Summary
There are a lot of sources that says that the economy and the current technology levels of the countries in the Caspian Sea Region will continue to improve (TNN, 2005) until such time that use of nuclear reactors and nuclear types of energy will be common. Extended use of nuclear power will surely bring in a lot of advantages for the countries situated in the Caspian Sea Region but that doesn’t mean that there will be no corresponding consequences and sacrifices to be made. This is actually why addressing Nuclear Issues in the Caspian Sea and its surrounding regions is of utmost importance. It would certainly be a lot easier to handle Nuclear Issues while there are still very few companies and organizations involved at this time. The best and most appropriate way to address those issues would be by creating certain regulatory policies that will have an aim of preventing future conflicts when Nuclear Technology and Uranium Enrichment Techniques to generate a hopefully cleaner and cheaper source of energy is already a staple for the countries around the Caspian Sea. This paper will focus on the nuclear issues that are currently present in the Caspian Sea Region. It will also focus on giving recommendation regarding the best possible Nuclear Regulation policies to help prevent political, economic and other issues secondary to nuclear energy in the Caspian Sea region.
Background
Nuclear power seems to be a viable and economic option for the countries of the Caspian Sea Region (Anker et al., 2010). There are several main reasons why that is so. The reasons include the existence uranium mining sites scattered all over the Caspian Sea Region and the need for clean and renewable sources of energy. However, there are indeed issues that need to be addressed so that nuclear technology could be better used. Additionally, standards and policies should be enforced because nuclear technology poses risks no matter how promising it is.
So far, one of the most advanced countries in terms of Nuclear Energy advancements and knowledge about Uranium Enrichment in the countries of the Caspian Sea is Iran. According to an article published by BBC News (2012), despite the possible sanctions that Iran could possibly suffer from because of their Nuclear Programs, Iran will still push through their nuclear projects despite the negotiations offered by the United Nations. This indicates their will and persistence in developing a stable form of energy—Iran keeps on insisting that they are protecting their rights to conduct nuclear programs because it only has exclusively peaceful nuclear plans. In case Iran’s efforts result into a success, it would open up new doors of opportunity for the nearby countries and for the rest of the countries in the Caspian Sea region. This is an indicator that the potential that Issues about Nuclear Energy will raise in the future is possible and to create policies at this early would only be reasonable. Besides Iran, there are also other countries from the Caspian sea region as well as other parts of the world that are aiming to win the nuclear development for clean and renewable energy race.
Issues
1. Monopoly
Perhaps it would be considered a good start for policy makers to start conducting investigations on every Caspian Sea Region Country’s efforts in conducing Nuclear Programs so that they could monitor the level of advancements and the compliance levels of every concerned country. There is a need to establish this type of policy because this will help prevent countries that pioneered the nuclear programs in a certain region from monopolizing a future industry. Monopoly has a lot of economical disadvantages and it wouldn’t really be advisable to grant superior access to such delicate technology to a single entity only. One of the disadvantages of monopoly that policy makers should try to avoid here are weak supplier and buyer powers (Economicshelp.org, 2012).
2. Focus on Conducting Nuclear Programs for Possible Clean and Renewable Sources of Energy
According to the World Nuclear Association’s nuclear century Outlook (2012), there is a current research gap as to whether there is really a relationship between renewable energy technology and the use of nuclear power. Modern and industrialized countries including some from the Caspian Sea region hopes that conducting further nuclear development programs would be a key to answer the issues about possible clean and renewable sources of energy. The same organization also recommended that country by country assessments should be conducted to monitor the growth potential and advancements of every country (countries such as Iraq, Iran, UAE and others in the Caspian Sea Region for example). This will most likely create a more centralized form of information. If knowledge from different countries will become centralized, it would be easier to conduct advancement integrations because each country won’t have to try several tests that were found to be unsuccessful based on the conducted tests from other sectors anymore. As of now, it is almost impossible to do this internationally because of the amount of tension between western and middle and eastern countries. So, what policy makers and government officials could do to address this issue is to assign or preferably create a specific department in their state that will solely be in charge of regulating and managing nuclear energy development and monitoring the undergoing programs—basically all about nuclear energy.
3. Uranium and Nuclear Power in Kazakhstan
According to another online resource published by the World Nuclear Association (WNA, 2011), Kazakhstan is one of the Caspian Sea region countries with a lot of potential in developing successful nuclear programs in the future. According to the same source, Kazakhstan has the following:
a. Access to 15% if the world’s uranium sources
b. Good track record as a uranium producer (28% world production in 2009 and 33% in 2010).
c. A major plant dedicated in making uranium fuel pellets
Kazakhstan also aims to further expand their uranium export capabilities and in the future, supply 30% of the world’s fuel fabrication market. There isn’t actually any issue that needs to be addressed here. All that countries like Kazakhstan need to be able to meet their goals is guidance. This is so far the best example of an exclusively peaceful use of nuclear energy development. What policy makers in Kazakhstan could do at this state would be to regularly conduct safety and compliance checks to Kazakhstan plants to ensure that they are willing to cooperate with the authorities in limiting the use of nuclear technology for economical purposes only. It is known that nuclear technology could be further developed to be used as weapons of mass destructions (NEIS, 2004). This is what authorities such as the European Union and the United Nations are trying to prevent from occurring. Nobody really wants a nuclear war to happen because of the extreme danger it poses to innocent civilians. One disadvantage of imposing such policy would be a limited growth and advancement for nuclear technology. However, this is the most effective and perhaps the only practical way at present that would decrease the likelihood of a nuclear war.
4. Nuclear Waste
Nuclear power plants and reactors are known as infrastructures that emit toxic and usually radioactive substances to the environment. This is why used resources from uranium enrichment sites have to be disposed properly or they might cause serious illnesses to the environment and to the health of the residents living within a certain mile radius from the site. What policy makers could do to ensure that the concerned organizations abide to such regulations would be to submit laws, ordinances and acts that will penalize those who will not abide to such. They should also make the penalties and sanctions as savage as possible so that no one would even try to disobey the rules. Of course, there are disadvantages that may come as parts of making this move. One is the possibility of protests from the concerned companies and organization. However, the said types of laws should really be passed because our nature and the health of the citizens should be the most important and decisive factor in such cases.
5. Safety Issues
Another issue that needs to be addressed by policy makers is safety issues. Meltdowns could come as a result of protective infrastructure failures and other simple and more compound errors just like what happened at Fukushima Nuclear Plant in Japan last year after the country was hit by a tsunami secondary to an earthquake (McCurry, 2011). Since radioactive substance might be present (harmful and could even be life threatening), the safety of a whole nuclear plant should really be checked to determine whether they pass the standards or if necessary changes should be made (Webb, 2012). The set standards which nuclear plants must be required to follow must also be reviewed and updated (if necessary) from time to time. Of course such policy could add pressure to the organizations and departments in charge but it will really be worth it.
Options
Authorities have to deal with nuclear issues in the most professional and appropriate way. The first step that policy makers should do is to set standards so that they could have something to base their judgments on. After that first step, another option that could be helpful would be to conduct regular checks and observations on the development and compliance of nuclear factories and plants to the set standards. These two options are applicable to all 5 issues that were discussed above. The good thing about these two options is that they are very realistic and versatile. It also wouldn’t harm the nuclear industry in any manner. Another benefit of this option is the fact that it’s already tested—other industries using the same model are fairly and easily regulated by each state government. The only possible obstacle here is the fact that the concerned governments would have to accumulate more funds to set up another department that would oversee and manage the enforcement and regulation of standards. These standards should of course be accurate and updated from time to time to ensure effectiveness or else such policies would be worthless.
References
BBC News. Nuclear Row: Iran President Ahmadinejad Offers Talks. BBC News Middle East., January 2012, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16746683.
Economicshelp.org. Disadvanatages of Monopoly. January 2012, http://www.economicshelp.org/microessays/markets/monopoly-diagram.html.
WNA. WNA Nuclear Century Outlook. World-nuclear.org, January 2012. http://www.world-nuclear.org/outlook/clean_energy_need.html.
WNA. Uranium and Nuclear Power in Kazakhstan. World Nuclear Association, November 2011. http://www.world-nuclear.org/outlook/clean_energy_need.html.
NEIS. Nuclear Power and Nuclear Weapons. Nuclear Energy Information Service, 2004. http://www.neis.org/literature/Brochures/weapcon.htm.
Webb, G. IAEA Mission Reviews Safety Assessment at Ohi Power Plant. International Atomic Energy Agency, 2012. http://iaea.org/newscenter/news/2012/missionohinpp.html.
McCurry, J. Fukushima Plant Leaks Radioactive Water. The Guardian, 2011. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/05/fukushima-leak-radioactive-water.
TNN. Oil Marketing Sector to be Opened Wider. The Economic Times, 2005. http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/keyword/caspian-sea/featured/2.
