Ahmed Mustafa considers the pros and cons of Egypt's nuclear aspirations Egypt's aspirations for a nuclear power programme were a priority on President Hosni Mubarak's agenda during his talks held in Moscow and Beijing last November. These gained significance in the context of the ongoing international endeavours to tackle climate changes. There is a wordowide search for alternative sources of energy other than fossil fuels. A handful of Arab countries are already considering nuclear power as an option, given that nuclear energy has for decades been providing a good chunk of power in the industrialised countries. The Egyptian government likewise, seems determined to follow through on its vow to pursue a nuclear power project. Whether this is politically correct or not is irrelevant here. What is more important is to remain focused on the solid facts and projections for Egypt's power sector. Egypt currently produces around 22000 mega watts (mw) of electricity, more than 80 per cent of which, using hydrocarbon and other sources, is hydroelectric from the Aswan High Dam. In 2004/05, the dam's installed power generation capacity was 18,544 mw. Assuming demand for power will rise by more than seven per cent because of demographic and economic growth, the government chose a build-own- operate-transfer (BOOT) approach in the power sector, partially privatising power generation to increase output. Since 2002, three gas-fired plants have come into stream, adding around 4000 mw to the power pool. The lead gas- fired BOOT venture is that of PGESCO, a joint-venture between Bechtel of the US and local companies, whose annual production is 1500 mw. This helps achieve the goal of increasing power generation capacity by 12000 mw, by early next decade. The efficiency of current power generation installations is partly due to the use of locally-produced hydrocarbons, mainly natural gas. Egypt's hydrocarbon reserves are not huge, and so it has been devising plans for its natural gas resources. In the mid-1980s, Egypt introduced incentives for the development of its natural gas reserves, and now has three liquefied natural gas (LNG) plants in operation, as well as an export pipeline running to Jordan and Syria. In order to pursue more LNG exports via Turkey and on to Europe, and, as well, develop a strong and expansive petrochemical industry, Egypt must find alternatives to consuming all of its LNG in the domestic power sector. The latter is currently consuming some 65 million cubic metres a day out of a total daily bgas production of 95million cubic metres. More than two decades ago, most power plants consumed the bulk of oil production, leaving government coffers short of revenues if this resource was exported. The quest for alternatives dates back to the middle of the last century. Egypt at presemt generates about 150 mw of wind power, mostly from wind turbines at Zafarana in the Gulf of Suez. There are also much- delayed plans to build a part-solar power plant at Kureimat (with 30 mw in solar capacity out of a total planned 150 mw). This will be a BOOT project funded by the World Bank. Egypt also has a long-established nuclear research sector, and, in the early 1980's even considered using nuclear power when a tender was launched for a nuclear plant at El-Dabaa, west of Alexandria. The project was abandoned for a host of reasons, such as cost, in response to the Chernobyl disaster, and for political reasons. Today, Egypt has an Argentinean-built $100 million, 22 mw research nuclear reactor. This having been said, opting for nuclear power remains an economic necessity for Egypt if it is to benefit from exporting oil and LNG. There are still, hoewver, several issues that must first be addressed. Foremost is what the technology of choice will be in such a project. Light water reactors require importing enriched uranium from a member of the nuclear club, and arranging for the supplier to take back the spent fuel; meanwhile, heavy water reactors use natural uranium, which waste could be safely disposed of in Egypt. The technology is available, but the choice will determine the cost of input and and, subsequently, the efficiency of power generation. The second and more important question is that of funding. New power-generating projects have lured money from international agencies, regional and local banks, as well as financial institutions. If the government presents a strong case of business feasibility, the same source might be encouraged to finance the nuclear project. The capital investment is huge: the cost of power generation is about $350 per kw. In the case of a nuclear plant, this is estimated at $2000 per kw (although subsequent savings would be made by lower fuel costs). There is also the question of safety. This is a serious problem, given the growing culture of negligence and sleaze which has predominated in Egypt in recent years. Nuclear safety should not at any cost be compromised. This integral consideration is not only related to environmental and public health concerns, but, as well, because it will be a key factor in persuading financiers to invest in such a project.
