 80% of all electricity will need to be low-carbon by 2050. In order to meet climate goals, we have to keep building and we have to increase our nuclear capacity. Russia, India and China are currently leading the way in expanding nuclear power. China has nine reactors under construction, the most anywhere. 30 countries elsewhere are also building new reactors, like Finland. Our biggest climate act in Finland will be when the new reactor will start in Okulot. 30 countries currently operate nuclear power plants. More than two dozen others are looking at nuclear power to meet their energy and climate needs. The United Arab Emirates and Belarus are close to operating their first nuclear power plants. And Bangladesh and Turkey recently started construction. We believe that nuclear energy is an indispensable option for Turkey because it is emission-free, environmental-friendly, sustainable and reliable electricity source. Currently, 450 nuclear power reactors operate worldwide. But to respond to emerging needs and challenges, the nuclear power industry is looking ahead towards innovative solutions for the long-term operation of existing reactors, the timely expansion of ongoing nuclear power programs and the deployment of new reactor technologies. Several countries are developing small modular reactors. One has already been built in Russia. If this new smaller technology proves to be successful, then nuclear power can become more affordable and even more flexible to be integrated with renewables in so-called hybrid energy systems. In the western United States, amid reminders of our nuclear past, more than 30 towns and cities are looking to the future. They want to go carbon-free and they're betting on small modular reactors to get there. I've come from the IAEA's Office of Public Information to find out more. Our residents here in Lehigh and I think along the Wasatch Front are more environmentally conscious than they ever have been. The days are gone where we rely solely on coal, we rely solely on natural gas. They're gone. The community-owned utilities are increasing energy efficiency and expanding use of renewables. Our coal's been working really hard, 95% capacity factor type product. As it goes away, we need to replace it with a similar 95% capacity product that's emission-free and that's what nuclear gives us. Nuclear energy can back up those renewables, ensuring round-the-clock clean power. Investing in a new nuclear technology has not been an easy decision. Cost is a key concern. We believe that the technology with the help from the Department of Energy will bring this in at $55, a megawatt hour, all in costs onto the grid. We think that's very competitive with combined cycle natural gas and we're about one-third the cost of typical lithium-salt battery storage. Recently, the community utilities agreed to proceed with the project, taking it off the drawing board and closer to commercial reality. The big issue for nuclear is to demonstrate that we can actually build them, that we can build them on time. The small modular reactors will be built at the Idaho National Laboratory. Besides generating power for the communities, the plant will also be used for research on other applications like seawater desalination or hydrogen production to decarbonize industry and transportation. This small modular reactor project can integrate beautifully and seamlessly with wind, with solar, with some of those other sources that are maybe intermittent but that are also carbon-free. Even water has its shape of flow throughout the year and nuclear is steady. It allows for that marriage between all of the different carbon-free sources. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, everyone. For all of you who want to listen to the side event and who don't have a headset yet, please pick it up here at the left side on the top of the stage, a headset. Otherwise, it will be difficult to follow. Thank you. Is that a crossroads? To avert the worst from climate change, we need the right policies. The choice is ours. So this is Arco. Arco, Idaho, the first city to be lit by atomic power. In the early days of nuclear power, we didn't know much about climate change. Or that this new low-carbon energy source could help address it. Today, nuclear power provides 10% of the world's electricity. The thing is, to stem climate change, we're going to need far greater amounts of clean and reliable energy. To tackle climate change, 80% of all electricity will need to be lit. One, two, three. Testing. Testing, one, two, three. Okay. So welcome, ladies and gentlemen to nuclear innovation for a net zero world. This is a special event hosted by the International Atomic Energy Agency. It will last roughly two hours. It's organized into two sessions. The first session we have the honor of the IA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi leading a series of high-level conversations starting off with ministers and leaders of international organizations. This will be followed by a session led by the Director General with leaders from the industry. And so today our special panel of speakers includes Minister Bento of Brazil, Minister Prempay Afgana, Executive Secretary Algayerova of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. And after that session, we will have a special video message from the Director General of Rosatom from the Russian Federation, Alexei Lykachev. So with that, I will turn the floor over to the Director General for some opening remarks followed by the first conversation. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you for putting me on. First of all, thank you all for sharing some minutes of your day with us this afternoon here. We know that everybody is running from one event to the other and there is a lot of interesting material to go through and to listen to. So we are grateful for you to be here. And I would also like to say thank you to my distinguished co-panelists here. Jeff just introduced them to distinguished ministers from Brazil, from Ghana, the Executive Director of the Economic Commission, the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. So the idea here is to have a few perspectives on how this is seen from countries that are confirmed nuclear users and producers like Brazil and others like Ghana that are looking into the possibility and also from the UN Economic Commission for Europe with a perspective which is that of an analytical approach to this thing. Of course, day four of COP26 already you may also have your own, I'm sure, impressions of how this is going in general and in particular when it comes to nuclear. In general, we've been listening to the statements by leaders and we see that there is a deliberate effort to try to really deliver this time. The expectations are very high but there are difficulties, of course, and challenges. But when it comes to nuclear, I would say this COP has been extremely interesting in one sense. And this is in the sense that we can feel, for those of you who follow nuclear matters and for those of you who may not be doing that, you will see that we are approaching the issue of the nuclear contribution to climate change from an objective, more objective perspective with a much better disposition to look into the possibilities, to look into the realities of something which, in fact, we know is already contributing to a good outcome. We all know that without the current, not talking about the future, but the current contribution of nuclear, the figures, the stats, the graphs would be much, much worse than they are. And this is a fact. This is not a matter of opinion or preference or ideology. And we also see that countries now that they know that we are getting into a line that takes us directly to the lines, to the goal lines that we have set to ourselves, be it 2030 or 2050 or 2060, depending on how countries look at this issue differently are, of course, considering how, in what way, can nuclear bring us, not only them, us to a more decarbonized and hopefully fully decarbonized economy by the time we all agree. So the voice of nuclear had to be heard, is being heard and will be heard, I'm sure. But to give substance to these general initiations, I think nothing better than getting the experience, the views of those who are leading these efforts in their respective countries. One of the most important countries in the world and in the part of the world I come from in South America is Brazil. And Minister Bento is a power force driving efforts in this regard. So I would like to start with you, Bento, and with your views from the policies that you are implementing in Brazil, a very big country, a country that is at the center of many conversations when it comes to energy. So how you see this is for us of enormous value. So without further ado, I would like to give you the floor to welcome you, my dear friend, to this place here in Glasgow. We last saw each other in Brazil, now in Scotland, and the conversation continues. So let you please give us the wisdom of your views. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Hello, hello. Hello, hello. Yes. Thank you very much, my friend Rafael. It's an honor and a pleasure to be here, not only with you, participating in this event of the IAEA, but also with my friends here in this panel, it's an honor also to be here with you. I used to say, and I think you have heard this before, the energy transition in Brazil started 50 years ago. When we started our nuclear program and we start to build nuclear plants. And also at the same time, we decided to start a hydropower program and we also started to build hydropower plants, large hydropower plants. And at the same time, we start our bioenergy program with biofuels, with ethanol. It was 50 years ago. We considered that nuclear energy was, is, and will be essential and fundamental for the energy transition. As it is and have been the fact from many decades, it has been clean energy in our baseline system. Then Brazil considered that nuclear power will continue to be essential, not only for Brazil, but for the world to achieve its targets to decarbonization and of course to the energy security. We are facing now, the world is facing now a lot of challenges concerning the supply of energy. And nuclear power, you have an essential role in this fact. You have no, sorry, microphone please. Thank you very much. So you have in the energy program and development in Brazil, there are projects for new builds also in Brazil. I forget to mention. In Brazil, we have two energy plants. One is a 10-year plan and the other one is our 30-year energy plan. And in this 30-year energy plan, we will add 10 gigawatts of nuclear energy in our power matrix. And our 10-year plan is updated every year. And in February, we will present the new 10-year plan and there you will be the expansion of nuclear power in our matrix. Then we will build, you will add 10 gigawatts in the next 30 years in our matrix. Thank you, Bento. This is really amazing and worthy of, yes, of this appreciation because of the scope of the ambition. So we will be looking forward to February where the new update of the Brazilian program is to be announced. And, of course, as you know, you can count of the continued support of the IAEA whenever and in whichever form the Brazilian nuclear sector with which we have been working for these last 50 years. I was not there. You were not there either. But we know that Brazil and the IAEA have been partners in this way to make sure that it's a safe, secure plan. So you will have us side-by-side as nuclear growth and as you continue to decarbonize the energy sector of Brazil. So this is really exciting and I'm very happy to have had the privilege of your views firsthand. So Bento, let me turn now to Matthew Prempe. Matthew, thank you very much. We saw each other the other day when I had the great honor to see your president here. And we had a very good discussion where we were covering a number of issues because, as you all know, apart from nuclear energy, nuclear science and applications do a lot to benefit all countries, industrialized and developing countries as well. And Ghana has a very fine tradition, I would say, in nuclear sciences and applications. But of course Ghana is also contemplating very seriously the possibility of adding a nuclear component to the equation of your energy mix. So we would, I'm sure, love to hear from you. What is your perspective from ACRA? Thank you. About 60 years ago, the first president of the Republic of Ghana, Dr. Carmen Krumah, started two ambitious programs. Before that time, electricity or energy was generated for a very few people using diesel plants. And he started a program of hydropower and nuclear power. Nuclear power in all its ramifications. From its applications, people don't know, like in agriculture, even malaria control and a lot of sterilization of foods and a lot of other things. Unfortunately, the first coup d'etat happened in 1966. And at that time, Ghana had acquired a nuclear reactor and it was quakes away from Ghana because we were deemed not to be able to manage the ramifications of it. So Ghana has always consistently felt to rely on hydropower and at that particular time, nuclear power. But for like every other reason, nuclear power got out of favor. And Ghana stayed with hydropower and most of our base load in Ghana is through hydropower. Recently, we started renewable. And as I've known, about 2.4% of our energy mix is renewable, where our Paris target is to get to 10% by 2030. But in the year 2001, the fourth president of the Republic, John Adyakoukoufor, also reactivated joining the countries that will use nuclear energy as power sources and started a commission of renewable, reputable, Ghanaian scientists in that area to give us a roadmap to nuclear. That roadmap was made available to Ghana in 2008. And since that time, every president that has come has taken a step in the right direction. Till recently, the current president you met declared generally to Ghanaians that we want to go on the part of nuclear. And the reason is simple. A base load can no longer be sustained by hydropower. So we need other setting forms of energy to ensure our base load. And we feel that the right way to go is probably the cleanest form of energy power we have as nuclear. So with the support of IEA and working cooperatively and closely with IAPA, we are on the path of the 19 steps to get us there. Where we are now is we have set requests for proposals to countries that can assist us because we have set up the body to get into nuclear power production. And you offered to support Ghana in this quest. So that is where we are. We have chosen four sites in the country to virtually get to the one site that will develop the nuclear power. Because we believe that for industrialization purposes, which we are now in need in the country for job security, for generating base load power, the cleanest form is to go for nuclear. And that is what we are doing in the country. So we are taking the 10-30 step in support and collaboration with IEA to ensure that we do it the right way to get the capacity and the technical training that is required. Select a good country to partner with us to continue on our journey to eventually getting to nuclear power as Ghana has always desired to be. Thank you for that. I think it's extremely important what you're saying. And in particular, it's really encouraging to note that you are availing yourselves of the milestone's approach, which has a proven track record of success. And we look at, for example, the example of the United Arab Emirates where from nothing they went to four nuclear power reactors functioning and bringing electricity to the Emirati grid already. And it has done so taking all the necessary steps in the area of regulation and nuclear safety and so on. I think Ghana is also showing enormous, I would say, responsibility and professionalism in doing that. Let me ask you, since Ghana, you said it from President Krumah, I mean from the founding father of the nation, and then after that, nuclear has always been in the Ghanaian idea. Now you're moving closer to taking a decision and starting your program. Would you say in the current circumstances, what would be the biggest challenge for you? Would it be the financing? Would it be the capacity building that you need? How can we best support Ghana in getting across the line? Thank you. The best support is to continue how we are doing it, to work closely with IEA. Even if we have the money, we should get it right. We should have the capacity, human capacity well trained, the technology we are adopting well suited and people trained in that nuclear technology that we are adopting. So we need to be babysat till we get to the state. Our own distinguish between the financing, which is very, very important, but really that is probably the last stage. Because once we select a country as a partner with your support, then we need to train people in the technology available in that country. And that country needs to help us in the financing of it. So I won't pick one over the other. We have to take all those steps simultaneously. That is why we need and we feel that it is right to work with IEA to get it right such that we don't go and choose a country we don't have trained people in. We don't have trained people in one area and go and choose the financing from the other area or the technology from the other area. Even last two weeks we are contemplating whether we go in the direction of small nuclear reactors or very large nuclear reactors. Some are coming with offshore based nuclear reactors or onshore based nuclear reactors. These are things that are new to us. We need your cooperation and your support to get it right. So we have to tackle all the same things simultaneously. Thank you very much, Matthew, and we will do just that. As I was telling Bento here, be it with an old nuclear hand like in Brazil, because you've been there from the very beginning, to you who I would not consider as a newcomer really, because Ghana and nuclear have been waltzing for some time and now it seems that we are going to be moving into a more concrete phase. Of course the IAEA is everybody's home. This is where all the nuclear meet and we are going to be working with you. So after two ministers I would like to turn to Olga, because Olga brings a different perspective. You know in the IAEA now we work together with others. We work together with our UN colleagues. We work together with our renewals, friends. We work together with industry. We work together with all the communities that are involved, because this is the right way to do it. The UN Economic Commission for Europe is very interesting because Olga, you are covering a very diverse spectrum of countries which includes many, of course in Western Europe, in Eastern Europe and also in a transatlantic dimension as well. And you've been producing some analytical tools that have been appreciated and that have been also shaping the debate. So I would like to hear also from you how you see this world where nuclear has been discussed here at the COP and when we see countries, big countries of the emerging South as they say for Brazil, and important countries in Africa telling us about their programs and how they are including nuclear in their plans for the future. Thank you, Rafael. Excellencies, ministers, Rafael, the colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon. Really, thank you for inviting us to this very, very important discussion today. Dear colleagues, we all came to Glasgow to discuss how we can create the net zero world for our children and grandchildren. And speaking specifically on clean energy, we ask ourselves how to achieve the targets of the Paris Agreement, how to deliver on Agenda 2030, all 17 SDGs. And, you know, how can we do that? And the answer is simple and complicated at the same time. So let's start with simple first. As Rafael mentioned, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, we have 56 member states. And we worked very closely with them in our energy division. I have a director of our energy division, Mr. Scott Foster, with me here. We worked very closely with our member states and really elaborated in detail how they can achieve this net zero world, considering and respecting their different, very different natural resources and domains. So each of them will have different paths how to achieve Paris Agreement and Agenda 2030. Based on a very detailed analysis and also scientific facts, there is one conclusion. If we are going to exclude nuclear energy, we will not achieve the targets of Paris Agreement and we will not deliver on Agenda 2030. So the result of it is that some of our member states are using nuclear energy for producing the electricity and heat. And some of our member states decided not to do so. And probably we will not change it in the short term because they have their own concerns. And the concerns are, let's say, about the cost of such investment. The concerns might be about the safety of technology. Another concern might be about the long term management of waste, nuclear waste. So here we come to the complicated part of the answer. The answer lies in addressing these three concerns. So let's speak about the cost. Construction of a nuclear power plant is quite a big investment. And this is encouraging some countries from doing so. We think that today we have available technologies for instance for the small modular reactors that it could be an answer. You don't need so huge capital investment. You don't need so huge operational costs. And at the same time you can produce clean energy. So the second concern, what is the safety? And we know from history that many times the key factor here was the human element or institutional element. So let us address it properly, let us provide for technologies that are safe, advanced, and let us get the social license, let us the nuclear power plants be operated by communities of experts. Just to avoid these two factors. Speaking about the third concern, and this is the long term management of nuclear waste, of course this is a question that you could speak maybe hours about, but to take it simply we need to identify, develop repositories of the nuclear waste. We need to manage it properly. We need to try to minimize the volume of that waste. So once again coming to the beginning, without using nuclear energy in our global energy mix, we cannot deliver on our net zero world. Thank you Rafael. Thank you very much Olga for that, which is a clear explanation of how you see things and where you see that more work or more explanation is needed. Because one other thing that we have seen in particular myself here in Glasgow is that there are still quite a lot of misperceptions or misconceptions and in front of those there is only one solution which is inform, inform, explain, explain being transparent. We come now to the end of this first part of this event, where I would like to again thank the two ministers, Mr. Bento and Matthew, and of course also Olga for having shared their views. As we come to a close and let our excellencies move on to their next engagements and Olga as well, we are going to see a message from the director general of Rosatom, which is also a very big actor player in the nuclear world, which is a good introduction for what is coming because the next part of the conversation will be equally interesting and we'll show again how we work in nuclear, which is including all the voices, including all the relevant voices from industry and others, and we will see it this in just one minute. Please don't go because we continue, we just let our first panelists go and we continue with the taped message if you just punch it and we can continue. Thank you very much. It's not only our opinion. That's what experts from the International Energy Agency and the UN say. Nuclear power is a clean source of energy. Its level of CO2 emissions is almost equal to that of a wind power. It is also a safe and stable source of energy because NPP generates electricity 24 hours, 7 days a week for at least 60 years. Where IAEA as a key relevant organization plays a central role in efforts to secure the status of nuclear energy as green and sustainable. We are very grateful that the agency provides the venue for cooperation on this track of all interest parties. Rosatom is building an NPP not only in Russia, but in nine countries worldwide. In the last 10 years we have seen a great interest in atomic energy. We welcome countries that made decisions to construct their first nuclear power plant. For example, Egypt, Turkey and Bangladesh. We realize that the move to build an NPP is more than just a demand for clean energy. It means new jobs, education, contracts for local industry, economic growth, improved quality of life for people in general. In Russia, nuclear power is a major source of low carbon energy. Its share is more than 20% and there are plans to increase it up to 25%. Russian nuclear sector employs more than 300,000 people. 2 million people live in our 26 nuclear towns. We are responsible for these people, for their employment, for well-being. This modern concept of sustainable development is absolutely natural for Rosatom. Of course, nuclear energy is not the only source of green energy. Climate goals can be reached only by uniting wind, sun, nuclear and hydro. We call these four low carbon sources of energy a green square, where nuclear and hydro at the bottom provide base load generation. And wind at the top are responsible for peak load. It's important to diversify. We are open to partnerships and besides NPPs, Rosatom is building wind parks. We are developing small modular reactors and work on clean hydrogen technologies. Rosatom's prime value is safety in everything. One of the special focuses in our work is developing technologies of closed fuel cycle. Here we started the construction of breast reactors in Russia. This is the first NPP in the world with Generation 4 fast-button reactor to process spent nuclear fuel. We plan to use Russian fast reactors to reduce the amount of radioactive waste. Breast reactor power startup is scheduled for 2027. It means that by the end of this decade we'll have a working technology of fast reactors with closed fuel cycle. Today, the critical issue at stake is recognizing atom as green energy source. In Russia, our government has already taken this decision. The taxonomy of green projects was approved in September and nuclear energy is in the list. We see problems with electricity prices in Europe. And we share the view of France, Hungary, Poland and other countries that nuclear energy is the answer to efficient energy transition. We hope that Brussels will soon decide in favor of including atomic energy in the European taxonomy. In conclusion, I'd like to underscore that nuclear energy is more than just a green source of electric power. Rosatom hires around 2,000 young professionals every year. When they are asked why they want to work in our company, where they usually don't speak about money or stable employment, they say that they believe in high-tech, that they want to give ecological and climate challenges, that they want to change their work for the better, and that Rosatom can give them such an opportunity. Friendly speaking, I believe in it myself. Can we have the microphone? Thank you very much. We need to continue. This was a very important message, as you saw, if you were able to continue watching the screens where Rosatom describes some of their projects. Those following nuclear know that they are a very important vendor in the market. As I could see with one eye, they were showing some of their most important projects in countries like Turkey and elsewhere. We have to move on because we have a very interesting line-out of speakers now, which, as I was saying at the end of the first part, also reflect the diversity of nuclear and how we try to integrate different voices to the debate. Let me start with Sama Bilbao Ileon. Sama is the head of the World Nuclear Association. She has been there for not for so long, one year, one year already. She is a distinguished nuclear scientist and operator, and she has been also working for the IAEA in the past, and one leading woman in nuclear globally in an industry that has to be more inclusive. So I'm very happy to see her here, and perhaps without further ado, Sama, your perspective is unique. You represent the diverse views of industry of different countries, small and big. So how are you seeing this market developing in the context of the debate, such as the one we have here in Glasgow? Thank you. Thank you, Rafael. It is truly a pleasure to be here. So as you said, World Nuclear Association does represent the global nuclear industry. Obviously, you have a few people from the global nuclear industry here that will give you additional views, but I think that the big message that we all are bringing to Glasgow is that nuclear energy is going to enable this very fast, very cost-effective, very just transition to the carbonized world. So in reality, we really want to make sure that we get to a world where everybody, everybody in the world has access to abundant low-carbon energy, and of course that will enable a very good quality of life. And the good news, of course, is that nuclear energy can do that, because nuclear energy, as you know, not only produces low-carbon electricity, but it also produces low-carbon heat. And this opens enormous, enormous opportunities to actually decarbonize all this other very hard to abate sectors of the economy. So this is all very good news. So now on the other side, we come here and we really want to instill a sense of urgency here, because we have a lot of pledges and we really need to complement these pledges with bold and ambitious and actionable plans of action. So this is what we want to see. And because truly, if we want to keep this 1.5-degree target within reach, we really are going to need to deploy very, very quickly all the low-carbon proven technologies that we have at our disposal. And clearly, nuclear energy is one of them that we need to deploy as soon as possible. So in that sense, I'm happy to say that the global nuclear industry is ready to play the essential role that we are going to need to play in this transformation. So we are ready to deliver this promise that we have from nuclear energy. At the same time, I would say that we cannot do it alone. So within that concerted effort between government, industry and obviously the global civil society is going to be necessary to truly put in place what is needed to accelerate the deployment of new nuclear projects. So that we can reach this new society with clean, fair and abundant energy for everybody. That's very clear, Sama. Thank you. Thank you. And one of the other interesting things about nuclear for those who are not familiar with the industry is this togetherness. And much as the nuclear industry represented by WNA and of course the individual actors are concerned, we have also WANO. And WANO represented here by Ingemar Engvist, who is the CEO of President of WANO, is the Association of the Operators. And this is also unique because you need the voice of those who are really at the helm of each nuclear power plant around the world. What are the problems? What is the possibility? What are the needs there? So Ingemar, I would be delighted to get your views. How do you see the state of play now? Well, I would start off with saying that the nuclear industry is unique in its sense that it brings... And World Association of Nuclear Operators is my organization. We have all nuclear operators as members of the organization. And all these members share experiences, knowledge for free between them. And we are able to provide support to individual plants. We're putting international teams together for the benefit of safety reliability. And it's a unique organization, I would say. And what brings us together, that is of course the shared goal of raising the performance of plants, operate them safely for the future. And this strong drive to work together has actually made competitors come together. Competitors sometimes on very competitive markets, but still they are willing to share experiences and knowledge for the sake of making this industry safe and reliable. And in Wana, we can also support and provide knowledge to new operators. We heard the statements in the earlier panel session here about Ghana, who was considering joining the nuclear industry in a nuclear program. And by the time, once they have decided, all the world's operators stand ready to support them to make this a successful journey. So it's good for the public, for leaders and so on to understand that this industry is very determined to provide low carbon energy source, to do it safely and willing to share expertise around this matter. So in that sense, the industry is growing in many parts of the world and providing a solution or at least a part of the solution for climate change. And to, for highlighting how the operators who are at the first line, we would say, of all of this can work together in particular with countries that are exceeding to nuclear. So you are associations and then we have the individual players. And on my right, I have two of the most distinguished ones. There are many in the world, but these two truly are. And Boris, he is the CEO of Urenco. Urenco is a very important company, multinational company in nuclear. But with you, we have been looking in particular from the IAEA perspective to one of the most interesting and perhaps promising and certainly needed aspects of the new energy, clean energy landscape. And it's about hydrogen and how to get to that green hydrogen as it is known. And we've been working on a study which is out there. Perhaps you can tell us whatever you want. But in particular, this particular very promising side of what nuclear can offer. Boris? Thank you, Raphael. Thank you, Director General. First of all for inviting me and inviting us. And I want also to thank you and the IAEA for organizing this event because it's so important that we are becoming a little bit more visible in public, visible as a part or as a part of a solution for climate change. And that is really, really important. Thank you for that. It's a very good initiative. Why do I say that? I strongly believe nuclear has a role, a very important role to play. And I come back to the study in one minute. I want to start with one short word before. When you just look at Europe, look at England, look at Germany, roughly so far 8 to 10 percent of the primary energy consumption is covered now by solar and wind. It's not again solar and wind. That's a success story. It's a fantastic story. But we had in the past always a very strong focus just on the electricity sector. The total problem is much bigger, much bigger. And this is a huge challenge. Combating the climate change is not something small. It's something really, really big. And I'm 100 percent convinced. And I'm coming more from the renewable side myself and my career. But I'm very much convinced that without nuclear, it's impossible to meet these targets. Simply independent of any cost. Simply because we need all sources which are CO2-free. And nuclear is one of the important sources there. Now coming back to the, now coming back, that is the first message I wanted to share with you. And then coming back to the study with it. When you look now into the future, when you look in the future, more and more countries believe that you will have, beside the electricity side, also a hydrogen-based economy. How big that will be? There are still question marks around that. How much can be electrified? How much will be hydrogen? That's one of the open issues. But we made a first study or we participated in a first study here in the UK where we looked at the hydrogen potential. How much do we assume for 2050? And we came to the conclusion for the UK, it will be somewhere between 250 and 460 terawatt hours. But we did not look in this first study, what's the best way of producing this hydrogen? And so we said and that I'm very thankful that we got your support there, together with EDF and also together with Lucy Catalyst, who are also here in the room. Thank you for that. We asked for an independent study from Aurora, the Aurora Institute, to think about what are the best mixtures, what is the best energy mix for producing the hydrogen that we need in 2050. And I was really a little bit surprised by myself of the results. Many three results that I want to share with you. First, that is the important one. In an energy mix where you have renewables, where you have nuclear and where you have hydrogen, you can meet the climate targets. And the whole setup of this mix looks realistic. It's always a little bit strange when you have then at the end scenarios which are nice, you meet climate targets, but they look completely unrealistic. These scenarios, they look realistic. That's the first very important message we can meet the climate targets which are the mix. And the second one that was really surprising for us is in this combination, nuclear and renewables, especially for the hydrogen production, there is a cost effect. Nuclear makes it more cost efficient. And that was something new for us. It's depending also on the question how much high temperature nuclear you can add in the long term, where you avoid then the production of electricity beforehand so to reduce costs again. But the overall message is independent of what you do. When you have a sufficient share of nuclear in the system, it gets cheaper. In our scenarios that we have looked at, it was roughly 6% to 9% total cost, system cost, where it has been cheaper. And the third message I want to share you, this example, the study used the UK as an example. And the UK is an island, so it's a perfect example. You can actually use this example for a lot of other countries in the world. It's a good role model to understand also the situation in other parts of the world. So I think it's a good, good start for a further debate and for also creating an understanding of the role that nuclear should play, can play in saving the world. Thank you very much for that. And what I want to emphasize here is that Boris, is that what we need to take good decisions is science-based argumentation. Sometimes there has been, at least in the past, in my experience with almost 40 years working in nuclear and nonproliferation from the diplomatic side, a lot of emotion and perhaps not so much in terms of scientific argument and here you have, in the case of the Aurora study, Aurora IEA, Urenco study, you have a wonderful tool for governments to take the decisions they may wish to take. When we talk about nuclear and the future of nuclear, everybody talks, everybody says that the future of nuclear lies in small modular reactors and this is a perfect segue for my next speaker. Before Secretary Granum, who is already here with us, hi Jennifer, I'll give you the floor in a minute. John Hopkins, he's a, I don't know if in general you're a happy man, but this week you are, I guess. And maybe you can tell us about that, but what is clear, and this is why I thought it would be very good to have you here with us. Very often when I'm with audiences all over the world, we talk about the SMR and people look at us with a smile as if we were referring to some vagorous distant thing that will never happen. Apparently this is not the case for you, so why don't you tell us a little bit about that? New scale. Director General, thank you very much and thank you for your leadership. It's been a very great two days for the advanced nuclear industry and particularly new scale. I came in this industry about nine years ago, prior to that I was building offshore wind farms, I was building PV, I was looking at biofuels as an investment and when I was called and asked about small modular, immediately my eyeballs rolled back and said, I don't think I want to go down that path. However, thankfully we went and sent a team to Oregon State University and did due diligence, and the investment hypothesis to my board at the time was not about a quick return. It was about could you envision if, in fact, small modular reactors, advanced nuclear does come to fruition the applications and how it could really transform energy as we know it around the world. We all talk about energy poverty, we all talk about the need for clean water. Yesterday I was in a session, we talked about hydrogen, we talked about direct air capture sequestration. Well, guess what? All those need a tremendous amount of energy, desalinization. Hydrogen, we formed a consortium right now with multinational companies to get hydrogen to the point of where we need it to commercially viable. It requires two to three hundred metric tons a day to get the price levels down where we need it. I'm big on water, you know, and when I looked at this energy in terms of reverse osmosis to provide energy for desalinizations in companies like Sub-Saharan Africa that have no water, Sub-Saharan Africa, they have no electrician to even get the produce out of the fields and it rots in the field. We could be an answer. We are at a tipping point right now and what just happened the last couple days that we have such great support from the U.S. government just recently a few minutes ago Secretary of Energy Geraint Holm and the Romanian energy minister from Romania, Poposcu, did a signing of agreement of collaborative efforts between governments to come together to help promote advanced nuclear and where it's needed. It's not just about climate disruption, it's also about energy security needs and so I am really proud to be signing an agreement with Nuclear Electric in Romania and we will be deployed early 28, late 27. And how can we do that? I have a robust supply chain all over the world. Our modules are 77 feet including containment. They come in components, we'll build them in a factory, we'll ship them. As that's happening, the civil works will be done. So I can ship these, they're fungible assets, I can ship them anywhere in the world and that's what we're looking to do. And so Romania is critically for us to get our foot in the door. Their government and their people support what we're doing. I'm signing the same thing in Poland. I'm signing the same thing in Bulgaria. I have a memorandum of agreement in Indonesia. There's countries all over the world who say, yes, we need renewables but nuclear's got to be part of the mix. Let me congratulate you again for that huge success and for proving again that this is not a promise, this is a reality and it is up to us working together from the IEA on the safety, the security of all of this to do it together. I think after listening to the associations, the industry, the operators, these two examples of what individual companies are doing, we are privileged to have here the Secretary of Energy of the United States, Jennifer Granold, who has reserved a few minutes of her agenda to explain the plans. She did that a few weeks ago in Vienna at the General Conference and I can promise you it is really interesting to listen to. Jennifer, if you would like to share here and take my seat, take my seat here at the center. I can sit here. Okay, no, that's okay. Okay, super. Thank you so much, Director General. Appreciate so much the invitation to come and speak. I'm so glad about John Hopkins' news. This is fantastic. We are all in on nuclear. Let me just say a couple of things. First is that many of you know the Biden administration has been focused on getting 100% clean electricity by 2035. And we strongly believe in a very broad technology tent. Right now, nuclear is 20% of our clean electricity in the United States. It's 29% of the clean electricity globally. But if you just look at the clean electricity, so it's 20% of our overall electricity, it's over half of the U.S.'s clean electricity. And if we're going to get to 100% clean electricity by 2035, nuclear absolutely has to be a piece, a very important piece of that. So the President has put on the table for Congress to approve this bipartisan infrastructure bill, as well as some tax incentives to continue to build out clean energy. We're all very hopeful that this will be brought across the finish line in the next few days. But part of what was included in that is $6 billion to support our existing nuclear fleet so that we keep the existing fleet going. And part of that is investing in technologies for the next generation of nuclear, so advanced reactors. Just a couple of examples of that that we see as very promising in addition to the SMRs is, for example, we're really focused on these communities that feel like they have been left behind and that without action will be left behind, like fossil communities, coal communities. So, Natrium and TerraPower announced a nuclear plant, an advanced reactor on a coal mine in Wyoming. Now that coal mine is going to put people to work. It would have otherwise, it was closed, in fact, but it had the infrastructure to be able to take the power. It had the grid to be able to take the power on. And so they've gone from a very carbon intensive technology to, too, they will be going to a clean technology. That's the kind of solution that we see as opportune in fossil communities across the world, but certainly that we are focusing on in the United States. We're excited about the technologies that X Energy has looked at, right, regarding the high-temperature gas reactors. That is very exciting as well. We're really, our 17 national labs are looking at next-generation technologies from nuclear to solar, but we also know that the holy grail is clean baseload power, and really that is what nuclear provides. So I want to say, you know, without the IAEA, making sure that people understand that you guys are the watchdogs and ensuring that there is security around nuclear energy because you have been so vigilant about making sure that the world is safe from nuclear proliferation. Your work on both sides of the equation is instrumental in helping us to achieve our clean energy goals. So on behalf of the United States, I just want to say thank you so much for helping the world to be safe and clean. So bravo to DG Rossi and the IAEA. Thank you. Rossi. Well, dear friends, as you can see, this almost at the top of the hour, 60 minutes you spent with us here, we hope you benefited from those. I think in a very efficient way, we were able to listen from countries, from confirmed nuclear users, from emerging nuclear countries in Africa, from the associations, from the operators and from leading companies in the United States. I think a wide impression that says and that confirms something which is very simple, something which is very important and something that I think it is what we from the IAEA came to Glasgow to say and that nuclear, simple as that, has a place at the table. I thank you very much. Thank you. How can the IAEA help make sure that nuclear energy is sustainable? With global energy demand constantly rising, nuclear energy can help ensure access to affordable, reliable and low-carbon energy to guarantee that nuclear energy is developed in a sustainable manner. Hello. Ladies and gentlemen, we're going to take a short break as we transition to the second session of our event today. So just bear with us as we clean up things here and get ready for our next panel on financing and global policy frameworks to be followed by a discussion on nuclear technology innovation. Thank you. How can the IAEA help make sure that nuclear energy is sustainable? With global energy demand constantly rising, nuclear energy can help ensure access to affordable, reliable and low-carbon energy to guarantee that nuclear energy is developed in a sustainable manner. In the year 2000, IAEA member states initiated the International Project on Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Cycles, INPRO. INPRO helps countries assess national nuclear energy strategies, charts nuclear energy scenarios and coordinates studies on innovations. INPRO uses a detailed methodology to assess whether nuclear energy development is sustainable. This methodology covers six areas that match the United Nations definition of sustainable development, affordability, nuclear safety, radioactive waste management, non-proliferation, environmental impacts and governance infrastructure. Through national assessments, member states can make informed decisions on their future nuclear energy systems. INPRO's modeling framework and analytical tools help member states formulate global and regional nuclear energy development scenarios. These models explore how different approaches, including increased nuclear trade and collaboration among countries, can boost efficiency. For nuclear energy to play a substantial role in the global energy supply, both technical and institutional innovations are needed. For this, INPRO brings together technology developers and users, including newcomer countries to nuclear power, to examine innovative reactor and fuel cycle concepts, the results of joint analyses and assessments under the IAEA's INPRO project, provide an added value to stakeholders in the nuclear and scientific communities to ensure nuclear energy of sustainable development. Hello, this is Christian from Glasgow. Can you hear me? Give me a sign. This is me now. Can you hear me? Give me a sign. Can you hear me? Give me a sign. This is me now. This is me now. Can you hear me? Can you give me a sign? Okay. Okay. You can hear me. Perfect. Can you say something that we hear, that we get sound from you? Okay, we can hear you. Thank you for the check. Again, the technician. Hey Fiona, I'm Jonas. Technician, can you hear me? Just give me a sign. Perfect. Thanks. And Fiona, can you even talk to me? It's just a check. Ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, very pleased to be here with you today. And welcome to our session, which we'll be focusing on nuclear innovation for NetZero. We're going to have a particular emphasis today on financing. But just before I introduce our very distinguished panel of speakers, I'd just like to remind everybody, you know, why we care about this issue. So in David Wallace Wells' fantastic book, Uninhabitable Earth, he noted that half of the global carbon emissions that are currently in the atmosphere today were emitted in the last 30 years, right? Since Al Gore published his first book, in fact, on climate change, and that really needs to, that should haunt us. We now have 30 more years. In fact, we have 28, really, 28 more years. A single generation, our generation, everybody, to almost completely eliminate carbon emissions from the energy system, from the global energy system, and not only completely eliminate emissions from our global fossil fuel infrastructure, but possibly double or even treble the global energy system to meet rising global energy demand with clean energy. So here we are, despite 30 years of successfully raising the alarm about climate change, and that's what we're all here doing again today. We have not made a dent in the upward trajectory of emissions. And that's despite, you know, very successful trajectories of wind and solar deployments, reduced costs. Wind and solar still only represents, sadly, 3% of total energy demand. In the past, nuclear is Europe's largest source of low-carbon power. It sustains 11 million jobs. European climate leaders are modern industrialized economies with clean electricity generation achieved through a combination of nuclear and renewables. And I'm thinking particularly of, of course, Norway and Iceland with their very fortunate natural resources, geothermal and hydro, but also Sweden and Switzerland and France and Finland have very low-carbon intensities in their electricity generation. That's what success looks like for climate. And nuclear can support even more decarbonization, alongside, of course, an expansion of renewables such as solar and wind in the near future, but it can also contribute to the decarbonization of heat, as we heard from Samar a moment ago, that not only does nuclear make electricity, but it also, of course, produces heat, and in that way can contribute towards the decarbonization of non-power sectors, such as transport through the production, for example, of hydrogen-based fuels. So this is why we care about the issue of excluding nuclear from accessing sustainable and climate finance, because this really undermines the climate mitigation scenarios and roadmaps that have been identified as feasible and credible by authoritative, independent organizations, including the IPCC, including the International Energy Agency and including even the European Commission. So any rationale for excluding nuclear from financing mechanisms because of safety, frankly, undermines the professionalism and the integrity and the independence of national and international regulators. And indeed, the undermines the integrity of international legislation, including the Euratom Treaty and guidelines issued by the International Atomic Energy Agency and the International Committee on Radiological Protection. And finally, evaluation of all forms of low-carbon energy really should be considered equally, and that's what we're going to get to now. So I'd like to turn now to our very distinguished panel, which I'm very honored to moderate. We're joined firstly by His Excellency Mr. Al Hamadi from the Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation. Mr. Al Hamadi, we've seen some really interesting perspectives developed in the UAE, really a leader, not only in having established possibly the world's most successful first-in-country, first-of-a-kind nuclear energy program, but also very innovative financing mechanisms that really values all low-carbon electricity. May I ask you please to tell us a bit more about that? Thank you. Thank you, Christy. First of all, I'd like to thank you for having this opportunity here to speak to a very important time with the COP26. It's great to be here and also to be able to share the UAE story of how we've done this. So if I can take you 15 years ago, the UAE did a very comprehensive study on the energy demand and requirements. And we'll look at the future, how we can have a sustainable and secure and clean and reliable source of energy to power the nations for decades to come. Fast forward to today. We managed to install 80% of solar and renewable energy in the region and the Arab world. Also, we managed to develop a civilian nuclear program to the highest standards of nuclear safety, security, and non-perforation. And today, sitting with you here, we are generating electricity from the first reactor. It's commercially operational. The second power plant has been connected to grid and has been producing power for testing purposes. And this morning, we've announced the completion of construction of the third unit. So by...thank you. So by 2025, we'll complete the fourth unit. So we'll have four units up and running and operational that will produce 25% of electricity for the nation. So 25% of the UAE's energy electricity will come from nuclear. And that's it. Plus, the renewable energies that we've installed, some of them are one of the biggest plants and the most cheapest plants, 1.2 gigawatts, photovoltaic plants in Abu Dhabi. So over a decade, we managed to dramatically change our carbon footprint. And the four units will avoid us emitting around 21 million tons of CO2 emissions on annual basis. 2.2 million cars on annual basis off the road. So the key question about how do we finance this? We managed to structure the financing by government funding, private banks. We structured it in a way to get private banks to finance these projects, specifically the renewable and also the nuclear in a very sustainable manner. And took us a good number of years, but we managed to do it and do it to high standards. And we are very, very proud of the structure we've done with our partners from Korea. And the way we've done it to the highest standards of nuclear safety, security, and also we managed to do it in a timely and budgetary manner. Congratulations. And this is very inspiring. It's very inspiring for other newcomer countries, but it's also inspiring for our existing nuclear countries to really demonstrate that you can build very cost-effectively new nuclear construction. So I'd like to turn now to Maria Koznik, CEO of the Nuclear Energy Institute from the US. Maria, we're seeing a lot of leadership from the US at this COP, particularly on nuclear. And it was really fantastic to see Secretary Granholm just joined us just before this panel. So congratulations on all of this progress that's being made. And you're also making progress on financing, I understand, too. So please do share with us your perspective. Well, absolutely. And it's wonderful to hear Secretary Granholm, she gives such a full-throated support for what nuclear can do. And then she follows up on that with her support through funding. And as you probably already have heard, the Advanced Reactor Demonstration Projects that are going forward in the United States are a partnership between the government and private industry. And they're going to bring new designs and technology and they're building them. So it's not just reactors on paper. These are pilot projects that are being launched in the United States to be online by the end of this decade. And I think one of the things that people think about for nuclear, they imagine, oh, if you're going to do something new in nuclear, it's a small modular reactor or maybe even something smaller, a microreactor, they imagine it's 20 years away or 30 years away, just feels so far. And I think that's what's beautiful about the investments that are happening right now in the United States. They're going to happen in the 2020s, okay? They're now. It's not real far away. And what's beautiful about that is people will have a view of how long it takes to build and how much it's going to cost to build so they can really make investment decisions to bring more of that to market, not only in the United States but around the world. Fantastic. And can you tell us about the IDF or the development finance corporation that recently changed its stance on financing nuclear? Absolutely. And it's one of the things, if I could, to say how important it is for, say, the green taxonomy that's over here in the European Union and the debate that's going on as to whether or not nuclear should be included. Seriously? Should it be included? You're damn right it should be included, right? It's carbon-free, right? And in that, you know, we've just got to get past this debate. You know, we're sort of wasting time. We need to stand up for nuclear, really appreciate what it brings, quite frankly, to the world. And it's so important when you have something like that, that taxonomy, because other people pick up on that, right? Other people are watching. They're going to look at what they want to put in for their investment, their structure for investment. So it's so important that we make sure that all of that lands correctly. So it was very similar for the Development Finance Corporation that she was asking me about. So for many years, it had a prohibition against nuclear. We have worked and worked and worked for many years, more than five years. And finally, it was just last year, maybe within the last 18 months, they finally reevaluated that and agreed, and they have changed their structure to say nuclear is allowed to be financed by the Development Finance Corporation. And that's huge. And we're not stopping there, okay? World Bank, we're coming to you next, okay? Just saying. That's exactly what I wanted you to say. That was fantastic. Fantastic. Couldn't agree more. Mr. Al Hamadi, you wanted to add something about ESG financing in the UAE. Another example of great leadership. This is the first time, by the way, in the UAE, also in the region, to establish an auction to buy renewable energy and also nuclear energy through the single purchaser in the country. So last month, we had the first cycle of bidding to buy these energies from nuclear and renewable. And I'm really happy to see that companies were bidding for all the quantities. Recently, we had our oil and gas company buying almost all the production of the nuclear power plants energy and securing that purchase to be able to improve their footprint. And this is only the beginning in the UAE. We'll be doing these auctions in a quarterly basis for companies to bid and enable those companies. We have one of the companies, which is one of the largest in the region, Aluminum Smelter and they've been exporting their aluminum to companies like BMW. And now the BMW and see the streets is the aluminum comes in that car comes from the UAE through a clean energy. And that's something which is personally I'm very passionate about to see that's happening to save the environment and be an effective citizen of the world and do something right. Wonderful. Wonderful. Thank you. Well, so I'd like to turn now to our distinguished panelists who are joining us remotely. So firstly, Nicoletta Batini who's the lead evaluator of the UNF's Independent Evaluation Office. Nicoletti. Nicoletta, I apologize. We have not just experiencing climate impacts, we've also experienced a severe shock to all of our economies over the last two years in the COVID pandemic. And you are the lead author of Building Back Better. How big are green spending multipliers which is, you know, a critical question for all of our economies as we begin recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic. We'd love to hear from you please on your perspective on nuclear projects and how they can lead to even greater effects for economic growth than other types of clean energy investments. Welcome. Thank you, Kirstie. And thanks to the organizer for inviting me. Yes, I would like to make a few remarks. And I'm surrounded today by energy and energy financial specialists. I've been working on this perspective since that is what I do. And of course, the IMF is moving fast on climate action as you know. But I won't go into that. I want to talk about the work that Kirstie mentioned. So the choice of a proper energy mix including nuclear is a matter of course for engineers and the general advice from economists that can give a very cheap advice is that there are four mixes that are well tested and tried in terms of technologies because there's a lot of talk about new technologies and browning technologies. But at least from an economist's point of view and I think this applies to other sciences the shortest route is the one you know best. And time is not a friend at this point. So I see nuclear positively and having an advantage from this standpoint relative to other technologies that's my non-engineer interpretation. But when it comes to investments, returns and the role of government and policies of course economists take more of a center stage and as you were saying the climate crisis is seen as an opportunity to restart economies after the COVID-19 pandemic. And a lot of money was spent to keep governments, households and firms afloat during the past two years and debt has soared globally as a result of that. Unfortunately only a minimal fraction of this money went to eco-friendly industries and what's left or the funds that will be available in the near future must be spent well including for dealing with the climate and energy crisis. And so I have envisaged the need for a project exploring the potential of green investment to generate income in the context of a post-COVID recovery. And the question we asked is is there really a trade-off for the recovery between green and strong? And to answer this question we estimated the economic impact of spending on activities that will make economies greener like investment in clean energy. And so we looked to solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, biomass and nuclear among others and biodiversity conservation. And as you know these impacts that economies call multipliers were first conceptualized by John Minor Keynes in the 30s as metrics to assess policies to restart the UK economy after the Great Depression. And so these are compared in our paper to impacts associated with spending on non eco-friendly activities like investment in fossil fuel energy generation or subsidies to unsustainable land users for example spending to support intensive farming and intensive animal agriculture. And we used a new international data set part of which was especially assembled for this task and the study found that every dollar spent on carbon neutral or carbon sink activities from zero emission power plants to the protection of wildlife and ecosystems can generate more than a dollar's worth of economic activity. Turning to nuclear more specifically our results indicate the spending on nuclear energy has a large output effect a really large about six time larger and the output effect associated with spending on fossil fuel energy. More specifically every dollar spent on nuclear energy in the past has been capable of generating four dollars in the larger economy over one to two years while every dollar spent on fossil fuel energy generated about point six dollars on the larger economy because money usually leaks abroad when it's spent on fossil fuel energy production and we also find the nuclear beats in very common spending on other cleaner form of energy although those in turn beats of course fossil fuel spending in terms of impacts on the economy. Why this find is we can have thought about this and we think that these larger values may be linked to the nature of nuclear spending multipliers relative to other forms of clean energy like solar and wind investments in nuclear energy may lead to larger employment of both high and lower scale resources for the construction of the reactors relative to lighter energy producing infrastructure. In addition while building and operating nuclear reactors tends to take time the average time for large reactants of recent construction is about 5.1 years. It's not incredibly long but it's long. Spending for nuclear construction is not sequential like in the case of renewables and tends to be more front loaded which could explain the stronger near term impact and subsequent loss of statistical significance in some of these analysis and these results are corroborated by findings in other studies that compare steady states or long run employment estimates for the generation of electricity using nuclear for example versus wind power which indicate that nuclear produces more employment about 25% more employment per unit of electricity than wind power. Now all these considerations are very important of course for financial plans as well because government will have to have skin in the game when nuclear is built with a lot of nuclear finance by private means. We also found and this corroborates other research comparing wind solar nuclear and in the United States that the pay of nuclear workers is one third higher than that in the wind and solar sectors and usually people working in this sector for nuclear are paid more than twice the mean of other power sector workers. So let me conclude here by saying that nuclear is on the top of the list of economic impact at least in our findings we're now moving to study the implications of shifting from coal to nuclear for example a lot of countries are now debating what to do with these two energy sources which are kind of continuous sources and what are going to be the employment and GDP impact want to do a one to one comparison but the bottom line of this work I think can be that greening our economies is not just more for the planet it's also the shortest and cheaper route back to prosperous global economy so I hope that you know the the conversation goes on a nuclear and for all other energy that are clean and that of course the taxonomy takes into account not just the you know the cleanliness of that but also the social economic impact that nuclear for example can have on economies if investment is made substantially in that area so thank you thank you thank you very much indeed and congratulations on this important work this is I'm really very pleased that we had the opportunity to share that so we're very clear that nuclear has extraordinary environmental benefits it has extraordinary social and economic benefits and I'll now turn to our last guest this afternoon Fiona it's so great to see you hi Fiona Riley from Fire Energy and Fiona has been leading some incredibly important work on making nuclear more investable and particularly focusing on making nuclear applicable to a wide range of ESG criteria Fiona you're the author of nuclear energy and ESG investable asset class we all need to be reading this document please tell us all about it thank you and welcome great to see you we I should say we produce this report through the generation for forum but at the request of the finance community because the finance community came to me and said we want to invest in nuclear we want to solve this problem but we can't because it's not included in ESG and as far as the finance community is concerned ESG is non-financial reporting it was interesting to hear Mark Carney speak at a Canada UK event last week when he made clear that he wasn't talking about ESG when it came to financing he was talking about reporting so to the finance community ESG are very boiling some data collection and accounting metrics and they're a way for the finance community to assess whether projects should be entitled to access climate finance, green finance whatever you'd care to call it it's very different to taxonomies taxonomies should be policy documents they should not be assessing asset classes they don't actually change a project's requirements when it comes to ESG reporting what taxonomies do is they can be very dangerous in that they can allow a huge amount of greenwashing and they can stifle innovation and we clearly said in the report that we would support having no taxonomies and there should be greater ESG reporting and again Mark Carney supported that view last week we looked at a huge range of metrics we use the world economic forum metrics but we also use the TCFD SASB metrics and we've basically put together a document that the finance community can use to assess projects and to look at nuclear as an asset class but of course each project will need to be able to report well in its own right to be able to access financing what we were able to show is that nuclear projects if they're established well are able to align with Paris commitments clearly lower carbon emissions than offshore wind farms they manage and mitigate their waste in nuclear projects which is something that I'm afraid renewables have been lacking in for some time and certainly other projects have been lacking in although we have seen great advancements in solar projects and we're beginning to see advancements in other renewable projects but we were able to show that what we could and do in some instances already report well against probably about 30 metrics of the world economic forum came up with across governance people planet and prosperity and when we spoke to the finance community they said Paris alignment is clearly important and has to be important and we need to look at greenhouse gas emissions but we do need to look at the wider metrics what's the land use that these projects take what's the water use what's the other pollution these projects take because we can't simply focus on greenhouse gas emissions we need to look at wider environmental concerns and it's clear that nuclear meets those wider environmental concerns much better than many other projects I would say nuclear projects are more sustainable but I did find that the finance community has an allergic reaction to the word sustainable because it's used to broadly and too widely and they are clear that the metrics have to be reported well against to allow access to financing again turning to Mark Carly's comments last week he made the point that we need a level playing field across reporting which is the same point we make in the GIF report we have to have a level playing field we need to be able to access finance on the same basis as every other project across the world and we should be doing that and what we have shown in the report is that we need to do that I'd just like to leave one final comment which is the nuclear industry is very good at speaking to itself and generally terrible at speaking to the finance community and the other side is the nuclear industry can be very defensive about how we put across our credentials and it was the finance community who said to me can you please stop being defensive can you please show just how brilliant these projects are and how important they are and I think that's something we need to remember so when you're going to talk to the World Bank and you want your right with the World Bank which I do think is one we need to have we need to be positive and we need to be progressive and show just how well nuclear projects can report certain metrics and therefore should be able to access all sorts of private financing Well said Fiona, thank you let's give her a round of applause and let's give all of our panellists a round of applause thank you very much indeed so since COP21 in Paris five years ago I have seen a dramatic shift in the awareness the understanding and the support for nuclear energy as a climate solution now we need to see the finance community catch up with this not only for nuclear new build but also for refurbishments and maintaining our existing fleet which also requires financing we can't get to zero without nuclear as Mark Carney in fact said last week he's never seen a credible net zero transition strategy that doesn't include nuclear so let's see the finance community catch up with this and thank you all so much indeed I'll hand over now to Josh I believe is going to be speaking but we'll have a short break in the meantime thank you we're going to start so the last panel discussion is on innovation in the area of technology nuclear technology or fuel cycle technology and we have four speakers with us in person whom I will introduce when we have the screen but we have a speaker from Positiva in Finland we have Josh from the US 3rd Way we have Diane Cameron from the OECD NEA and joining us remotely we have Vakis Ramani from EDF so I will start by asking I will ask each speaker basically the same question what innovation in nuclear or nuclear technology they see as being key to the full deployment of nuclear energy and it's full fulfillment of the promises and the role that has been discussed so far it's contribution to net zero and also to identify possibly the challenge or the main challenges that need to be overcome so I will start to my left by asking Diane Cameron at the OECD nuclear energy agency you have also quite a wide perspective on reactor technology and innovation can you let us know your thoughts thank you so much for having me in this panel and let me start by thanking our die hard fans who have stayed for the fourth portion of this event I think we would be calling you folks the groupies so thank you for being here with us I did prepare some slides I'm not sure if we're going to show them no slides okay that's fine I think what I would like to start with is a few comments about pathways to net zero picking up on some of the themes from the previous three panel discussions we at the NEA have taken a look at about 90 pathways to net zero pathways have been published by a number of organizations including the international energy agency including Bloomberg New Energy Finance Shell, BP and many others and what these pathways aim to do is they aim to show us how we get from where we are today to where we want to be in 2050 which is net zero they aim to inspire us with aspirational visions of the potential of innovation they aim to tell us how we can combine different energy innovations and integrate them in different combinations in order to achieve our ambitions we looked at 90 such pathways the same 90 pathways that the United Nations IPCC looked at a few years ago these are the 90 pathways from where we are today to net zero by 2050 for the 1.5 degree scenario and when we looked at those pathways we drew a few different conclusions the first conclusion is that there exists today despite the large number of published pathways still considerable uncertainty in the technical feasibility in the political will and in the costs but despite all of these uncertainties there are a few clear conclusions amongst the clear conclusions are that it will take every non-emitting energy source available perhaps in different combinations and there are different ways of combining them but it is very much in all of the above non-emitting solution that we need to bring to bear all of the published pathways present and present challenges and they all require massive investments in energy innovation another clear conclusion which is very much worth noting and doesn't get nearly enough attention is that all of the published pathways require global installed nuclear capacity to significantly grow between now and 2050 often more than doubling and in some case as much as increasing by a factor of six in fact on average when we look at those 90 scenarios to net zero by 2050 the average role of nuclear in those 90 scenarios is to triple global installed nuclear capacity between 2020 and 2050 when we first saw that our hearts sank a little to be very honest because at first blush it appears possibly unachievable we then put that aside and started a different type of analysis we started looking at projections ground up projections of the true potential of nuclear to displace carbon between now and 2050 we looked at long-term operation of existing fleets we looked at conservative and ambitious scenarios for that we then looked at planned and conservative and aspirational scenarios based on reactors under construction and reactors that are planned generation three large-scale existing technologies and estimated the contributions from those types of projects we then moved to nuclear innovation and this is important because amongst those 90 pathways many of them include very aspirational roles for all sorts of energy innovations from carbon capture and sequestration to hydrogen to batteries and storage but the truth is that not a single one of them includes a particularly aspirational projection of nuclear innovation some of them are ambitious I mentioned in terms of the role of the build out of existing commercial nuclear technologies but none of them project the role of nuclear innovation we could look at that with a glass half full perspective an optimistic perspective and say that that means we can play the role of those scenarios project for us because it's based on existing proven technology you could also look at it as a bit of a glass half empty which is there is clearly a vacuum in the conversation nuclear innovation has not presently part of the conversation we need to step into that conversation and help the rest of the clean energy policy dialogue understand the actual potential of nuclear innovation so that's what we started to do we looked at small modular reactors conservative and aspirational projections generation 4 nuclear produced hydrogen and also nuclear heat for deep decarbonization of heavy industry so I'll just share very quickly with you the findings of that analysis the punchline to all of this is that we found that the cumulative effect of long term operations gen 3 so power and non power nuclear heat, nuclear hydrogen and SMRs in generation 4 is that nuclear could achieve a role where we triple global installed nuclear capacity by 2050 and displace upwards of 87 gigatons of carbon dioxide by 2050 now before so we did project these are in some cases aspirational but they were all achievable we wanted to paint a picture that was doable one final comment on that before we all sigh a sigh of relief and say okay great we're on track we can do this we can deliver this when we look at what is planned so what we consider to be our conservative pathways there is a gap between what is planned and what is needed that gap can be filled but it requires nations and governments and industry to change their plans to change their plans from what is currently fairly conservative in terms of their vision of what nuclear can do to a more aspirational plan is that those aspirational plans are achievable I think from your your analysis you see that a whole set of reactor technologies would be needed to fill the needs not just in electricity but as you mentioned hydrogen and heat and so on so you mentioned very ambitious objectives but we know that there are a number of challenges to achieve those objectives and are recalling the earlier conversation and the statements by the executive secretary of UNEC she mentioned several factors that were challenges for governments one of them is the issue of waste management and I would like now to turn to our colleague Jua from Finland because Finland's been leading the world in the way you have approached the management of spent fuel it's been a long process but you're very close to having an operational system, please tell us about it thank you Henry very nice to be here I'm a nuclear hero as you can see from Malkiluato from Finland so happy to be here we are innovative in Finland in many ways and also bold we have a climate neutrality target in 2035 so which is the most ambitious in the world 2035 we will be climate neutral so and the solution for that is that we use more and more nuclear power the biggest step that we will take will happen in February in three months that we will start the world's biggest or one of the biggest power plants so the biggest climate action will happen in the Finnish history in three months which is great thank you and then we need to wait for a few more years and then we will start the operations in Onkalo we will start the activities depositing the spent fuel into final deposit over 400 meters deep so currently the construction work is going on it's going well so it's a few years of construction but of course before that actually this whole plan was agreed a national level in the 1980s already so we've been following this plan for 40 years and also following the timetable and most of the work has been R&D and also including innovations but now that part of the job is done it's now in construction which is going well and operations coming on quite soon so and if I may add one thing more which is positive I think we could be frontrunners in SMR's tour how is that possible so we look a lot into heat SMR's small reactors and what's special in Finland we have maybe the highest political support in increasing small reactors so actually I'm coming from next to Helsinki from Espoo city and they just the politicians decided that they will show us a site a place where to invest to SMR in a city close to city at least they are looking into it so political support is not just the words it's concrete preparation for the future investments and this is not only happening in Espoo it's happening in several big cities currently using fossil fuel in heating so there's more to come after onkalo more interesting stories thank you and for these good news I know our director general visited onkalo last year and he said it was a game changer for the nuclear industry so we look forward to that and also in Finland there's something you're doing right because one party is supportive of nuclear energy so we should take an example of how you've managed to convince across I would say religions in a way so thank you so let me now turn to our speaker who's connected remotely from EDF to talk about the perspective of a big nuclear utility that is also a vendor and Vakis tell us what innovations do you think a nuclear industry should offer to its future customers good evening Harja hope you can hear me well and thank you for having me this evening and apologies for not being able to join all of you in Glasgow tonight maybe to follow on Diane's comments and numbers and big numbers some additional numbers so today the nuclear installed capacity around the globe is around 430 gigawatts so that's what we have today and that represents roughly 10% of the generation worldwide slightly declining over the last few years but soon to pick up and that's what we hope of course and we have to increase the pace of that growth now the reality is if we are to maintain that level 430 gigawatts of installed capacity with the decommissioning etc etc we have to install 8 gigawatts of capacity per year which is already enormous now if we are to maintain 10% of share of nuclear energy then it's not 8 gigawatts that we have to install it's 14 to 15 gigawatts per year that we have to install so the numbers continue to stack up and it's quite amazing at which pace we have to push our ability to develop those projects and we all know it takes a lot of time to develop and then construct and connect and so definitely from utility and developer perspective that's what we will be looking at how to increase the pace of development, construction, connection to grid of nuclear power plant now how to do that, how to unlock really the potential of nuclear energy then we look at that from say it's really three dimensions from a technology development standpoint in really two dimensions it's industrial technical on one side and there is an additional one which is regulatory which I will develop very slightly, there is a third one which has been developed in the first panel in the previous panel which was related to financing where we have a lot of things to innovation to bring in to ensure that nuclear power plant can be developed now from an industrial and technical standpoint if I take the example of EDF what we have done is well we have facing this demand, increasing demand for electricity well we have developed over the years a range of product because of course the demand itself overall when we look at it overall and then we look at it from different countries perspective, different utility perspective different usage perspective is quite varied and so today in our range of product in nuclear we have the high power EPR reactor which is operational in China which is soon to be connected to the grid in Finland which is also to be fuel loaded, end of next year in Flamelville 3 in France and that reactor is aimed at high demand massive demand or high renewal requirements and we definitely push this and propose this type of product where the demand rate is really high typically in India where we have a 6 EPR project under discussion now how to it's been mentioned by our colleague from TVO earlier the EPR in Finland the EPR projects those big projects take time how do we make sure that in the future they we can compress this time well we have to push much more into digitalization and standardization this doesn't look like innovation in fact but actually it is in our industry we have to push much more for standardization and digitalization to compress the development and construction time and this is what we have to do to big power plant in the range of product we also have within the same technology EPR technology some mid range adaptation of the EPR technology which we call the EPR 1200 the EPR 1200 exactly the same technology as EPR and at 1200 megawatt power and this is to allow us to make proposals to countries where there are site constraints or network constraints and again this sounds like a pretty basic idea but in fact ensuring that you have the same technology in different range of power making sure that you have you can standardize this approach making sure that you can replicate the design approach and the safety approach is something which requires significant discipline and engineering in design work and this is what exactly what we are doing today with this mid range reactor and finally and this is something that has a lot of space now in the media drives a lot of interest which is related to SMR we are also accelerating significantly the development of our SMR product which we call New World it's a 340 megawatt electric power plant which aims at replacing those aging coal power plants around the globe and there are many of those there the innovation is ensuring that those reactors can be integrated so that we can simplify the approach to licensing we can simplify the safety demonstration and therefore reduce the time for obtaining licenses in that domain and so with that we also add the modular aspect into the design and that is something we ingrained right at the beginning of the design standpoint and that is to allow us to reduce significantly on-site construction so all of this include rather in big reactors or smaller reactors innovation in terms of design approach as well as in terms of industrial process approach and this is all significantly demanding in terms of engineering capabilities so of course the last piece in that is that the usage of nuclear has to be broadened to beyond electricity and this is where heat comes into play hydrogen comes into play desalination potentially comes into play and you have to optimize or be able to optimize your design to those usages and this is also a significant challenge we have to integrate very early at the design phase so that we can deliver those options why they are going to come in the coming two decades basically and so I mean I think what I'm trying to develop here is that in the approach to decarbonization we have to be able to push and propose products which are able to significantly reduce and secure the project development time phase and this is something which will require full attention in the coming years I will finish with a few words about regulation because it's difficult to talk about design development without saying that the time to obtain licensing and get licensing through is always a big challenge in nuclear and there is a need for the regulators to support the design developers to ensure that this licensing process can be reduced probably by starting first to harmonize objectives of the regulations in countries worldwide thank you very much thank you for sharing your experience from the point of view of EDF and actually it's a perfect transition to my next speaker because the US has been at the forefront of the development of advanced reactors it's a country where the regulator has also been involved with the designers so can you share your experience and maybe let us know what you see as the challenges for the development of those advanced reactors which Diane Cameron also alluded to in her presentation thanks for having me here tonight and thanks for everyone who's stuck around for the end of this really fantastic series of panels just very quickly, third way is a US based think tank that supports a technology neutral approach to climate change and for us when we started this work we honestly did not care if nuclear was part of the solution or not the whole point was how do we get to net zero as fast and fair as possible and what became clear to us is the data showed it was much much harder to get to net zero for the united states or globally without nuclear power and without nuclear not just for electricity but to provide a number of services including production of hydrogen including industrial heat and so the question which I think is also the challenge for nuclear is you've got a number of technologies the talent is there we have the know how to develop a variety of ways to basically create heat and to cool it very safely, very effectively and very cost efficiently but there are other roadblocks and challenges to get US reactors or any advanced reactors to markets around the world that need them and you've identified and you've heard from all of the panels here today really three big themes one is nuclear needed new creativity creativity and thinking about what the product they had was how to talk about it and how to provide the services the rest of the world need the second is confidence nuclear is being talked about across cop it is a very big part of the solution because in part more and more people recognize that and I think the nuclear industry NGOs that advocate for nuclear and others are simply saying that is fact we're not asking to be at the party we're just at the party and then the third is capital which are our last panel that Kirstie moderated did so well to discuss and just very quickly on the creativity side look advanced nuclear isn't about electricity anymore it's about providing whatever service a country an operator end user needs that requires a significant amount of consistent heat and what we're seeing in the United States with the development of these advanced reactors is that they're really being driven by innovators and by companies that are looking at what the customer wants and what the cost the customer really will view as competitive and then meeting them where they are dramatically different from what we saw 20 or 30 years ago when the assumption was it would just be one large utility whether it was state owned overseas or a utility that was regulated in the United States just purchasing it on the confidence front the fact that we're at cop the fact that we've seen a number of announcements from a number of different international leaders who recognize that we don't have time anymore to be debating different solutions every solution needs to be included and that there is more of a political cost to excluding action in many instances than there is to including technologies that are perceived in some quarters as controversial that it doesn't make sense to sort of accede to that view anymore but to recognize that the urgency has to override everything and I think we all need to continue to embrace that this panel the day has done that and then finally on the capital front I think that we're seeing this in the U.S. as well it's trying to figure out what are the creative ways to not only develop capital to finance the demonstration and commercialization of the first handful of reactors but these exact questions how do we make sure that nuclear is included in ESG how do we make sure that the World Bank that the export import bank in the United States and every other financing entity that really plays a role in signaling to the capital markets and signaling to countries that yes nuclear should be part of the solution for climate for addressing energy poverty issues has to be included and you're going to be looked at more suspiciously if you do not include it as part of the solution rather than if you do that's a sort of innovation that we're starting to see and we really need the technology is already there and frankly we just see multiple multiple reactors built online before the end of this decade that part is being taken care of it's the rest of it that I think we really need to work on Thank you Josh for sharing your optimism but also identifying what are the remaining challenge which indeed were addressed earlier in the day so I will now finish with Vladimir the last but not least and ask you what you see as the innovations that are needed for nuclear to fill its full role You understand in which difficult situation am I right now or so everything positive has been said impediments were identified and what to say and I found what I have to say I would like to focus in my very short message the very interesting feature of nuclear power technology and it is inherent potential to be essentially circular technology in technological terms it means nuclear power has a potential to be engineeringly waste less and the reason is very simple just that is not a dream it is a nature of fish and reaction you remember from your colleagues in the school that incident neutron on the nucleus of uranium produces nuclear power and produces secondary neutrons and the faster the incident neutron is the effectively produced neutron axis and this neutron axis can be converted in many things it plays the role of legendary stone of philosophers which is capable of turning substance into more valuable substance so this neutron axis can be used to produce secondary fuel from uranium it means renewable effect renewable energy and the part of this neutron axis can be used to transmute nuclear wastes and nuclear waste today have been said as one of the most impediments and that is not a dream again that is engineering reality at least in my country the point is we have to develop fast reactor technology and this is also challenging thing because we have to move from the water coolant to liquid metal coolant and of course at higher temperature there is a problem of compatibility of the liquid metal with structural materials but that is not a physical problem that is engineering problem and each every engineering problem has a potential to be solved in my country the first nuclear reactor with fast neutrons was put into operation in 1973 in the former Kazakhstan the second was put into operation in 1980 and still has been working at the commercial stage and the last one was put into operation 2015 and this reactor is not just to demonstrate the technology of fast reactors it will be used to demonstrate the feasibility of closing nuclear fuel cycle with transmutation of wastes and currently this reactor is loading with the MOX fuel which contains plutonium artificial fuel by the way renewable fuel by the way and this director general told to you in pre-recorded message this year in June Russian people the first concrete in the foundation of the first in the world let cool the reactor and this reactor is a unique one because it is not just to produce electricity it is associated with repossessing and refurbification of the fuel in the perimeter of nuclear power plant in one nuclear power plant fuel can be fabricated and without any ways to produce electricity so the stone of philosopher that is not a dream it is engineering reality in a few years Russia will give the chance to show to the world that no more impediments to include nuclear power as a green energy source and with this I would like to conclude thank you very much for your attention that thank you Vladimir for reminding us that fast reactors and close fuel cycles are the way to not only to guarantee a clean electricity within the next few decades but for centuries so it addresses also the issues of supply of uranium you said by recycling you have a renewable source of energy to be accounted with so thank you to all the speakers who are here thank you to Vakis who connected remotely I would like to thank all of the audience for staying so long with us and I would like to thank our team up there my colleague Craig and the team for supporting our events with so many different types of sessions so thank you thank you all and enjoy the rest of your evening