62. AIL industrial activities, including the use of nuclear energy, give  
rise to residues, some of which can be recovered and recycled, while  
others are considered as wastes. The radioactive wastes arising from  
the use of nuclear energy are considered here.
63. To facilitate understanding, radioactive wastes are here divided into  
two main categories:
1- high-activity wastes, arising from the reprocessing of spent fuel and  
containing about 99% of the radioactivity produced during uranium  
fission in reactors;
- low- and medium-activity wastes, arising during the operation of nuclear  
power plants and other fuel-cycle installations.
The low- and medium-activity wastes can be further subdivided according  
to whether or not they contain a significant quantity of long-lived  
alpha emitters.
64. The processing and conditioning of low- and medium-activity waste  
(with the exception of alpha-contaminated waste), which account for  
almost 95% of the volume of the conditioned waste produced today in the  
Community, benefit from experience acquired over 30 years. Several  
processes for reducing the volume of such wastes adapting their  
chemical composition and incorporating them into solid structures  
(matrices) are commercially available.
65. Certain Community Member States have already acquired considerable  
experience with the disposal of these wastes, while others only store  
them pending subsequent disposal. No major problem should be '
experienced in this field.
If irradiated fuel is not reprocessed, it is considered to be high-activity waste.  
Disposal of such waste gives rise to problems which differ from those encountered  
in the management of high-activity waste that has been reprocessed. Only  
limited experience with the processing, conditioning and disposal of irradiated  
,fuel has so far been acquired anywhere in the world.
'Stir-surface land disposal and sea disposal undertaken in the context of the  
multilateral consultation and surveillance mechanism established by the OECD.
The latter form of disposal is at present the subject of a de facto moratorium.
(N.B.: these wastes are of low and medium activity).

- 24 -
66. Technologies are available for the processing and conditioning of  
waste contaminated by long-lived alpha emitters and for high-activity  
waste, and some of these technologies have arrived at the industrial-  
application stage.
This is the case, for example, with the vitrification of waste  
separated during the reprocessing of irradiated fuel.
67. There has been no disposal of such wastes as yet. The first  
installations for the disposal of alpha-contaminated wastes at  
intermediate depth in geological formations will enter into service
in some Member States at the beginning of the 1990s. Various options  
for the diposal of high-activity waste are being studied by the  
Member States and the Community, particularly disposal in deep-lying  
continental geological formations such as salt, clay and crystalline  
rocks, which are sufficiently abundant throughout the Community.1  
The results obtained from research and experiments in this field  
confirm that disposal in these types of formations is feasible.
At present, waste of this type, some of it already conditioned, is  
stored temporarily in special facilities. The need to allow  
high-activity waste to cool down for periods that can be as long  
as several decades in order to obtain optimum conditions for final  
storage would seem to rule out the need for industrial-scale  
application of final-disposal methods before the end of this century.
68. The costs of processing and conditioning, including, where  
necessary, the cost of interim storage on the site where the waste  
was produced, are known accurately enough and are accounted for at  
the stages in the fuel cycle where they arise.
It should be noted that certain Member States without nuclear power  
programmes are also interested in this subject. In particular,  
Denmark has studied the feasibility of waste disposal in salt domes  
situated within that country.

- 25 -
As regards the cost of waste disposal, particularly that arising from  
the disposal of high-activity waste in deep-lying geological  
formations, the converging conclusions of economic studies carried  
out in several countries indicate that it will not exceed
A3% of the production cost of the nuclear kWh.
69. In accordance with the Council resolution of 18 February 19802  
approving a plan of action, the Commission is administering, in the  
radioactive waste sector, a major Community programme - including,  
in particular, research work - which has been coordinated with the  
activities of the Member States; it is also associated through  
specialized agreements with certain non-Community countries.
As part of this plan of action, the Commission also has to analyse  
continuously the situation in this sector. The first exhaustive  
analysis of the present situation and prospects was recently  
forwarded to the Community institutions.3
This is not an estimate of the cost of disposal, but an upper limit  
which that cost will not exceed under any circumstances; such an  
assessment does not take account of cost discounting, which reduces  
2the relative extent of the costs.
30J C 51, 29.2.1980.
C0MC83) 262 final.

- 26 -
(f) The transport of nuclear fuel
70. The nuclear-fuel transport sector in the Community will expand  
considerably in the years ahead because of the rapid expansion of  
national nuclear power programmes. The diversity of products  
transported, the means of transport used and the geographical Locations  
concerned are three essential - but not necessarily interdependent -  
aspects of this type of transport.
The sector covers a very wide range of activities: the transport
of uranium in all its forms(ore concentrate, natural and enriched  
uranium hexafluoride, uranium and plutonium oxide, new and irradiated  
fuel elements) in specific packagings adapted to the physical and  
chemical characteristics of these materials and the nature of the  
risks they represent.
71. The cost of transporting nuclear material (ore, processed  
uranium, fuel, etc.) is included in that of the various services  
associated with the fuel cycle and accounts for a very small proportion  
of the overall cost of the full range of such services.
By way of illustration, the unit cost of transporting irradiated  
fuel - which is the most expensive transport operation - amounts  
to é few percent of the cost of reprocessing.
72. In view of the foreseeable trend in power-plant siting, the  
number of journeys for the purpose of transporting new fuel is likely to  
increase appreciably. This trend is not so pronounced in the case of  
irradiated fuel, as large-capacity transport casks will be developed  
over the next few years.
73. The need for a new type of heavy cask has recently become  
evident in the Community. The type concerned is a dual-purpose  
cask for the transport and extended interim storage of irradiated  
fuel pending reprocessing. As the practice of extended interim  
storage becomes more widespread, there could well be a considerable  
increase in the demand for casks with which the industry is capable  
of coping.

- 27 -
74. Programmes for the transport of irradiated fuel discharged from  
nuclear power stations call for meticulous planning on the part of the  
transporters, the electricity producers, the reprocessors and the  
competent national authorities.
Provision is made for a reserve transport-cask capacity of  
approximately 30% in order to allow for maintenance requirements and  
other contingencies.
75. The scale of such operations will increase in future to keep  
abreast of the requirements arising from the greater number of power  
stations in operation.
The future prospects for this sector point to the use of large - and  
to some extent standardized - casks, which will make it possible to  
provide a more efficient service.

- 28 -
5. Nuclear reactors: design and construction
(a) Reactor types
(i) Ih§_tyges_already_deyeloged
76. Power reactors of several types - or concepts - are in operation in  
the Community, since their design depends on the technological and  
political considerations, infrastructure, etc., specific to each client.
77. The oldest type is the Magnox (British designation) or UNG6 (French  
designation meaning natural uranium, gas, graphite) which was adopted
in the United Kingdom and France and exported by the former to Italy and  
Japan and by the latter to Spain (a single reactor in each case). This  
type of reactor was designed at a time when:
- only the USA had the capacity to provide industrial-scale supplies of  
enriched uranium;
- the production cost of nuclear graphite was lower than that of an  
equivalent quantity of heavy water (it was also possible to use natural  
uranium in heavy-water reactors).
At a later date, in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy and at  
Euratom, attempts were made to improve the neutron economy of the systems  
in order to increase the quantity of energy that the uranium could yield  
by developing heavy-water reactors.  Except in Germany, where it was  
developed exclusively for export, this design never advanced beyond the  
prototype stage, since other designs, which did not require the quite  
specific and very considerable investments in heavy-water production, had  
become available in Europe where uranium-enrichment technologies had been  
acquired in the meantime. The unanimous European decision to abandon
Argentina purchased two heavy-water reactors from Germany with a capacity  
of 319 and 692 MWe, respectively, while in Germany itself there was the  
52-MWe prototype, shut down in May 1984. European industry developed this  
reactor type up to a total capacity of 1 267 MWe, while in Canada, where  
the heavy-water reactor was adopted as the standard national type, a total  
capacity of 15 499 MWe has been attained.

\
- 29 -
the heavy-water design has aroused regret, which is perfectly  
understandable in view of the satisfactory performance of the system.
However, that decision was motivated by the desire to avoid commitment to  
overly specialized investments at a time when alternatives based on less  
specific technologies were available, as was enriched uranium.
78. The design of the British Advanced Gas-Cooled Reactor (AGR) was derived  
from that of the Magnox and was intended to reduce the production cost of the  
kWh by increasing:
- the power density, and
- the thermodynamic efficiency.
In order to attain that objective, it was necessary to make use of higher  
temperatures, which required that the cladding be made of refractory metals  
and consequently that enriched uranium be used as the fuel. Because of this,  
the neutron economy of a graphite reactor became quite comparable to that  
of a light-water reactor.
The AGR reactors developed in the United Kingdom (and even in the USA,  
where work on them was discontinued at an early stage) had so far not obtained  
commercial success on the export market, since the cost of the power they  
produced was not competitive with that of the power generated by LWRs  
(light-water reactors). This was due to the fact that the good neutron economy  
achieved by the use of graphite was adversely affected by the cladding  
materials, while the high level of thermodynamic efficiency resulting from  
high temperatures was offset by the high construction cost. As regards  
the latter aspect, it is regrettable that comparison with the LWR cannot  
take place under equal conditions (in other words, after the same number of  
reactors have been placed in service).
79. The other European countries chose light-water reactors, mainly in the  
form of pressurized water reactors (PWRs), since:
- enriched uranium had become available from several sources;1
- they provided an opportunity to draw on American experience.
For a certain period, the PWR had to compete with the BWR (boiling-water reactor),  
but the Community Member States later showed preference for the former. It is  
possible that the BWR will return to favour as a result of the experience  
acquired in the construction and use of that type of reactor.
1 _ _
it should be noted that there is no reactor concept which enables natural
be^? ed in conjunction with light water; at the beginning of the  nuclear era, this was a serious disadvantage for the development of light-  water reactors in Europe. a

(ii) Th§_concegts_of_the_future
80. It can be expected that new reactor designs that may be developed in  
future will possess one or more of the features listed below in increasing  
order of importance and priority:
suitability for low- and medium-temperature applications;
- suitability for use in power stations of Lower electrical capacity than  those of today;
2- suitability for high-temperature applications;
- capacity to recycle the plutonium produced by any type of reactor in  
which uranium (natural or enriched) is used, either in reactors of  
already established design or, preferably, in specially designed  
reactors (fast breeder reactors);
capacity to utilize almost all the energy contained in natural uranium,  
that is to say, to multiply by a factor of about 60 the amount of  
energy utilized so far.
However, it is unlikely that the diversity of the features referred to  
above will give rise to a proliferation of advanced concepts, if for no  
other reason than that the level of the development costs, known to be  
necessary from the experience acquired with existing reactor types, will  
be high.
81. As regards district heating, it may be considered that such a development  
will take place only very slowly and that steam for that purpose will first
be supplied by existing power stations, priority being given to conventional  
plants, although nuclear power stations were chosen in Switzerland. District  
heating could eventually be based on specialized reactors that generate heat  
alone (as was done in the USSR) or have a dual role, generating both power  
and heat.
82. Furthermore, the AGR reactors and the Magnox reactors could provide  
industrial steam (the uses of which are very widespread but vary from place  
to place), but it is improbable that this highly fragmented potential market  
would be compatible, in the short or long term, with the economic dimensions  
of today's reactors.
The low-temperature applications chiefly concern collective (district) heating  
(temperatures below 200°C); medium-temperature applications concern uses of  
2industrial steam (temperatures below 570°C).
High-temperature applications (at about 800°C) require the use of permanent  gases (difficult to liquefy), for example, the liquefaction of coal,  
the stimulation of deposits of very viscous petroleum, the reduction of metal  ^oxides, the production of hydrogen, etc.
Fast breeder reactors (FBRs), which are dealt with later on, would also be  
suitable for that purp0se

- 31 -
83. Low-power reactors are of interest either as replacements for  
decommissioned conventional or nuclear units or for export to countries  
possessing low-capacity power transport grids. The problem is neither  
technical (since the known concepts were developed with low-power units)  
nor one of credibility (since the German industry successfully sold two
PHWR units to Argentina without first having placed units of comparable power  
in service in the Federal Republic), but an economic one. It is necessary  
to be certain that the cost of the installed kWe, which is higher in the  
case of smaller units, is Low enough for such units to be competetive;  
moreover, the extent of the small power-reactor market is uncertain, which  
makes it difficult to access with accuracy the series effect when it is  
superimposed on the scale effect influencing the construction cost of these  
units.
84. Where high-temperature applications are concerned, they presuppose the  
industrial-scale development of a specific design, that of high-temperature  
reactors (HTRs), which have already proved their worth as experimental  
reactors in the United Kingdom, Germany and the USA, mainly with a view
to electricity generation. Alt these reactors have the quality required  
for these types of technological application. In addition, they can also  
clearly be used for electricity production, and it is even likely that, in  
order to reach the level of profitability indicated above, this reactor type  
would have to make its initial penetration into the electricity sector.
However, it will inevitably meet with competition from the existing commercial  
types.
85. The cost of developing and promoting this reactor type has so far preventec  
it from being more widely used, but the associated technology is well known  
(that of helium, graphite and carbides), its thermodynamic efficiency and  
neutron economy are excellent and its adaptability to small or medium-sized  
units has been demonstrated. A further advantage of the HTRs is their  
capacity to utilize thorium (more abundant than uranium, but not directly  
fissile in a reactor) to produce fissile uranium-233, which can be recovered
as an energy source material by reprocessing the irradiated fuel elements.
Whatever the intrinsic qualities of high-temperature reactors may be, it  
will not be possible to make use of them in any new projects unless major

- 32 -
decisions on that reactor type are taken from an industrial standpoint  
with regard to a possible project and the way it is to be implemented:  
national framework or European cooperation. In Germany, a consensus has  
been reached by the potential users, the research bodies and the construction  
industries, who may shortly adopt an investment programme involving both  
the construction of a certain number of reactors and the infrastructures for  
the production, on an appropriate scale, of graphite and graphite- and  
carbon-coated uranium-oxide particles.
86. As regards the use (recycling)  of plutonium in non-specialized reactors,  
technical solutions are available and industrial-scale plutonium-recycling  
operations are now being conducted by several electricity producers.^
Decisions in this connection depend on detailed economic assessments which  
take account, in particular, of the following specific problems: the
handling of plutonium fuel elements; accumulation of the uranium-236  
isotope, which limits the re-enrichment of spent uranium; accumulation of  
non-fissile plutonium isotopes, which limits the number of times plutonium  
can be recycled; and the internal structures of reactors fuelled with enriched  
uranium (in which recycling is carried out), which limit the volume of the  
reactor capable of accommodating plutonium fuel.
It may be possible to achieve an approximately 15% reduction in the  
uranium requirements of the total number of light-water reactors.

- 33 -
87. Finally, fast breeder reactors (FBRs) are capable of extracting 60  
times as much energy from uranium as are light-water reactors, either  
PWRs or BWRs, and, at the same time, of recycling plutonium, whatever  
its origin, with greater efficiency.
This capability derives from the fact that FBRs use depleted uranium,  
which is a by-product of the enrichment of natural uranium, in  
combination with plutonium, which is created during the operation of any  
reactor fuelled with uranium (natural, enriched or depleted) and is  
later separated from that uranium during the reprocessing of irradiated  
fuel.2
88. Community industry has already acquired considerable knowledge of
and experience with FBRs, and this is reflected, in particular, in the construction  
of 3 prototypes within the 200- to 300-MWe range·3 and of one demonstration unit
Depleted uranium can also be derived from the reprocessing of fuel  
from reactors in which natural uranium is used, such as the Magnox (UK),  
,UNGG (France) or CANDU (Canada) types.
The FBR is not only the most effective system for exploiting the energy  
potential of plutonium, it is also the system which most reduces  
the out-of-pile plutonium inventory that has accumulated to date:
(a) it can always contain much greater quantities of plutonium than a  
thermal reactor, even when it is used for recycling purposes;
(b) furthermore, it is virtually unaffected by the isotopic  
composition of the plutonium, which it consumes almost fully  
(high burnup).
It is also interesting to note that FBRs do not necessarily generate  
plutonium - and still less breed it; if properly adjusted, they are  
capable, while generating electricity, of "burning" plutonium without  
producing any.
One of which has been in operation for over 10 years, the third being  
scheduled to enter into service shortly.

- 34 -
with a capacity of 1  200 MWe, bringing the total capacity up to 1  959 MWe.
89. Studies, experiments and operating demonstrations have shown that, particularly  
in Europe, the FBR concept has come to the fore as a fundamental component
of a long-term nuclear strategy. Dividing nuclear power production  
between FBRs and PWRs would give the strategy under
consideration a considerable measure of flexibility in the total utilization  
of uranium and would enable the consumption of that material to be appreciably  
reduced. However, this development must be preceded by a demonstration of  
the economic viability of the reactor concept.
90. Except in the case of the Magnox and UNGG reactors, which were developed  
mainly on the basis of a political decision, it can be seen that, where  
real alternatives were available (for example, heavy water/light water;  
graphite/light water; helium/carbon-dioxide gas; helium/sodium), the  
solution that turned out to be the most economic one was always that
which enabled industry to minimize its specific expenditure. In particular,
if the technologies required by the two most promising reactor types, the
PWRs and the FBRs, are considered in detail, it is evident that a plant
designed to produce PWRs which was subsequently forced to lie idle could
manufacture other heavy mechanical components (with, of course, investment
in excess of that required in the case of less exacting conventional work).
For its part, the FBR industry is characterized by greater mobility,
since, under normal conditions of site accessibility, it has to make use of
2on-site applications of high-quality stainless-steel technology which can  
be used for a wide variety of purposes.^ However, it is conceivable that, with a  
view to improving the economic performance of FBRs, greater use will be made  
of workshop fabrication in the development of that reactor type, which would  
make FBR technology more conventional to some extent.
With modern technology, FBRs are cooled by means of molten sodium (LMFBRs) in order  
to ensure that operating pressure will be low and that there will be a truely efficient  
inherent - and passive - emergency cooling system. In the quite distant future, a  
gas-cooled variant of the FBR (GCFBR) may be developed. This is one of the types  
to be considered in respect of the technological applications of heat previously  
mentioned. The difficulties arising from very high pressure and temperatures in the  
case of this variant can be overcome only by means of very specific and exclusive  
techniques. As a result, industry is not giving much priority to the development of  
the GCFBR variant, since it wishes to cut back on investments that are too specific and,  
in any case, such development would follow that of the LMFBR and HTR reactor types.
Because its large components are too bulky to be transported.
'The fact that the stainless-steel industry makes use of well-known and tried techniques  
explains the success of certain industries in their participation in Superphenix,  
although they have not previously had an opportunity to acquire that technology in  
the FBR field.

- 35 -
(b) General outlook for the industry
91. The Community's nuclear construction industry has a production  
capacity which greatly exceeds domestic and export market  
requirements.
92. Although the nuclear industry is characterized more by the  
extent of its technical expertise, its creative ability and its  
capacity for coordination (parameters which separate countries  
that have attained industrial maturity from the others) than by its  
investment in manufacturing, it is nevertheless the latter factor  
which, on account of its social impact, determines the potential  
development of that industrial sector as a whole.
93. The existing excess capacity in the nuclear power-station construction  
sector affects a flexible and highly ramified industry possessing  
wide-ranging skills that are very difficult to acquire and can be
put to use for other ends. Nuclear component manufacturers are  
well equipped for conventional boiler-making and for manufacturing  
conventional turbines, distillation towers, equipment for the  
iron and steel industry, concrete furnaces, heavy or sophisticated  
equipment for major earth-moving and civil-engineering work and  
for the mining or oil-extraction industries, machine tools, etc.  
This flexibility is still greater in the field of design and  
industrial architecture, since the capital there is almost entirely  
human and the skills extremely comprehensive.

- 36 -
94. Furthermore, many non-Community countries wish to make use of nuclear  
energy, so that interesting export opportunities would be created.
This would continue a long-standing tradition of the European heavy  
electrical engineering industry and would bring to fruition the extensive  
experience acquired on the domestic market. Nevertheless, such exports  
would not suffice to absorb the excess capacities of the nuclear  
industries in view of the general economic crisis, particularly in  
countries of the Third World.
95. The pressure of external competition, which is already considerable
in traditional markets, will increase in the nuclear market, mainly
in countries of the Far East and particularly in Japan. In that
country, operators have the advantage of being able to construct,
service and operate nuclear power plants within their own market, which
is closed to the European industry. They are also the favourite partners
of the Americans in reactor-system development (an example of such
cooperation is the Westinghouse-Mitsubishi agreement on the marketing of  
1 2the APWR, "A" meaning "advanced"). For their part, the Americans  
possess all the requisite skills, but in the past lacked the motivation  
which would have enabled them to be more agressive in exporting their  
equipment and are also hindered by their internal nuclear policy.
96. One of the most serious weaknesses of the European nuclear industry is the  
absence of a coherent tradition of cooperation between the major industries  
participating in the nuclear sector, whereas there are cases of
fruitful cooperation between partners of different sizes.
And the agreement between General Electric and Hitachi-Toshiba on the  
marketing of the ABWR (advanced boiling-water reactor).»
In addition to the American operations in Japan, the presence of the  
Germans (KWU), which is a European alternative, should be mentioned.

- 37 -
However, some examples of cooperation on advanced technology  
projects do exist :  uranium enrichment, thermonuclear
fusion and the fast breeder reactor show that fuller and more  
balanced cooperation is certainly possible.
97. Thermonuclear fusion is dealt with in paragraphs 105 and 106.1In the fast-reactor field, mention should be made of the SNR 300  
and Superphenix reactors.
98. Superphenix, which is nearing completion at Creys-Malvilie, France,
and will enter into service in 1985, is being built jointly by France,
2Italy and the Federal Republic of Germany; it is the largest  
FBR constructed so far and is closer to a standardized industrial  
product than any other fast breeder. It will have been built with  
a cost overrun and minor delays that can be envied by those  
responsible for many projects involving less-advanced reactors.
From this it may be concluded that, fortified by this experience,  
the industries will be able to improve their international cooperation  
still further. It should be stressed in addition that this achievement  
demonstrates that the cost estimates for the FBR are as reliable  
as those usually made for light-water reactors and can also provide  
a sound basis for planning.
99. It can be seen that the national markets for light-water reactors and  
AGRs are to a great extent walled-off.^ This partitioning of the  
European market, while not the cause of the current excess industrial  
capacity, is nevertheless holding back any efforts to reduce it.
This excess capacity is the result of the extent and duration of the  
economic recession, which has made obsolete the projections on the  
basis of which the investments were made.
Project implemented by the Federal Republic of Germany and the  
Benelux countries and accorded the status of Joint Untertaking  
within the meaning of the Euratom Treaty. Luxembourg has in the  
meantime withdrawn from the project.I
Holdings were subsequently acquired by Belgium and the Netherlands.
In practice, a national market is closed whenever a country wishes  
to be self-sufficient in a particular product.

- 38 -
100. This situation, which is compatible with the Community Directives on the  
opening-up of public contracts to competitive bidding, is the result
of policies of the Member States most concerned and cannot change  
until those countries consider that rationalizing the sector at  
Community level is more beneficial than conserving jobs which are not  
always viable and maintaining a surplus on the balance of payments at the  
cost of greater internal expenditure. The Community has already had  
sectoral industrial difficulties arising either from problems of  
excess capacity or from problems relating to the opening-up of  
markets. With the assistance of the Community institutions, it  
has been possible to find solutions.
(c) Maintenance of nuclear power stations
101. In the short term, the industry has found a susbstantial market  
in the maintenance of nuclear power stations. It is estimated  
that the sum of almost 500 million ECU per year is budgeted for  
maintenance in the Community alone. Furthermore, a certain  
proportion of services is being exported to the United States,  
mainly because of the number of reactors in operation and of the  
compulsory backfitting system in force in the United States.
Europe, service activities are being developed mainly towards  
specialized maintenance with specially designed tools, the use  
of appropriate software and optimization of the fuel cycle, these  
being sectors in which it is clear that the original designers  
are in an advantageous situation from a technological standpoint  
in comparison with the installation operators.
(6)

- 39 -
(d) Decommissioning and the industry
· ]103. The dismantling of nuclear power stations must be considered from  
two standpoints:
its economic importance, that is to say, the extent of the  
dismantling market;
- the associated technology, that is to say, the development  
of methods most suitable for the different materials.
The extent of the market, in terms of the volume of business,  
is at present equivalent to 1% of the construction market. Hence  
it does not provide a significant additional outlet for the  
industry.
It would be astonishing were the situation otherwise;
demolition obeys the same law of growth as the construction sector, but  
after an interval of close to 30 years. Since the nuclear sector is  
of recent origin, demolition is an activity for the distant future.
As regards the technological aspect, small reactors are more than  
sufficiënt to allow dismantling techniques to be developed. The  
problems of a qualitative nature to which they give rise are the  
same as those in the case of larger reactors, and their demolition  
will provide valuable experience which can be extrapolated to the  
subsequent demolition of larger reactors in the same way as the  
construction of smaller reactors provided a basis for the construction  
of larger ones.
104. Despite the scarcity of opportunities on the present dismantling  
market, it is likely that the construction industry will find it  
sufficiently advantageous to become active in the field, if only  
because there are points of similarity between dismantling and  
power-station maintenance. The former can, in fact, be regarded  
as the final phase of the latter, both activities requiring of  
industry the same skills and the same precautions, since they are  
carried out in the same environment.
The decommissioning of nuclear-fuel fabrication facilities is not considered  
here, since it has an even smaller economic impact. The equipment, in fact,  
is exposed only to surface contamination and not to activation in depth, due  
to the lack of a neutron flux.

- 40 -
The example of General Electric in the United States, in acting as  
main contractor for the demolition of Shippingport (the first  
PWR nuclear power station) is most revealing of this trend on  
the part of constructors to undertake demolition work,  
especially because it shows their willingness to dismantle reactors  
which are not part of their range of products.
6. Thermonuclear fusion
105. The Illustrative Nuclear Programme, although deliberately focused  
upon aspects of the use of nuclear energy which are of economic  
significance, cannot disregard thermonuclear fusion, since it  
represents for mankind a new energy source of considerable potential  
which could be inexhaustable. However, before that potential can be  
exploited, appropriate practical means must be available, and a  
considerable period will inevitably elapse before they are.
106. Research conducted to this end is concentrated on the toroidal  
geometry reactor, which has met with a large measure of approval  
in the scientific world. The Joint European Undertaking JET  
(Joint European Torus) is operating the most advanced model of this  
type, which was constructed on time and within the budget provided.
The main importance of JET derives from the opportunity it offers  
to prepare, with full knowledge of the facts, the specifications  
for future research investment in the field of fusion, namely  
for NET (New European Torus) with which it may be possible to  
achieve a major advance in fusion technology.

ENERG/112
Brussels, 30 May 1985
OPINION
of the Economic and Social Committee
on
Nuclear Industries in the Community -  
Illustrative Nuclear Programme  
under Article 40 of the EURATOM Treaty - 1984 
CC0MC84) 653 final)
CES 472/85 en

-  1 -
1. On 28 November 1  984 the Commission of the European  
Communities, in accordance with Article 40 of the Treaty  
establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (EURATOM),  
asked the Economic and Sociui. Committee for an Opinion on the  
documententitled:
The Nuclear Industries in the Community - Illustrative
Nuclear Programme under Article 40 of the EURATOM
Treaty - 1984.
The Section for Energy and Nuclear Questions, which was  
responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject,  
adopted its Opinion on 14 May 1985 in the light of the oral  
report by Mr QUERLEUX.
At its 227th Plenary Session (meeting of 30 May 1985),  
the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following Opinion  
with no votes against and 4 abstentions :
2. Preliminary Remarks
Under Article 40 of the EURATOM Treaty, the Commission  
is obliged to publish periodically "illustrative programmes  
indicating in particular nuclear energy production targets and  
all types of investment required for their attainment" (PINC).
Since the last illustrative programme dated back  to 
1972, the Commission decided  in 1982 to publish a new programme.
C0M(84) 653 final.

-  2 -
The Committee notes that this document has been the subject of  
numerous discussions with the relevant circles in the Community.
The Committee would observe that the Council of
Ministers is not legally obliged to take a decision. The PINC is  
not in any way mandatory or interventionist and should be  
regarded as merely a frame of reference for the reflections and  
decisions of the Member States.
3- The Committee's observations and suggestions
3·1 -  Noting that the previous PINC dates back  to 1  972, the
Committee first of all welcomes the fact that the Commission has  
drawn up the present illustrative programme. However, it calls  
for the precise formulation of an overall Community energy policy  
so that the programme will form an integral part of a
comprehensive Community strategy.
In view of the importance of nuclear energy, the  
Committee thinks that in the future the Commission should abide  
strictly by its declared intention to issue more frequently (for  
example, every four years) an illustrative programme presenting  
an evaluation of the results obtained in the period that has  
elapsed and any progressive technical and economic adaptations of  
the major strategic guidelines that are essential in this area.

- 3 -
In particular, the specific communications made - quite logically  
- by the Commission on every aspect of nuclear energy in the  
interval between two PINCs should be recapitulated and commented 
on in each new illustrative programme published, which is  
essential if this periodical document is to retain its exhaustive 
nature.
3.2. Whatever the "illustrative" nature of the Commission's  
nuclear plan in legal terms, the Committee would stress that this  
plan is not without practical implications :  in pursuance of  
Article 41 of the EURATOM Treaty major nuclear investments have  
to be communicated to the Commission, which has to give its views  
to the Member State concerned. The PINC sets out the "rules of  
the game", forming essential criteria for the formulation of the  
Commission's views.
Any nuclear investor whose projects diverged  
substantially from these "rules of the game" (or failed to take  
account of public opinion) would undoubtedly be liable to  
experience serious difficulties in obtaining the loans needed in  
order to finance a particular project.
3.3. It is stated in the PINC that, taking into account the  
investments that have been practically decided on to date, some  
35% of the electricity generated in the Community will be of  
nuclear origin  by 1990 and that, according to forecasts of  
subsequent investments already under consideration in various  
Member States, this figure should rise  to 40% by 1995. The PINC 
also indicates that nuclear energy's share of electricity  
production in the early years of the 21st century should be close  
to 50%.

- 4 -
The Committee considers these Lines of approach to be
Logical in view of :
- the economic competitiveness of electricity of nuclear origin;
- the reliability and safety of the installations;
- the macro-economic impact of nuclear energy, the cost of which
basically corresponds to the value added by European industry  
(the raw material, uranium, accounts for less than 10% of the
cost of the kWh); there is a knock-on effect on major
industrial sectors in the countries concerned (nuclear  
engineering, civil engineering, mechanical engineering,  
electrical engineering and the chemical, electronic and  
information technology sectors,  etc ...);
- the favourable effect on the overall balance of trade of the
EEC countries (little expenditure of foreign exchange to  
purchase raw material and promotion of an export role for
European industry in the various spheres connected with
nuc Lear energy) .
The Committee would, however, point out that, given the  
uncertainties of long-term forecasting (due in particular to the  
crisis), periodic revaluations of very expensive projects are  
called for as part of a cautious strategy. From this point of
view, the four-yearly updating advocated by the Committee in 3.1.  
above will play an essential role.

- 5 -
3.4. The Committee approves the PINC's message that in the
Long term the Community has a basic interest in reducing as much  
as possible its dependence on imports of uranium (the known  
reserves of which that can be exploited at a reasonable cost  
correspond to about 20 years' supplies) and in pursuing a supply  
strategy based inter alia on:
- continued prospecting by the Member States and by economic  
operators both on their own territory and outside the  
Commun i  ty's;
- a storage policy.
- a policy for the reprocessing and temporary storage of used  
fi  ssi le materi a l.
The Committee is also in agreement on the following two
points:
- reactors of the present generation will be progressively  
improved and will continue to be constructed for several  
decades to come;
- thought should be given already to the longer-term, and  
preparations made for the achievement of economic  
competitiveness by the next generation of fast breeder reactors  
(FBRs) in accordance with the programme set out in the PINC;  
this should be done by checking at each stage the technical and  
econoic reliability of the reactors.

-  6 -
3.5. The Committee would also confirm that it is in favour  
of the continuation - without any slackening of effort - of  
Community research on thermonuclear fusion, a potential major  
source of energy that could be inexhaustible (JET programme),  
within the framework of the possibilities offered by a research  
budget that is apportioned in a balanced manner, with a timetable  
for the objectives.
It thinks that this very important prospect merits more  
than a simple brief mention at the end of the Annex to the PINC.
3.6. The Committee would like even greater stress to be  
laid, in the definitive text of the PINC, on the importance of  
and the need for genuine political and industrial cooperation 
between the Member States on nuclear energy.
The Committee takes pleasure in pointing out that the  
first FBR now approaching completion is the work of an  
international company, NERSA, embracing electricity generating  
undertakings in France, Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium  
and the United Kingdom, and that similar financial arangements  
have been made for a new project, SNR 2. The Committee would  
strongly recommend this method of pooled investment and major  
R S D efforts by electricity generators, which it considers to be  
particularly suitable for resolving fundamental problems such as:
- the entry of the "small countries" into the field of nuclear  
energy on an equal level and the allocation to their national  
undertakings of a fair share of nuclear energy production and  
the associated industrial benefits;

- the construction (by a sufficiently early date to enable it to  
be operational in time) of the essential plant for the  
reprocessing of irradiated fuel elements from FBRs.
- the industrial - and hence economic - rationalization at EEC  
level of FBRs of the second generation.
3.7. The Committee considers that the PINC does not lay  
sufficient emphasis on the problems that still arise (with wide  
variations from one country to another and even from one region  
to another within the same country) in connection with the  
acceptance of nuclear energy by public opinion; the Committee  
fears that if certain situations do not improve from this point  
of view the industrial plant connected with nuclear energy will  
be concentrated in a small number of countries.
While not denying that efforts at information have been  
made in the past, the Committee would, accordingly, recommend  
that all data concerning nuclear energy be presented to the  
public through a campaign of regular and repeated messages in the  
mass media (written and audio-visual).
3.8. This campaign should present the various points of
view, and deal with the various aspects of the nuclear process in  
a methodical manner: preparation of fuels, the actual reaction,
reprocessing, storage of waste. It should make everything
concerning the nuclear industry clear and comprehensible to the  
population. It should highlight the advantages of this industry:

-  8 -
- replacement for traditional non-renewable energy sources;
- competitiveness and macro-economic impact;
- greater energy independence;
- high degree of safety of installations;
- non-polluting;
- international rules for the prevention of irregular  
proliferation.
But it should also give an objective analysis of the  
problems connected with the nuclear industry, such as :
- the limits to the use of electricity;
- the effects if largeness of scale and specialization;
- the technological complicity, which calls for constant  
vigilance in order to curb all proliferation risks and all  
radiation risks.
It should also deal clearly and frankly with questions  
the public is insufficiently familiar with, particularly the  
reprocessing or the non-reprocessing of irradiated fuel elements  
and the storage (provisional and final) of radioactive waste.
The Commission can and must act as driving force here,  
but it cannot do this all on its own: manufacturers and
decision-makers at regional and local level and employers' and  
workers' organizations have a no less vital role to play in  
providing information; this should include full, automatic
disclosure of even the slightest run-of-the-mill operating  
incident, since rumour might distort this into a deliberately  
concealed accident.

- 9 -
This clear and detailed information is really of  
fundamental importance; the campaign should be directed in  
particular at all socio-economic organizations, local authority  
decision-makers and associations for the protection of the  
environment and should also of course cover workers in the  
nuclear i  ndust ry.
3.9. It is not contested that the Commission has paid
careful attention to the following important matters :
- the safety of nuclear installations and the protection of  
health,
- the existence of guarantees concerning the use of nuclear  
materials,
- the particular issue of the safety of the transport of nuclear  
fuels,
But the Committee regrets that the PINC (which claims to be an  
exhaustive document providing guidelines) fails to give, in a  
detailed chapter, an overall survey of existing rules and points  
for future consideration in these areas. The publication of a  
new edition of the PINC provides an excellent opportunity to  
highlight how in the area of nuclear safety the development of  
technology goes hand in hand with studies on the problems of  
safety and security as well as to propose improvements in this  
area on the basis of the experience of all concerned.

-  10  -
The Committee would particularly urge that, after all  
the parties concerned, particularly the authorities, have been  
fully informed, and an impact analysis covering the entire cycle  
has been carried out, the transport operations performed by  
specialist carriers should not be impeded by red tape, regardless  
of whether these operations are cross-frontier or within a given  
country.
The aim should be a homogeneous approach to the problem  
of nuclear and dangerous chemical transport operations and  
installations, particularly where there are cross-frontier  
aspects.
3.10. The Committee considers that the PINC's presentation of  
the problem of storage of waste, although satisfactory from the  
point of view of current scientific data, would be clearer and  
more convincing if there were an indicative timetable for  
concrete action concerning the final storage of high-activity  
waste in deep geological formations. The Commission should take  
steps to bring about real cooperation between the Member States  
regarding the selection of sites. A'large-scale campaign to inform  
the population concerned is' particularly called for.

-  1 1  -
4. Cone Lus i  ons
The illustrative programme proposed by the Commission  
is on the whole a well-structured and positive document, even  
though a number of improvements could be made in order to :
- highlight the major importance of greater Community political  
will in the implementation of programmes concerning the various  
aspects of nuclear energy;
- specify more clearly the action to be effectively embarked upon  
by the end of the century in the crucial areas of the  
reprocessing and interim storage of irradiated fuel elements  
and the management of radioactive waste; this should be done  
with the aid of an initial set of indicative deadlines to be  
updated in subsequent editions of the PINC by means of rolling  
plans.
Done at Brussels,  30 May 1985.
The Chairman 
of the
Economic and Social  
Commi tteeThe Secretary-General  
of the
Economic and Social  
Committee
Gerd MUHR Roger LOUET