 So welcome everybody this morning who that you showed up in such large numbers although it's very early so I was asked to talk about nuclear power within the context of energy demand and supply and like my section head who gave lecture two years ago and I would like to add also something about sustainable development and climate change has been developed in the past few years so what I will be talking about first electricity demand and supply then I'll tell something about the sustainable development and the sustainable development goals defined by United Nations then I would like to focus on the sustainable development goal of climate change mitigation and then of course end up with some takeaway message messages so to start with we have some challenges in the field of energy start with the growth of population of the world we had in 2014 7.2 billion and which is expected to grow to 9.6 billion in 2015 on top of that these people don't live homogeneously divided over the world but they move to cities urbanization increases by more than 40% between 2011 and 2015 and economies grow at an average rate of 3.2% per year from 2011 to 2050 and then the business as usual scenario as you know I'll explain later when forecasting the future we use scenarios but if nothing happens to current policies we just go on as we always do so called business of usual the world's energy primary energy demand will be increasing by 70% between 2011 and 2015 and maybe you would say 2011 that's already six years ago yes it is and of course they're changed a bit but the principle idea remains the same so we have pressure on resources health and environment and the sustainability calls for energy system transformation so if you look at the graph what do we see there it's the distribution of the world's energy demand over the various fuels available the black one conveniently for coal the large light brown one is for gas and the medium brown ones for oil so this is the largest over largest part of primary energy demand its fossil fuels and on top of that there's the nice colored ones the yellow for nuclear and the big green for bioenergy the blue one for hydro and the other renewables well they're also yellow but the yellow one top and we can see it's still very small and the red line is the energy related CO2 emissions that come back to the end of the presentation today but what you see when we go on as usual is rising and rising rising so if we look at primary energy demand first we look at the black line that's the past well we can certain about that it's only one line because that's what already happened it's here measured in thousands millions tons of oil equivalent and what we see is this little dip of the financial crisis in 2008 but then it's the overall trend is that it's rising then we look to the future and then we look here at the international energy agency world energy outlook where they define three policies the red one that's the so-called current policy scenario that's if you take the current policies of the government and only that without any well wishes or proposals and so then you have this red line going up if you have the new policy scenarios it's the policies already implemented plus the intentions and well wishes and well serious plans so to say and then you come to the blue line and if you then go to real decarbonization and that's what we've seen now is okay the current wish to limit the rise of the temperature in 2000 no in 2100 to 2 degrees Celsius then we go into the so-called 450 scenario and then that is the green line and that is really a policy where I say additional measures have been taken that are really radical just to limit these co2 emissions now where does this number of 450 come from or at least the 450 parts per billion of co2 that's in that is then the concentration in the air so that's this is corresponding to these two degrees Celsius so if we then move to electricity first look to the past we also see a rise and an accelerating rise here we can see some advances have been happening at the beginning very left it's the end of the World War two and in 1973 there's the first oil price shock as we all know oil price shock then there was a going down of the economy and also going down of primary energy consumption but electricity went on and on and on second oil price shock in 1979 US recession 1981 it oh it may be slowing down a bit but it's rising and rising the only what was really giving a bump that was a global credits crunch in 2009 that's the red pillar at the far right but the general trend it's rising so if we then look into the future and there's 33 scenarios again 2014 and then they distributed over the various regional regions that's in America on top and China on the bottom which it's not for any reason to do that it's just to show well from the largest to smallest region to the largest region which with regard to energy demand then we see what's happened in 2014 and then additional is in blue what comes on top of it in 2014 and then in the new policy scenario that's that's the mean the medium and then if you go to the current policy scenarios it's more and when you go to the 450 scenario it's usually less electricity demand by the way if you have questions don't hesitate to interrupt me otherwise I'll just go on so first talk now about the traditional energy electric power demand and supply where you see this traditional and the right we have the suppliers and there's a coal fired plant there's a nuclear plant there's a hydro plant and all these good good electricity on the grid which is transported over high voltage lines to the consumers that can be a factory there can be an office that can be a residence and why I call this traditional and later on at the end we will see what happens if we add large shares of renewables to the grid but first the traditional supply if we divide this over fuel and look at the past we will see a large amount of coal over the world and small amount of oil if we look 50 60 years ago there was a larger amount but oil was then unpredictable for price and pretty expensive so just kind of pushed out the demand let me say electricity supply and so the fossil viewers are mainly coal and gas the lower yellow bar is nuclear and the large blue the upper blue bar the dark blue bar is hydro and then on top of this come the renewable the new rules the green one is biofuels and the upper yellow one is wind solar and the intermediate renewables so what we see here again is the same trend it's under rise except for this 2009 dip if we now distribute this over OECD well first for all of them it goes coal is a dominant source and it stays that way if we go look back to 1990 and compare this to the 2012 situation it has shifted a bit but coal is still dominant followed by gas gas is very popular and has been rising a lot also where hydro can be applied well still increase that and there is some some growth in the renewable sources but in this period it has not been very much if you divide it over OECD and non OECD you see that in a non OECD coal is even much more popular it's like much more and also the rise of coal is much more nuclear plays also role of and the OECD it has been growing and also non OECD it has been going even more but still the percentage is very low still then the evolution of nuclear electricity production if we concentrate on that and we divided over the various countries and look at the past and what we see here is the most application is in European economic area and in North America and in East Asia there has been a growth but due to Fukushima there's this large hit coming from and now it's slowly recovering but still this dip because it's a cumulative gravity graph is coming from there in the meantime also Germany has started there to shut their plans down but this is less visible here see here Africa is very small there's only two plans but as we'll look in the future this is plan to be more but for some statistics I think well we've seen this yesterday as well 449 nuclear reactors are in operation 60 are under construction there's a almost 400 gigawatt install capacity in 30 countries and 12 percent of the electricity is generated per country this is varying from 2 percent to even 73 the famous French situation this one we also saw yesterday the plans in the construction first is in operation the blue bars are the operational plans and we see where the growth is here that's the green bar in Asia in the far east and it's Asia Middle East and South East that's also has growth and in the Central Eastern Europe Western Europe and in North and America not really much is happening yet this is a kind of complicated graph I leave it a little it's a power generation mix in the international energy agency world energy outlook scenarios so this what I was talking about first we start here with the 2013 situation on the left and then we compare the new policy scenario and PS with the 450 scenario there you see that all these bars of the various fuels are lower here we see these different colors and the black of course is for coal again and the the large green one another large orange one is of gas and the nuclear one is the lower yellow one and we see the general trend that the 450 scenario oh sorry yes yes well this new policy it means what governments are pledging no what they're doing already today what's in the legislation plus what they are pledging for the near future so it's the current city government said they've been elected and so they say okay we have these new policies underway or we're pledging to do that from that that's your term here going on but for the front at 50 there's more going on then we then there's really a goal like well look our energy well our energy supply has to be decarbonized to that and that's level which means that well much more of the fossil fired capacity needs to be replaced by carbon-free capacity that can and then that it's it's equal whether it's wind or nuclear or hydro or whatever it just doesn't it cannot emit CO2 but there's no policy in place for that yet and it's also not pledged yet but that's the difference between these two scenarios that is still uh it's uh well these rule well it's not it's it leaves an obligation for uh these policies yet to be created and so this this 450 scenario assumes okay this this is going to happen that these these governments will create the policy and they will implement it and when when this is happening then we will see this scenario yes how the uh how the nuclear energy can be increased that's yeah yeah um i suggest i will leave this question um until the end of the presentation because then the Paris agreement comes in and this has a very interesting mechanism which could in this way encourage nuclear to be realized but and if i don't answer it properly please come back so now go to sustainable development and the United Nations sustainable development goals so what is that it are 17 goals to mobilize efforts to end all forms of poverty fighting inequalities and tackle climate change so it's all kinds all things that have to have to be improved around the world well affecting all factors of life it's not just energy it's not just nuclear uh i'll show in the next slide what are what they are but first they are adopted by the world leaders in september 2015 at the UN summit so it's in the United Nations thing for all of the world and in january 2016 they came into force that's pretty recent before there were other goals they were so-called millennium goals and um but what they forgot forgot there for instance there was no energy millennium goal so this is out of date have a set of new ones uh which is very handy for uh governments to to build their policy on and there's an action plan being defined for the next 15 years so here they are and here okay we're conveniently put number seven affordable and clean energy in the middle because that's the area that we are working on and we see with the other 16 goals uh they are uh all in some other other way connected to this goal of affordable and clean energy energy is the center of uh means to realize all of this so to pick out some well more related ones and of course uh there's the number 13 that's the climate action and there's the number which is it uh the yeah yeah yeah industrialization and so we have affordable energy it reduces the poverty and inequality supports health education economic growth and so that's the first one the reliable energy is essential for industry health education and there are all these goals that um that just rely on energy so what do we do with this how do we quantify the improvement or uh what we can do from the energy side with all our different fuels for realization of all these measures these uh metrics of quality of life so we use for this a lifecycle assessment this provides a consistent way to compare different technologies by accounting for the full impact over the life of each technology of producing an identical end product so called from cradle to grave and in our case we always look into the kilowatt hour of electricity so to start this um how about the occupation of land we go 15 life cycle land occupation is indicated here for the various fuels uh that is required for the production of electricity and we measure that in square meters here in a year per megawatt hour as we see okay the colored ranges they show low and average and high estimates on the top is the solar thermal thermal then it goes to solar pv wind offshore wind onshore biomass hydro the gas um mythical mine cycle and then there's the coal with the carbon capture and sequestration oh that's the upper gas as well by the way um and there's the normal coal and on the bottom there's the nuclear and what we see here is that biomass well of course you know is taking the most um land for per megawatt hour generated and those that are doing very good it's the offshore wind it's the the gas and nuclear what's wrong with the coal uh they're taking just more land because of the mining especially the branco mining so this is a fine way to compare these all these fuels in this uh on this metric now you can go to the next one which is water consumption it's the sixth goal clean water and sanitation life cycle water consumption is then measured in the needed square uh no cubic meters per megawatt hour for electricity technologies and what are used in the operations the dark green refers to cooling towers whereas light green shows just withdrawals for the ones through cooling which is usual life and there what we see again uh is that both nuclear and coal and gas because their thermal generating technology still they require still a lot of water and solar PV is doing better there the photovoltaics but biomass and hydro yeah they have dependent on what you're using biomass production uh or evaporation so they're doing quite too long wind offshore and onshore are doing very well there they don't need any water yes yeah as a mars they have the same principle of you know the boiling water and the thermal cycle so they're not more efficient or so so they also need the water yeah well it's just a little different because they won't need the large cooling towers but the principle still little it's still similar it's not it's not that they suddenly don't need any water at all so then we go to materials requirements and that's the goal number 12 of the responsible consumption the life cycle structural materials requirements and then we have been looking at four materials the red one is cement the yellow one is aluminum the green one is copper and the purple one is iron um of all these fuels what would they need for for kilowatt hour on grams per kilowatt hour of these different materials and then we see suddenly that solar thermal and solar PV and wind offshore and wind onshore and not doing very well also biomass and hydro you're using a lot of materials per kilowatt hour generated and there the usual fossil fuels and nuclear are too much better as being concentrated sources of energy electricity and then we go to human health what we measure there is the various aspects of health impact disability then we measure that in disability and just the life years you know metric per terawatt hour generated of electricity technologies and when we go again through this whole list of fuels and we look at things like ozone depletion human toxicity that's the yellow one the purple one is particulate matter formation and the green was ionizing radiation and then we also have photochemical oxidant formation and we see that especially the fossil fuels are quite doing quite bad on human toxicity and on particulate matter formation and of course nuclear is this particular aspect of ionizing radiation but if you take that into account in a quantitative way it compares kind of positively still with the fossil fuels here the the renewable sources are doing very well I mean on the top then the latter one greenhouse gas emissions in comparison that's over the life cycle it's not only during operation but also what is needed for construction of the plant and what is needed for the commissioning of the plant and you know tearing it down so if you then compare and then it goes in gram of co2 equivalent per kilowatt hour why what is a co2 equivalent it's not only co2 that's greenhouse gases but there are other greenhouse gases like princess methane which have a different impact on the greenhouse effect in fact princess methane is 30 percent more severe than co2 but if you then all calculate it to a co2 equivalent then you have one measure and that's what's shown here in grams co2 equivalent per kilowatt hour of electricity technologies and then we show that especially coal is doing very bad of course and we see that the well other fossil technologies don't are doing better because of better efficiency and there's the carbon capture and sequestration technologies the CCS that's supposed to well especially fight this component of fossil fuels and we see it helps but it doesn't help it doesn't eliminate it still it decreases to 25 percent and well what we see here nuclear and wind are doing best here in fact maybe you've seen that yesterday the DDG also showed such a graph that's a little bit older one now we have some move figures that especially hydro is not that positive anymore can also in some cases even emit more co2 so now I'll focus on this a little bit more climate change mitigation so first we look to the past so if we would have generated everything by well that's if nuclear and hydro and other new worlds were not available this generate this electricity had to be generated in some other way and then more co2 would have been generated or emitted and this is what this graph is showing that the black one is the power sector sector actual and the blue and yellow and orange one are dose of carbon free sources so they have avoided the emission of co2 by their operation and so here the yellow bar is what nuclear has avoided in comparison but these if you look into the future the if we want to maintain this nuclear share it's not something something self-fulfilling then there needs to be some active action because a lot of nuclear plants have come to quite a high age and of course there is some action on lifetime extension but that's not everywhere there are also countries that are actively facing out going the other way okay very nice but it needs to be replaced by some other carbon free source otherwise we just keep on emitting more so here I have the age distribution of the operating nuclear plants and we see that a considerable amount of plants are older than 30 years so three quarters of the existing nuclear fleet should be replaced by 2050 so now about Paris agreement the United Nations has this annual United Nations climate change conferences they started in 1995 and the idea is to address this problem of greenhouse effect the rise of temperature because of the increasing concentration of co2 in the atmosphere and for this there is a United Nations framework convention on climate change UNFCCC and they have these conferences which we call simply conference of parties the 21st was in Paris well the third one is also very famous that was in 1997 in Kyoto maybe you've heard of the Kyoto protocol and well the 21st was then in Paris with the famous now famous Paris agreement that is in 2015 then well a turning point in the global climate action but it's not an end point it's the Paris agreement huge sorry to go emissions people are very very happy the goal is to limit the temperature or temperature rise to two degrees C but also to aspire to one and a half degrees C and for the first time this is important this is a bottom up it's an action at the national level and it's a design of rules processes and institutions only negotiation for its entry into force in 2020 so just now an agreement but it's not in force yet the idea is now that all the countries come up with their their nationally determined contributions so everybody has to come in well I'm going to contribute this what are you going to do well build these and these plans and do energy conservation or close coal plants or whatever and then they may show well this is going to bring so much so this is a long-term goal it's to limit the average global temperature increase to well below two degrees C above the pre-industrial levels that expires to one and a half as I said it's a clear signal to policy makers businesses investors and the public that this low carbon and climate resilient economy is inevitable it's providing a dynamic mechanism to take stock I'll show that later on is very important and strengthen the mitigation ambition over time and setting up an enhanced transparency in accountability framework and it has a solidarity package with adequate provision on climate finance so countries that cannot afford all these nice measures they're being helped by mechanisms by all the parts of the world that happen to be more wealthy and to address the links needed to adaptation loss and damage that causes all these this climate change effects they're already going on it's not something in the future it's already happening that's a that there's already damage to certain parts of the world so this is what's happening the black line on the left that's what we saw before that's the yeah and it's going in a similar it's a very similar form as the primary energy that we saw in the beginning but this is the global total greenhouse gas emissions and but then for the future we can go through ways the current policy trajectory if we don't do anything just follow on with the current policies it will cause in 2050 a rise of temperature of 3.3 to 3.8 degrees celsius where there's a whole scientific body doing all these calculations coming up with these numbers now every country coming to paris brought their internet intended nationally determined contributions we're going to contribute so much and if we all add all this up again you get this red line then it's going down to 2.7 degrees celsius but it's still not enough for short to 2 degrees celsius target at a greater emission from a country is needed and so and if we would uh if that would work out then we will see a real maximum in the CO2 emission and it will be going down again but until now it's only rising it's going to be more or less but it's still rising so the paris agreement emphasizes the role incentives to reduce emissions and there's these national mitigation targets formulated by the national determined contributions there will be a price on carbon there will be support long-term policy orientation for investors it's very in the low carbon energy it's very well understood that this is not something nice of today of something politically fancy or fashionable of these years and these investors must be certain that they will earn their investments also over the long term also importance the rdnd investments research and development and demonstration and technology transfer and the policy incentives serving joint purposes of sustainable development here i highlighted the article 137 has also recognized the important role of providing incentives for emissions reduction activities including tools such as domestic policies and carbon price so the message to all the different countries is choose and design the policy instruments that are best suited for implementing your countries and these things so this is how it works the paris agreement and 2015 it's on the left there's the paris agreement itself and then intended national determined contributions were submitted then in 2018 there will be a pre 2020 review of global action that is that the scientific body is going to look at well what's happening in reality today who's emitting what and how does it all add up then 2020 we get a renewed agreement then 2050 the development emissions development strategies countries submit their targets for 2030 and that can include then technologies they are not available yet or at the moment too expensive but um yeah they can say that then it will be available so we make it a policy to implement so this will include possibly include it's it's just an option some kind of innovative nuclear technology and then in 2023 there's coming this scientific body again well it's the first global stock take what's effect does it have maybe it's even better than we need to take less action but most probably there will be uh just a confirmation okay go ahead we need more reduction so and in 2025 the countries are asking what's next what you're doing now well i've still a new nuclear technology that wasn't available before so that's an option see and that's how it's all going on it's a 2013 they're a new target 35 they're new targets and it all offers the opportunities to bring in new technologies and on the bottom here is based on the latest science and there's this uh in the governmental panel of climate change they provide these reports in 2018 of the impact of 150 no sorry 1.5 degrees Celsius and related global greenhouse emission pathways that the two degrees c target can well it will reduce from 2010 the greenhouse emission benchmark from 100 to yeah either 40 to 70 percent in 2015 that's the two degrees target and the one in the 1.5 degree c target has a cut and to even 70 to 95 percent so that is really a lot but all of them they aim to cut emissions to even zero and the two degree c target is doing that in 2018 to 2001 2100 and the 1.5 degree c target it closes even forward to 2060 to 80 but the idea is the same so it's just not only about mitigation targets it's also about adaptation loss and damage it's about financing the technology development and transfer capacity building people being helped with that transparency of action and support so there's a whole legal part on this compliance in call protective approaches so the Paris agreement also explicitly emphasizes innovation it's upscaling of public and private rdnd that there's a so-called energy breakthrough energy coalition and it's of course not only about nuclear in effect there are still a lot of discussion about nuclear nuclear is quite a controversial technology because it's still a lot of country they either excluded explicitly or they just avoid the topic they're not really clear on whether to apply it or not just avoiding it but if we from the side well from the side of nuclear knowledge people can help this while this providing well this is what you have this is that this is the technology we can develop it in this in this way and we'll be ready again in then we can make our contribution to that the innovation spirit though for the expansion of nuclear power so and on the right bottom I put some examples and what's so innovative of this nuclear power then at the moment we have these only these big nuclear plants would be nice if it would be more scalable smaller larger plants and of course there's a way to discuss you about enhanced safety can Fukushima happen again how can we prevent it and how can we clear that it's prevented in simple words and can we build plants in a cheaper way which is in a modular way constructed easier and especially faster to seven years for construction and flexibility of utilization is it only electricity that we're producing or can we also use the waste heat or maybe even sacrifice some of the electricity production to produce high-quality heat so various advanced concepts are already in different stages of development and so the Paris Agreement may even be another incentive to proceed this is the development and then bringing in these concepts explicitly as well this is contributing to to the climate change mitigation and within these nuclear power developments also the challenges of nuclear power can be addressed so that countries that at the moment say well no no no we don't apply nuclear power because Fukushima because no waste because well whatever and then you can say yeah but now we have new developments there's no Fukushima anymore and the waste problem is addressed in this way that's the waste is being you know waste anymore it's fuel and so then these countries might change their mind and what are we doing then as IEA International Thermal Energy Agency well we are producing of course well what do we know we're trying to put that in nice reports not only thick reports also brochures like the nuclear power and the Paris Agreement which is a nicely digestible eight-page brochure and we of course are having a website we are also translating the documents in other languages that are spoken in the large parts of the world so examples are the climate change and nuclear power reports that are produced once in two years or sometimes every year nuclear power and sustainable developments we have one report on nuclear power and the Paris Agreement that's this brochure and there was a special of the IEA gluten on climate change so I'm coming to the end with some takeaway messages so to take away to meet the scale of energy demand in the future well we propose to use all low carbon technologies it's no nothing no source can be we don't have the luxury to say hey we don't apply this or that source because well whatever reasons there it's all outweighed by the need of low carbon electricity no carbon energy so you want nuclear has significantly contributed already to the greenhouse gas mitigation but now it must accelerate growth and even to do that it must replace all plants and that is an active action that's not something that's already in the policies or something that you hear often well to attain the level of nuclear electricity well we have to do that back well this is not something self-fulfilling or so but this is in every country this is an active decision of some government it's usually not some utility deciding about an event an investment but everywhere it's an issue of national importance so it's decided in the parliament and so this has to happen everywhere if it doesn't happen then the nuclear contribution has to is going down okay then it has to be replaced by something else which is we're not there so we have to do something about that and what do we have to do well how can we contribute to this well trying to reach out and trying to to explain the cause in as simple words as possible and trying to convey the message not only tell each other how nice nuclear is but just let's try to explain to the world outside our nice bubble so the recurring character of the Paris Agreement and that's the good news it offers an opportunity for innovative nuclear power and some people say it's too late but never too late now of course the first thing to help is life extension of existing nuclear plants that's helping the the Paris Agreement and the climate change mitigation modes but then we cannot just stay with that and plants are getting older and older they really need to be replaced and let's take the chance now to make to do this with really innovative nuclear power but we from the agency we are poised to support the member states plans for nuclear in implementation of the Paris Agreement so I would like to thank you and ask you for questions did I ask you to answer your question properly in the meantime okay good just one good question look at the Paris Agreement what's your opinion on the future yeah well I think this United States that's something very temporarily because the reason that they withdrew is because the current administration wanted to support the the coal industry in the United States so well maybe they open the mines again and then they find huh there's no one to buy these coal and so then they'll soon enough come back because also these climate change effects will be visible and felt in the United States as well so I'm not that worried also in the United States itself many of these climate policies energy policies they're uh not regulated on the federal level but on the state level and very states already say well it's very nice what you're doing in Washington but we are going going on with our Paris Agreement compliance policies so I'm not that afraid right the context of the Paris Agreement how would the how would the developing countries survive take it into account that most of these developed economies used coal and other possible to develop the economies and now we are selling the idea of greener energy to the developing countries well we know that some of these renewables are not sustainable we cannot actually kick-start industrialization in some of these countries do you think it's a good idea for the developing countries to buy into the Paris Agreement or what's the way forward for the developing countries in the country for the Paris Agreement well I think of course the developing countries can take advantage of the whole I say technology development and accompanying cost development of all these energy technologies that's in the early days of um well the developed countries coal was burned in a way that's absolutely not uh acceptable anymore it's it's it was emitting not only CO2 but also all kinds of suits and yeah you know people got immediately health problems living in there so it's not possible anymore not for developed countries but also not for developing countries so coal is not that cheap anymore as it was in the early days that's that's something in the past so you can't transfer now it's our turn to burn this large amount of coal otherwise we cannot develop now it's so but on the other hand the developing countries can take advantage of the the the cost reductions of the other technologies especially had the to start with the renewable technologies had the the good thing is that usually a lot of developing countries are in very sunny regions so you could start well they could start with that and of course then use the proper mix yeah that's also something we do at the agency start with these countries to do their energy planning and training them on computer tools where they have to put in what they are expected um population growth was the development of the industry of businesses and everything and then uh what's your resources so what would this uh source cost particular in your country and then there comes this mix out and doesn't exclude anything so also coal is possible um but then on top of this there could be a policy well look we have been signing these bearers agreement so we are pushing a bit these uh carbon free sources but of course there will be an elasticity but which comes to an end if then it appears that the PV what also the nuclear is too expensive yeah sorry they've debated for a while but um uh at the end it's still well impossible but it's also uh beneficial and it's even necessary that's that's also the because the um say the climate change effect it affects countries in one way or the other and especially developing countries are usually in in other areas of the world yeah they are in need of most in need of that that this this temperature rise is being uh hold it somehow so and uh this bearers agreement it's also acknowledges very much the the the well the strong shoulders and the weak shoulders you know that the uh the developed countries are helping also with financing constructions the developing countries to do their part in in their country so bottom line is i think also for development developing countries it's it's a must but also benefits to to uh so to sign the bearers agreement and to implement the policy along according to it yes uh so what you mean there are a lot of uncertainties if you yeah so first of all this um of course this life cycle assessment it takes into account a lot of assumptions and yeah that's something we have to live with also it takes for it has to say something about nuclear so it also assumes something about what does decommissioning cost what is the the final repository cost it's it all goes in there and if you dig very deeply of course then you can see yeah well wait a minute that particular number don't agree with is much too high or too low or whatever so uh and therefore it's it's important that you have many people to do so such life cycle assessments and gain some consensus and uh and compare this uh among the various research institutes all over the world and of course they will find some outliers of Greenpeace will do their own study and fight well nuclear is way expensive and but uh and also well maybe the nuclear industry will do it the other way around anyway and the idea is that of course there will be assumptions and yeah if you have done such a slide of course i cannot put all the assumptions uh even in the reports sometimes they cannot be found but uh that's yeah that's uh that's something well maybe we work these institutes can be working on how to uh how to uh put these how to communicate these assumptions because otherwise people will just either use this because it's it's it's fits their purposes or uh rejected because yeah it doesn't fit their purpose and they can't see where these numbers are coming from anyway and what was the last uh question you had there was a yeah all with uranium that's a very interesting one uh of course it's difficult for these comparable comparative lifecycle assessment because all the other sources don't use uranium but um well you know there's this famous red book um of the OECD and IEA um do we well forecast on available uranium and they do that in a very scientific way okay there's these very assured resources we know they're the mines and they're they're reasonably assured uh resources and they're they're very probable resources and so on but to cut the long story short at the end uh it's all about the demand of course when the demand is so low as it is now because nuclear is not that popular but you see uranium prices are dropping what you also see is uh during the the years before Fukushima there was the so-called nuclear remaces it was uh more countries were interested in nuclear and what we saw is then a rise in uranium prices um because the expectation is that more uranium would be used so what happened is there was more exploration so nothing happens to the expect well the to the forecast of available uranium because there was even so much used as there was found again maybe say the same uh phenomenon in the oil industry I have the there's uh there was this huge outcry in 1970s of uh the club of Rome while we were running out of oil but then exploration went on and went on with new technologies and with more energy because there was so much demand and they found just as much as they were using so also with uranium um that this we've we've seen this happening just on the on the short term but there's with uranium we have some other peculiar things uh there was also the weapons program of the we say um the uh old well the there was an agreement between between us and russia of demolishing their old nuclear warheads and they were converted into nuclear fuel and this was quite a lot it kind of well distorted the uh the the market for the for the mines so this was another resource um and on top of this there is also the prospect of using fast reactors which is also going to make uranium prices drop very much if this is really going to happen and then on top of this there is the resource of seawater uh where there's also well there in the in the sea there are much many minerals and one and one of the elements occurring there is uranium and there has been several uh efforts to mine to farm this uranium from the seawater the moment it's more expensive four times as expensive as mining the uranium but yeah of course when the mining mines are getting uh more depleted all this becoming uh more and more interesting but it's give some kind of bottom line that we never be running out of uranium ever so i'm not that much afraid for you who was first yeah you go first and then you it also includes the producing yes yeah well what what you see is uh with solar panels the um the production comes happens in a very controlled way you know it's especially with this vacuum controlled area it's it's just needed otherwise you cannot make it so it's uh it's a natural my say a natural boundary to well the the humans that are that are just operating the process so they're saying natural um their distance have to say to to this production process and um it's always yeah there's very small quantities and very you know these these high tech vacuum production facilities so that's something else is for instance coal where they have these huge mines and you can put up a respiration device but it's only limited they helping and uh i guess that's that's kind of uh well overall speaking the the reason if you look to the production process it's just more well health-friendly for PV although i agree these materials are pretty toxic that's true yes that's a good question yeah yeah so what you mean is there this this bar of ionizing irradiation should also be the present in the in the coal bar i think that's a very good point i will take it to my colleague who made this yeah thank you very much Anik for a nice interesting lively presentation