Controversy arose in South Korea earlier this year over reports that Moon Jae-in’s government was considering options to build a nuclear power plant in North Korea. Although the plans were developed with prospective inter-Korean economic cooperation in mind, the provision of nuclear energy to North Korea as an incentive to cooperate raises practical economic concerns, in addition to fears by the United States and other countries that North Korea has a functioning nuclear reactor.
In its deliberations, South Korea has considered three possible options for building a nuclear power plant in North Korea. One called for the construction of a South Korean light water reactor in Kumho at the location where the energy development organization of the Korean peninsula should build a light water reactor according to the framework agreed in 1994. The second option was to build a light water reactor in the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ), while the last option would have supplied North Korea with electricity from the south by resuming construction on the abandoned Shin Hanul-3 and -4 reactors.
It is unlikely that North Korea will accept its reliance on nuclear power in South Korea. If North Korea is also to be supplied with electricity from South Korea, it is not absolutely necessary that it is nuclear power, as the Pyongyang regime does not gain prestige from South Korea’s dependence on nuclear power.
Building a nuclear power plant in the DMZ would pose environmental problems even if it satisfied North Korea’s political needs to see the plant on North Korean soil.
Although the United States and other countries have offered to build a light water reactor to North Korea as agreed, they would likely have reservations about providing North Korea with a nuclear power plant. However, if these could be overcome, building a light water reactor in North Korea would be the most viable option given the reality of the other options being considered. Light water reactors belong to the more proliferation-resistant reactor types, provided that the reactor facilities are not paired with enrichment or reprocessing facilities. However, they may not be the most economically viable option for North Korea’s economic development.
As the world increasingly focuses on reducing carbon emissions, nuclear power has the potential to play a role in promoting carbon neutral economic development in North Korea. However, it also has disadvantages. The reactor design that would be used in North Korea is valued at $ 6 billion and will likely take five years or more to build, delaying the generation of electricity necessary for economic development.
While reusing the Kumho site could save cost and time in construction, treating low- and medium-range spent fuel in South Korea is 2.7 times more expensive than in the United States, further increasing the cost of nuclear energy, if the spent fuel does not remain in North Korea.
These nuclear power restrictions in North Korea are important considerations if any of the goals is to efficiently rebuild the economy after all nuclear talks are over. North Korea will essentially have to rebuild its entire energy infrastructure, so the question arises of how to get electricity flowing quickly, cheaply and cleanly in order to stimulate the economy.
Unlike nuclear power, other renewable energy sources offer North Korea potentially cheaper, easy-to-build energy options. Even Kim Jong-un has emphasized the importance of renewable energy in the long run as the country looks for an energy source that is not prone to sanctions.
Hydropower generation is already making a major contribution to North Korea’s electricity production, accounting for around 55 percent of total electricity generation in 2017. The problem with hydropower generation is that the major river systems that drive hydropower generation in North Korea freeze in winter, which drastically reduces the amount of electricity available during the winter months. Large hydropower plants like Huichon Power Plant are also struggling to meet performance targets, and North Korea’s poor electricity infrastructure definitely makes it impossible to rely on long-distance transmission of electricity from large power plants. Instead, North Korea would do well to continue its more successful policy of building smaller hydropower plants that are distributed to meet local and regional energy needs.
Following the trend of small, decentralized power generation, around 55 percent of households in North Korea will be equipped with solar collectors from 2019, which serve to supplement an unstable power supply from the mostly water and coal-fired national power grid. Solar panel prices have fallen in recent years thanks to abundant global supply and increasing production in North Korea. North Korea already produces more solar power per year than South Korea, despite its slightly lower solar potential due to its higher latitude and more cloudy conditions. Still, there is potential for more solar power generation as solar power is only an estimated 0.1 percent of North Korea’s generating capacity.
In contrast to solar energy, North Korea produces more wind power and has significantly more wind power potential than South Korea. Strong winds on North Korea’s west coast and its high mountainous terrain give North Korea relatively robust potential wind resources. Wind turbines only take two years to install and last ten years, which makes them quick and affordable. With the support of Russia, North Korea already wants to develop large wind turbines, offshore wind power and large wind farms.
Helping North Korea develop its renewable infrastructure could bring diplomatic benefits to South Korea, but it could also complement Seoul’s efforts to develop hydrogen as a renewable source. Currently, South Korea’s hydrogen ambitions are being limited by the use of hydrogen from fossil fuels. In a joint development project, excess renewable energy could be reused to produce green hydrogen to aid South Korea’s hydrogen efforts.
Even if building a light water reactor were politically justifiable, North Korea would benefit more from improving its existing non-nuclear renewable infrastructure than from building a nuclear power plant. Concentrating on small hydro, solar or wind power plants would be cheaper and faster to build and at the same time, due to North Korea’s poor electricity infrastructure, more reliable in meeting local and regional energy needs. If North Korea were to focus its efforts on non-nuclear renewable energies, Pyongyang would have the potential to create a niche in renewable sources recycling and renewable waste disposal. Experts predict that hundreds of tons of old wind turbines, batteries and solar modules will have to be disposed of or recycled this decade – and by 2050 million tons. This could be a potential economic opportunity for North Korea.
Troy Stangarone is Senior Director, Congressional Affairs and Trade at the Korea Economic Institute of America. Sean Blanco is a research fellow at the Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies. He is currently completing a Masters Degree in International Affairs from Columbia University.
Image: Reuters
Comments are closed.