more difficult, but then I can assure you that you have a very interesting lecture. As I told you in the morning, the basic principles of nuclear energy we are going to talk about in this afternoon. And we have Mr. Yanko Yano, who is currently the CEO of a company called Nuclear Knowledge Management Institute at Austria. And he has a vast experience, I think, over four decades of experience in the nuclear industry, in the nuclear power industry. And also he has worked in the agency for several years, and he has developed some of the important documents for the agency to mostly the guiding documents, the principles and things like that. And today the one which is going to talk his favorite subject is the basic principles. He has obviously his hands and mind into that. So before, without going too much detail into that, I will ask himself to introduce his specific profile. And I will invite Mr. Yanko to start this afternoon session. Mr. Yanko, please. Thank you, Ashok. Dear colleagues, this afternoon I would like to discuss with you probably the most important subject in the whole landscape of nuclear energy, the basic principles, why and how we can use nuclear energy. I'm convinced that although any one of you can tell me part of it, how many of you have read the little agency document, which is called Basic Principles of Nuclear Energy Development. It's part of the Nuclear Energy Series. I will show it to you. You can find it on the web. It's about 10 pages. Have you ever read this? Okay, then at least after the lunch, when all the blood goes to the stomach and the brain is a little bit sleepy, I believe that you will concentrate a little bit on this. So nuclear energy really is, you heard this morning D.D.G. Chudakov talking about this. It's a very specific source of energy. This is probably the most powerful concentrated source of energy that human civilization has nest. We can use it. We know how to use it. And there are about 30 countries in the world which use nuclear energy. There are another probably 100 who would like to use nuclear energy and they use different other aspects like healthcare. There is not a country on the globe which doesn't have an x-ray machine, any hospital. If there is a hospital, there is an x-ray machine. So they have to know something about it. Now, knowing about nuclear is a very, very serious problem. Nuclear knowledge is extremely rare. It's not like medical knowledge. Medicine in every country, if he has not finished Harvard School of Medicine, he is a native doctor. He knows different plants and he can treat you and maybe he will help you. Even in Tibet and in many other countries, in Africa, in South America, you see you have native doctors. So they know something about the human diseases and they know how to treat them. But if you go around and ask anybody, let's say here in this country, in Trieste, and ask how much people know something about nuclear, you will be surprised to find out that they are very few. My personal speculation is one in 10,000 people know something about something. This may be the teacher of physics who tells the people that there is a nucleus and there is something. This might be the x-ray doctor, let's say, who knows that if he radiates the patient, he has to be careful. He knows something about radiation protection. But if you really want to find an expert or a person with the full knowledge of everything in nuclear, it's between 1 in a million to 1 in 10 million people. So a country of 10 million people may have one expert. This is my country. I'm a Bulgarian, a small country, you may not know it, but this country has started to operate nuclear research reactor from 1959. Six reactors from 1974, 75, and so on and so forth. Now four of them are under decommissioning, but two are under construction. Eventually it will be revitalized. So a country, a small country, which uses nuclear energy. All other aspects are there, research reactor, medicine, production of isotopes, agriculture, and so on and so forth. And now we come to the story, why basic principles? And I will tell you the history because I was one of those who participated in the creation of the document. But anyway, I think I was the one who proposed this document to be created. In 2005, 2006, when I was working with the IAEA, we had a basic problem how to structure the agency documents. Because nuclear safety says we do standards, it's by the statute of the agency. And the standards have safety fundamentals and safety standards and safety guides, and so there is a pretty, how to say, well-organized structure of documents. The nuclear energy department was producing technical documents, which some of them are extremely useful and they're really, how to say, as we call it, bestsellers, the documents which I read very carefully. One of these documents, of course, is the document called TechDoc15. Then it is the famous knowledge management document, which we wrote. I think this is one of the most downloaded documents from the IAEA. But then we said, well, shall we not write really the fundamentals? Why we use nuclear energy? And then the suggestion was to write a document called Basic Principle for Nuclear Energy Development. So that's what I'm going to talk today about. First of all, nuclear energy, science, and politics. What is the IAEA? Can anybody tell me quickly? What is it? A scientific organization, a technical organization, a political organization? What is it? Because somebody wanted this morning to be educated by IAEA. What do you want to be educated to become an international bureaucrat? That's a very good education you will get there. But you will never get an education of how the reactor core operates under transit conditions. This you will learn at the power plant. So when you talk about human resource development, be careful when you ask an international organization to educate if they are generous enough to pay for your education. You will educate somewhere else. So what is the question? What is the IAEA? IAEA is a political organization. Why? Because the governments are presented there. It's an intergovernmental organization. IAEA deals with a very specific scientific and technical problem, which is nuclear energy. And all the other issues that come out of this. But in principle, IAEA is a political organization. Works within the system of the United Nations, but it's not a UN organization. IAEA is the only organization that can report directly. Our director general can report directly to the Security Council. In case there is a misbehavior or Klendenstein program or anything which doesn't, how to say, comply with the requirements. Which was the case of Iraq, the case of North Korea, and many other cases which have been there, which has been reported directly to the Security Council. So nuclear energy is half science and half politics. Because nuclear energy, I will show it after that. I will start to tell you, you have to do it technically very competent and politically very correct. And you have to understand what does it mean technically sound and what does it mean politically correct? Because entering into the nuclear energy area and using nuclear power requires a lot of political decisions. And a lot of technical competence. You have to have both. If you have one of these, I want nuclear energy. My government is very, how to say, committed and we would like to do it very good. We will sign everything very good, but you don't have the right technical people. You have the right to call it nowadays infrastructure. And then you have a problem. You can't implement this. So we will discuss the eight basic principles and how we have to understand them. And of course we will discuss at the end how you understand this. Because it's important that we have to say the people that go through this school what we want at the end of the day. And how we design the schools in the 2006, 2007, the school was designed, but really implemented a little bit later. We want them to understand the concepts, the philosophy of nuclear energy, because all the other things. Once you know what is the basic philosophy behind nuclear power development or nuclear energy use, then the rest is simply you have to learn it. But if you don't understand really the envelope, then of course you may have some problems later on in any part of the development of the program. And there are a lot of examples when a nuclear energy program has been started and ended in a dead end street because this was not followed or that was not followed or something like that. Well, the beginning was very simple. This is a very interesting table. This was the table of Otto Hahn, a chemist. Here I have to say, I apologize to the nuclear physicist, but nuclear fission was discovered by chemist. Because if you talk to a physicist, he will say physics is everything here in this institute. They always say physics is the mother of everything. I said, well, the mother is this, but the father of nuclear fission was Otto Hahn who was analyzing on this table. This is in Karlsruhe in this F1 reactor in the museum. And again, of course, after Stratzmann and the people who discovered really irradiating uranium with neutrons and see what happened, but Otto Hahn was analyzing the products. And he wrote a very interesting article in Chemische Berichte. He says, I put all my authority as a chemist that there is barium in this. And I don't know where this barium comes from. Barium is one of the pieces of the uranium split. So that's how he discovered uranium fission in 1938. Later on, of course, you know the famous curve of the fission products. And then it came with shipping ports with the opening power station. That's how there are simple milestones how nuclear energy was used at the beginning. Of course, we don't have to hide it. We have to say it clearly and openly that most of the science behind nuclear fission has been developed for strategic purposes. I don't want to use the word military, but it was this. Because most of the science of the fission products was developed in the Manhattan Project and in the Russian project for, and of course, all the other countries which at the beginning were you pursuing a military use of nuclear fission. This is not a secret, but for me it was really, how to say, quite a surprise. Every country in Europe had a military program. Switzerland, such a peaceful and nice country where everybody keeps his money. Those who have, of course, a lot of money they keep it in. The Swiss had a military program. The Danish had a military program. The Swedish had a military program.  What shall we do when the bomb explodes on our heads or something like this? And much of the science was done there. But, of course, the real nuclear technology was developed originally by two countries, mostly at the beginning of the United States, the so-called Marine Propulsion Program, the program which has to power the nuclear fleet, the fleet of the United States. First of all, the big crisis and the aircraft carriers, and of course later on the submarines. And, in fact, the pressurized water reactor is a product of the Marine Propulsion Program. The same applies to the Soviet Union. Other countries have gone into this, but let's say countries like France, UK has had its indigenous program of gas-cooled reactors. They went, and that's one of the reasons, was to be independent from the other. So they developed and they still have a couple of AGRs in operation. Cooling with CO2 and having graphite as moderator. The French program is based on the US program. The Korean program is based on the US designs and so on and so forth. And, of course, recently, China is probably the most aggressive developer of nuclear technology. And I think very soon they probably will be the leader in development of nuclear technology, as long as they're putting a lot of efforts and a lot of, how to say, a lot of commitment in national country, commitment in Chinese country with a lot of capabilities in this area. Now, the nuclear power plant, of course, is a very simple thing. What do we do in the nuclear power plant? We boil water. That's what we do. We boil water to receive steam and then to push a steam turbine, something, and to use the Carnot cycle. And that's why nuclear power plants today, one of the biggest accusations is you will never get about 35, 36 percent overall efficiency because you still boil water. First, Mr. Chudakov was telling you in the morning that there are advanced technologies where we make best use of, how to say, the science of turbines and so on and so forth. There is, if the power plant is capable of using the secondary heat and, how to say, do it a little bit in a combined cycle. And of course, there are technology of high-temperature reactors and other type of liquid metal reactors which work at a different temperature and can use different cycles. But in fact, the nuclear power plant is, how to say, it's a tool, it's an instrument to produce electricity by using a very, very simple approach. And the whole issue about nuclear power, oops, how do I put it here? Probably this one, but it's not changed very well. The whole issue is here. In the reactor, let's say where the fuel is situated and somehow we have the controlled fission reactor, but this is, how to say, these are the very, very basics. Now, nuclear energy mathematics is very simple. I repeat it once again. It has to be technically and scientifically sound and it has to be politically correct. What does that mean? Any mistake which we make in the design, whether this will, or in the siting, or in the construction of the reactor, later on we will see it will create problems. Chernobyl, positive void coefficient. On one side, looking at the symmetry when everything should be covered by graphite and then when you lift all the rods up, violating the instructions, because of some, I would call it requirements which Mr. Chudakov as a Soviet operator doesn't want or didn't decided to share, but maybe he forgot, was that the Chernobyl operators were asked to stay online because they needed for the system and on these basis they pushed the reactor in a very uncomfortable physical situation from nuclear physics point of view just because the operators of the grid were asking them to stay for a longer time because they needed to push another plant and so on and so forth. If they have said, go to hell, I stopped this reactor because it is physically not correct, there will never be a Chernobyl. Maybe Soviet Union would have existed, maybe not, God knows this is a political issue, but there will never be a Chernobyl. If the operators of Fukushima were more careful, forget about that they didn't build the wall, they didn't know how to operate the isolation condenser, you know what is an isolation condenser. The reactor there is a single loop, it's a boiler, it boils the water, the radioactive actually water from the primary circuit, pushed the turbine which is also radioactive, but they have a system in case this is stopped, the steam from the reactor goes, condenses and comes back so that it's like in chemistry, you know the reverse condenser, you boil something and it goes and condenses and so on and so forth. They didn't have 22 years, the operators didn't operate this, they decided to operate it because the restrictions were clear and then they said, OK, we will shut down because we don't know how this is going to happen. So obviously, scientifically and technically, the same applies also to trimile island, if you have studied the reasons for trimile island, you will see that it's a technical mistake there. One of the sensors was not showing correctly the level in the reactor and secondly, operators were not trained, they didn't know how to handle this. Now politically correct, there are many, many things which in many examples one can give a political non-correctness of a program. I will not go into this as long as whenever you talk politics there are always two views. You can say, OK, Iran was not right, but I think Iran can say, no, I'm right, I have been right to do this, but somehow the international community was not happy with this and that is with politics, sometimes you have to be very careful about this and that, but there are cases internally in the country. Internally in the country, the Philippines, for example, they started the nuclear program politically not correct, they couldn't deal a lot well with the different parties and oppositions and so on and so forth, so they have a monument there of nuclear power, the Batam reactor is sitting there built and never, never operate, the same case in Austria, politically non-correct. Do you know the case of Austria? Maybe you have seen, maybe you have been. Next to Vienna is a reactor which was built in the 80s, the Centendorf machine, fully ready to operate, fuel on the site and never started to operate, so billions lost simply because the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of Austria, decided to ask, let's say, to make a referendum and says, if you don't vote for the nuclear, I will resign and people looked at him and said, aha, you will resign, okay, we vote against. So this was politically, never is politically correct to ask the people about should we do nuclear or should we not do nuclear. I'm not an anti-democratic person, but you should ask people for questions which they can answer. Questions which they cannot answer, you better don't ask them. You explain them the benefit and you will see now why and how you have to do this using this nuclear energy basic principles. This is the small document. If you Google IEA basic principles, it will immediately appear. It's downloadable. I think it's nice to read the document at least once just to go through it because it will take no more than 20 minutes. But it says that this principle described the rationale. Why? The technical documents later on and the standards of the safety are telling you how and why not. But why you have to do it is written in this little document. Now, in nuclear energy there is a balance. This is a piece of a picture. For those of you who like fine art, this is Peter Broigel, the younger who has for the first time put on a canvas the stability on three legs because on one leg you are unstable on two legs as well. You have to have a special machine here like the brain who personally keeps you how to say in balance. But if you have three legs, then on three points you can always be stable. And nuclear energy really stays on three legs. First one is the benefit. Society has to understand why nuclear is beneficial. Why we have to do this? The second thing is nuclear energy should be done responsibly. It has gone, well, it is born together with the weapon. On one side was the evil and on the other side was the benefit. And we have very clearly to tell the people the benefit of nuclear energy because the evil they have seen. They have seen Fukushima, they have seen Nagasaki, they have seen some of the so-called peaceful accidents like Chernobyl and this and that. But this is different. The evil is the bomb and the weapons which are threatening to, they can destroy the earth today. You know the whole history of disarmament and non-proliferation is the fact that currently there are probably about 35,000 operational nuclear weapons in all the nuclear countries. Operational, ready to be taken. In this 35,000, if they all of a sudden are used, even 50% of them are used. This will end the civilization called earth. So, obviously, we have to be, we have to understand one thing. The responsibility is a major element of using nuclear technology. Because anybody can tell you no, but you know peaceful nuclear energy is one thing, military is different thing. Well, the science under this is the same. If you know how to enrich uranium for production of fuel, you will make three steps more and you will make it for production of weapons. If you know how to reprocess fuel, because that's what currently is used in the fuel cycle and you produce mox weapon, you can probably reprocess fuel and produce something different. So, responsibility is something as a fundamental element of nuclear energy development. And of course, energy, nuclear energy should be developed in a sustainable way. What does it mean, sustainable? You cannot start and finish tomorrow You cannot start and finish tomorrow. You have to think what is happening not today and tomorrow, because if I am how to say an energy guy and I would like to participate in the global energy business, I would like to get my profit tomorrow if possible or build a gas turbine. I can put something which is constructed in a couple of years maximum and then I will start to do the business. With nuclear energy, you have to think that you will spend enormous amount of money to build the nuclear power plant to put everything into what is called nuclear infrastructure, because it's just as expensive as the plant itself. And then, of course, the society will benefit in the next 60 or 80 or let's say 100 years. So, that is the balance which we have to do nowadays. You cannot prepare a set of specialists in your country. And forget about this and after 20 years you will see that you don't have the appropriate human resource. You have to think how I am going to operate this plant for 100 years. How shall I set up the educational system? How shall I set up the regulatory system? How shall I organize all the other things which will have to live together with the plant? Because imagine we start, we build the plant, we close the university or whatever or education because the minister didn't like this. He wanted to educate people in photovoltaics and something like this because this happens nowadays. Or people because of something you see in society, people don't want to be educated. They go somewhere else because at the end of the day this is your decision. Will you study nuclear engineering or let's say some other types of engineering because nuclear engineering is 10 to 15% of what the human resources need. The rest is serious engineering, electrical, chemical, mechanical and so on and so forth. So this country once embarking on a nuclear program has to look how we sustain the program in a way that this is first of all safe and second of all sufficient because if the program is spending money and not bringing benefit you better don't do it, do something else. So the principle one of nuclear energy is that the use of nuclear energy should provide benefits that outweigh the associated costs and risks. Every source of energy we say nowadays has certain risk. Sometimes we believe that let's say the big ventilator whatever I call them which rotate like this is risk-free. That's not true. If you start to go through the whole as we call it from cradle to grave all the different stages of producing, operating and then decommissioning and so on and so forth and you calculate the risk you will see that nuclear energy is not, how to say, more risky than many other sources of energy. So I have tried here to put some of the benefits of course you can add to this but it's really probably the largest the most concentrated low-carbon energy source and Mr. Choudhukov is showing you some comparison between the other. The energy supply security nowadays is one of the most attractive countries are very much interested in energy supply security because of the volatility of the international markets of oil of gas and so on and so forth and because we, how to say, we are living in an electrical world the electrical world is that that everything depends on having an electricity or a battery or whatever our banks, our hospitals, our communications if your battery is gone you're dead I mean you all become nervous all of a sudden if your telephones are out. Imagine what, yes, imagine that I say collect your telephones in this and in two hours all of you will come and please give me the telephone back because I cannot communicate but this was not the case like this. I'm not that old but I was living in a time when let's say you can go you can tell the number of the telephone booth downstairs and then they can call you like I was studying in Holland this was 1980, 1980 and then the telephone booth in front of my house was with a number so I knew that my family will call them at eight o'clock, so at eight o'clock I see the telephone on the street starts to ring and I talk to them. That was the reality. My first mobile phone was that big about half a kilo or more, very big, 92 at that time I was working for the government of Bulgaria I was in charge of the Atomic Energy Commission so I had a mobile telephone that big. Now I have already old fashioned telephone this is iPhone 6S No, there are seven, there are eight, come on, this is a couple of years ago I was on a conference in Jacksonville this was a conference on education and training and an American company showed how on this telephone it was 5S, not 6S the Relab 5 was operating almost full time Do you know what is Relab 5? Well, some of you of course know Relab 5 is a thermohydraulic code which calculates the thermohydraulics of the reactor the neutronics and this and that 1992 as chairman of the Bulgarian Atomic Energy Commission I had to sign, I don't know how much papers the United States government to give us grant to IBM workstations IBM workstation 6 or whatever they were that big like this, so big and they were able to calculate on UNIX, it's a UNIX based machine we were able to have the model of the reactors in Kosovo, it is our nuclear power plant and to calculate different transients and conditions that big, one meter by something two people hardly can carry now this is done on this telephone so imagine in what world we are living and how much we depend on electricity and technology so the security of supply when a country has to be very, very protected from this is extremely important because the security of supply as a manager of the plant I can buy two cores one core of a 1000 megawatt reactor usually depending on the suppliers even 80 to 100 million dollars so if I spend 200 million dollars and I put the core sitting there fresh fuel, no danger, nothing I have guaranteed the plant for another 8 years because usually every 18 months you change one third of the core different reactors is sort of different but principally so with one whole core you can operate 3 times 18 months well it's about today almost 4 years and a half and with two cores you are guaranteed for the next 10 years you don't care what will be the price of oil or price of gas because the gas power plant it's corrected almost immediately and automatically if the international price of gas goes up the next portion will be this of course there is long term contract there are lots of things which can sort of guide you and protect you from this but in principle in a nuclear power plant you can protect yourself and that is something which is tremendous benefit of course yes and you can ask questions please yes look at the end of the day at the end of the day the problem nowadays is that too many people want to play golf you know what I mean by this people want today to spend money and tomorrow to get the profit and go and play golf in nuclear power you spend a lot of money and then you have 20 years for depreciation and this is not easily accepted nowadays that's why when people have to finance a nuclear power plant today depending how quickly you want to depreciate the plot how quickly you want to return back the money and if you put a very short period of depreciation then the cost of the electricity becomes higher if you say okay I'm going to depreciate this plant in 30 years and the bank is happy with this then your costs of electricity are much lower and nuclear power is really seriously competitive in this respect so under your question I understand all the price of nuclear electricity is very high well it depends in which parts of the world in China it's not in my country it's competitive with everything even with the coal power plants so it depends how you explain to the people at the end of the day when nuclear energy started they said to cheap to meter it's not to cheap to meter everything has its price and its cost the problems with nuclear financing can be you spend the money at the beginning and this puts pressure on governments on budgets or on companies because if a company has to build it they have to borrow on their assets they have to say the bank well this is to be guaranteed for the long but I don't think you have major problem to explain to the people that nuclear power guarantees the stability price and Chudakov mentioned in the morning if you have your fuel at that price and the price of nuclear electricity the fuel is a very minor component the big price is the reactor itself after that the price is like this just the opposite a gas power plant it's very cheap you can put a container here in three weeks and you can start to power it but then the price of gas can be like that and today like this tomorrow like that people don't like this when you have nuclear energy in the system the same with hydro of course the river is going and you can say well that is the price of it then the price stability you also have to calculate the stability of it it's not how much you pay but you pay this today you will pay this tomorrow and you will pay this the day after tomorrow it's the same price so that's what I can say about this yes no of course it's not the same price the price of electricity in different countries is different and it depends on the producers on the many other things in the country how you calculate the price of electricity the price of petrol is the same you go to Abu Dhabi and you pay 20 cents per liter you go to my country you will pay almost 1 euro 1 euro and a half per liter you go here and answer in the petrol station it's five times six times bigger the price of electricity is how to say it's depending on the cost of production and on the politics of the country how they want to to get their money for the budget in my country half of maybe 60% of the price of petrol is taxes the real price so nuclear electricity in this respect in every country it brings stability in the system because there is no more variations you know precisely that's what is for the loan that's what is for the fuel and the rest is operational costs are more or less pretty stable you don't have millions of workers there you have a small number of people very highly paid but you know this cost so in this respect nuclear electricity provides stability to the price I don't say low or high now one of the important things oops I pressed the wrong button once again one of the important things is environmental protection is very clear if you have a nuclear power plant in the system you protect your environment especially the cleanness of the air compared to producing electricity with cold power plants with other power plants it's quite straight forward because in normal operation the nuclear power plant does not influence the environment at all some green pieces will argue that there is a thermal pollution yes the nuclear power plant throws some heat into the environment but frankly speaking it doesn't happen at least there are no major reports that the nuclear power plant has destroyed the environment just the opposite I know that you know a nuclear power plant where the hot canal which was well there was water coming from the denub we call it the cold canal and then the hot which was 3-4 degrees higher the best fishes in denub were after the hot canal because they would say better plankton and better a little bit better temperatures of the big fishes were there anyway we shall come to this the waste does not pollute the environment radioactive wastes are packages or containers which sit in a special place and they are not thrown away to pollute the environment just the opposite just the opposite when we say environmental protection this means let's say plastics are contaminating the environment because everybody is throwing them around without well there is control there are certain laws but who cares about the laws at least in some countries it's more than in others but nobody is throwing away radioactive waste let's be clear when we talk about radioactive waste we have to talk different we're talking about the management process how we manage the radioactive waste and how to make sure and guarantee that nothing of them can reach let's say uncontrolled into the environment and can come to the either in the food chain or can come to the people and so on and so forth they always give this example what about we make a pyramid like in Egypt and we put the radioactive waste and there is only one entry and there is a policeman there so what shall you do there how this can come to you there is a policeman who says you should not enter here but it's dangerous what does it mean dangerous it's there sitting biking the big geological repository it's 500 meters under the earth what is wrong with this I don't see but some people can tell you that this doesn't connect to the environment at all the most important from my point of view which has to do something with the benefit is the human development a country which involves using nuclear energy requires a very solid investment in education and training in all areas because when we talk nuclear you tell me any element of science which is not involved in a nuclear energy use which one tell me any human science which does not reflect in the development of nuclear energy forget about nuclear physics and engineering and chemistry and so material science medical science social science legal science international relationship which one environmental protection energy and so on and so forth so we have to have people who understand practically everything this means to have a strong educational system a very strong educational system so when we talk about nuclear how much benefit it brings to society it's not only energy it's not only electricity because nuclear slowly is supporting the main how to say current product the basic product of nuclear is electricity but we are making our societies more and more electrical because our transport our communications our medicine our banking financial sectors all of them sit on electricity and the fact that transportation you don't see it nowadays but you will see it see a country like China currently where is the biggest number of electric vehicles of course in China and they are building more and more and putting more and more because otherwise if they continue to burn petrol they cannot breathe in the air and Europe is going more or less the same way of course there are business interests I mean all these guys which produce the current BMW Audi and all these type of stuff they will not give up the market so easily but more and more let's say countries and governments start to understand that we need to push the transport to be clean and one of these way to do this is to use electricity so that is how to say the principle of benefit which has to be very much understand from this I will go quickly this is the global status of nuclear power which tells you the current operation of the reactors and under constructions most of them of course are in Asia the energy projections you will hear a lot about this but whenever you talk about the benefit you have to remember one thing we cannot solve the climate issue only with nuclear but without nuclear it's not possible all the how to say the projections and all the models and all the and all the analysis of the future energy development say okay nuclear has to take this which this share in order to be able to really influence the climate because otherwise we may talk a lot about climate change but then do nothing really serious of course the costs of nuclear you saw this morning the costs of nuclear are pretty competitive with all the current cost there are people which currently argue very much that the cost of photovoltaic and wind turbines have gone dramatically down that is a fact every technology at the beginning is expensive and then the more you produce and the more you apply this technology it's becoming cheaper and cheaper because there is competition photo let's say photovoltaic panels that produce not only like before that Germany and other places now China is the biggest producer but still but still you have to understand the limitations of this because saying yes this I have some photo panels let's say photovoltaic panels on my house I can show it although I'm a nuclear guy I recognize the usefulness of this and of course photovoltaic until now has been sponsored paid by the governments made cheaper by the governments also now it is cheap enough that people can consider investing in photovoltaic let's say or in wind energy they have this opportunity because wind is not everywhere like the sun is everywhere but not at the same angle there are countries which the sun is permanently shining on them one of these is in the Gulf area unfortunately there the sun is shining very nicely but there is a lot of scent and there is a lot of dust and if you leave your panel in one month this panel is covered with one millimeter of dust which you cannot stop and then you have to have cleaning your stations every second day and third so you see in every source of energy there are pluses and minuses but regarding costs nuclear energy is not more costlier than others big hydro projects coal with let's say carbon capture is currently even more expensive and the price of nuclear depends also where do you want to build it you want to build it in the United States under United States regulatory system 1000 megawatt unit costs about 13 billion recently we have seen that the two major constructions are being cancelled one of them cancelled and the other because of overruns of costs and the other is under discussion now whether they will continue or they will stop it as well the reason being unnecessarily high costs of the construction well also Westinghouse but that is a different story so obviously it's quite different the price which China does or which some of the Russian reactors have been built on time and on budget so obviously with nuclear energy it depends where you will build it and who will build it if you go into a country where they have forgotten how to build reactors if France has to build a reactor nowadays I doubt very much that they will build it correct I hope that they will but for the last 25 years they have not built almost anything now flammable is under construction serious problems in Okinawa in Finland and so on and so forth so a country which builds reactors maybe this is China this is Russia Japan was there but now there is this serious interruption can go and build it on budget and on time and that is extremely important for nuclear energy because the biggest price the biggest cost to spend in the beginning in the first 5 years when you have to construct the reactor you have to have a chance to study from 1,000 and 15 years and nuclear is still competitive but you should keep in mind that they are considering nuclear for the most capacity time in the world mainly in Europe but also in the United States and they are calling for the flexibility of nuclear power in order to work together with the new world and then we are hoping not about that I would argue with this and I will not necessarily I will not necessarily agree because if before sometimes economists talk about nuclear without knowing how the electricity system operates and the system operator in my country had his hair wiped because of the renewables which were put into the system so making this system you call it smart or whatever which will tolerate the participation of renewables like Sun imagine we in the last 2 years not last 10 years let's put it this way they decided to fulfill the objective of the European Commission by 2020 20% of renewables in the system so Bulgaria did it which was crazy but of course if you tell me that you will pay me 300 megawatt 300 euro per megawatt hour I will construct a photovoltaic nuclear power sorry photovoltaic plant immediately and if I go to a bank and say here is my contract with the system for 300 euro per megawatt hour the bank will finance me on the same minute so this was public money sponsoring somebody to make big profit out of this at the end of the day the total capacity factor you see using the photovoltaic is about 19% so 90% very interestingly so 1000 megawatt you have to have 5000 megawatt and some of them cannot operate during the night so we are asking a nuclear power plant to load follow we have been doing with the small reactors load following but a nuclear power plant is a base load and we have to understand the right value of the base load nowadays saying okay the nuclear power plant can follow the load and this and that because the renewables are more important I don't say this at the end of the day for me as a system operator if I am it is the same I don't care from where I will get it whether it will be from a wind turbine or from a nuclear power plant I want it reliable I want the frequency 50 plus minus 0.1% of whatever is the regulation and that's it and people say no but the nuclear power plants have to help the renewables why what is better in the renewables than the nuclear power plant the CO2 emission is better no what is better that I have the help being the renewables are excellent if they follow the daily curve the daily curve what is the daily load curve you have the base load which is mostly industry and many other things which transport and so and so and then people at 6 o'clock in the morning they get up they start to push the coffee switch off the lights and this and that and the curve starts to go like this peak about 8.39 o'clock then it starts to go a little bit down then in the middle of the day again goes up and then people when they get back at home we don't think about this but the system operator if you go for example in such a dispatch office you will see a day to block people coming back start to cook at home put this and that and so on and so forth and now when the renewables can appear well during the day photovoltaic in a country which can reliably plug in this let's say system that system they're okay why the hell I have to keep a very unreliable source really very unreliable source because all of a sudden comes a big cloud and my plan disappears from the grid and what shall I do I have to keep hot reserve hot reserve which can go up in two minutes maximum in two minutes and this is either a pump storage facility or a hydro plant which I can open and the water runs two minutes the turbine already takes up and I can connect it to the grid or it has to be a gas turbine which is dramatically expensive which I push the button and like the engine of the airplane because a gas turbine is just the engine of the airplane which you can you have seen it when you fly that it the pilot says oops and it goes be careful when you tell me that the nuclear power plant has to follow it's a politically correct in Europe especially in some countries it's complicated I think we can discuss separately what does it mean politically correct especially in the European meaning anyway that's about the cost look the budget design and licensing 6% of the whole price of the project why you spend so much money for nuclear we have a nuclear power plant which is ready for structural concrete and the government is saying these are one billion money spent for nothing I see only a late condition that where is the nuclear power plant well a nuclear power plant before you start to operate you need about 5 years maybe more maybe more to take the design to develop to do the site assessment there are lots of things and you spend almost usually you need between 200-300 engineers to operate on this and you spend about a billion here they say 6% I call it 10% now construction and then procurement you have to buy the equipment there are lots of things which you go there and then this is the interest during construction part of the money which is spent for this nuclear power plant this is the escalation usually the bank will the vendor of the plant will say well but we will build it this but in 3 years from now the costs will be different so we have to make sure that we escalate the cost of fuel and then site preparation 11% so I was right in site preparation design and licensing it's about before you start to construct you have about 15% of the money you spent and there is nothing and that is difficult to politicians to understand that they have to spend a lot of money before you start really to see the erection of the construction of the plant yes sorry well that is a different story again I think well some of my colleagues have to excuse me I think the small and medium size reactors are still something to be seen in principle everything is correct you can manufacture the plant in a factory and then bring it to the site and then quickly install it and connect it and so on and so forth there is a very serious how to say option that you will make profit because of the multiplicity and not because of how big is the project 20 years ago we were talking about economy of scale we had small reactors 400 megawatt very good very flexible load following and so on and so forth very safe which really was very safe these were Russian reactors but they were really very safe they had certain deficiencies which probably could have been eliminated and then we said economy of scale because when you build on this site build a big reactor and the economy of scale when that the Chernobyl type of reactor was how much 1500 megawatt 1500 the Ereba European EPR is 1600 and so on and so forth now we are again starting to talk maybe this is not the right because it's a difficult project very complicated let's build it small small is beautiful and so on and so forth let's see there are options opportunities which have but we have to see this how it is going to operate I don't think so I don't think so the budget distribution will be different because if you build a smaller reactor maybe and if you bring it almost assembled to the plant it will be a different this is a budget distribution usual for a 1000 or 1200 megawatt interest during construction construction time is very long it will stimulate interest on the loan interest during construction is something which is quite a substantial part of the cost of the nuclear power plant well that is a comparison which I already talked about this so concerning the benefits nuclear is difficult to construct but it's very cheap to operate vice versa gas or let's say wind is really much more costlier per megawatt than nuclear now it's in the site preparation and human resource development so it's the whole preparation which you have to oh maybe you can put it in the operation let's go faster because when I look at the time I'm getting nervous because we are still only with the first principle I understand that there is a lot of interest the CO2 emissions I will not talk about this nuclear is here somewhere and all the others are up obviously if we are talking CO2 we don't have to talk about nuclear nuclear is a real serious big CO2 saver in the energy production when we have to really talk about climate change and look at the different scenarios you will see that nuclear should lay a role and a very serious role my problem there is if we say today we have 400 and whatever 37 reactors and we have to have 1000 my question is can we build it where can we build it and how can we do and how can we prepare the people that operate this additional 500 reactors in the world but these are how to say I call these questions that I have to answer and I don't have my answer the human resource development look at the specific HDI the human resource development index which is combined between GDP education and health level of education and healthcare and if you look the countries compare the right that operate nuclear power plants they are more greener or yellower than those who don't operate nuclear power plants and this means that these are countries which let's say the operation of nuclear power plant pushes the country to develop education to develop how to say medicine because you have to have environmental control and so on and so forth the second principle second principle is transparency the use of nuclear energy should be based on transparent communication of all its passage this means you don't only have to talk about how good is nuclear energy but you have honestly to say what are the risks and how you take care about these risks because people will not believe a very positive speech sometimes nowadays some friends start to accuse me you're becoming anti-nuclear no I'm not becoming anti-nuclear I'm becoming more and more realistic with H I start to look carefully at this and I said if this was also positive why we still don't have 5000 nuclear reactor because at the end of the day remember principle number one society has to be convinced in the benefit if you don't convince the people they will do everything to stop this project so obviously transparency means social it's not communication it's not the old discussion very unpopular work nowadays at least how it's called people's communication whatever we call this whatever I will you see people have to understand the benefit of nuclear in order to agree with this they have to see how I am part of this project because if they say oh there is a group of scientists and I don't know who else they will benefit and what shall I benefit and usually those people who live around the nuclear power plant are very positive because they get the highly paid jobs they get all the benefits they get the kindergartens and new schools and this and that and those people in the other part of the country they are very much against because they don't get the direct benefit but they have to understand that nuclear energy really provides benefit to the whole society public relation that's what I was thinking this is a public relation is a something that we have probably at least my advice drop it out who does it mean public relation it can explain me to me what does it mean public relation you have to have a communication center and then show them what is the reactor and all these type of things they come and they go and they forget the next day they vote against the nuclear power plant so really we the word transparency puts together everything what you have to do to first of all to be honest and tell the pluses and the minuses and explain why pluses are better and more than the minuses and of course we call it acceptance you see agreement is a different story you need a public contract you need a social contract with the people to explain them and say we have to accept we know that nuclear power has pluses it has certain minuses but acceptance really is something which envelopes let's say the behavior of society by the way social acceptability of nuclear energy is so important topic that MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology has a master program on social acceptability of nuclear energy it's a scientific topic how really you do it yes the answer to this question is very long I strongly suggest you to discuss it after that but you never transfer my simple sentences you never transfer what is happening in Germany to what is happening in your country because your people are not Germans number one they have not had the German historical development well and I had the same question in Bulgaria when they asked yeah but the Swiss voted that they will stop nuclear energy are we more clever than the Swiss no probably we are not or maybe we are more clever but don't try to tell me that Bulgaria is Switzerland and vice versa so this question doesn't you have to talk to your people understand your habits your culture your acceptability what people are willing to accept in your country what they are not willing to accept and don't compare with the Germans or with the United States of whomever I mean Swedish or others but you are also a general interstate intergovernment an explorer of course for example to the fact also that to be an example of what some people here are willing to accept it's not related only to that country because the facts are not respecting the borders so there is some I would agree but I would also agree that every country is sovereign to do what they want and they you see if I have to I give you a direct example in 1992 Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Austria came to Bulgaria and was trying to tell me that every morning I have to report to him what is happening with Kosovo and I said to him are you serious we are a sovereign country why the hell I should call you every morning because the Austrian people are very much concerned you go and explain the Austrian people that they should not be concerned to report to anything so that's why there is certain conventions there is also there is principles international of how you build if it is close to the border then you have to make a common how to say meetings and so on and so forth and the program of acceptance have to be pretty serious but there is still the element of sovereignty which if you say ok you close Krushko and you don't build anything and then Slovenia says how shall I make my energy my economy is gone and so on and so forth so it's really a serious problem and I say acceptance is a very specific thing how you convince these people to accept the same is Austria with Czech Republic now Lithuania with Belarus and so on and so forth we had these issues in the good old days with Romania but then they had issues with us so I think as the countries that operate nuclear power plants we have a common understanding common training, common emergency preparedness and so on and so forth and that's how you handle these things now the nuclear share has to be going up that's what I say and here are the money issue when you spend a hell of a lot of money at the beginning then more or less in the first four years you need one major reconstruction of the nuclear power plant and of course then you have the commissioning phase where you don't get and this is the benefit of the nuclear power plant this is the plus that's what society earns you and what society earns is much more important and much better because a typical example is the United States of America when the nuclear power plants in the United States they had more than 100 were depreciated which means that all the costs were covered and the loans were paid all of a sudden they became the money printing machines and each operating company whether it's Exelon or Duke anybody else was willing immediately to buy an old nuclear power plant and start to produce money so obviously at the beginning you spend money but then you have to tell the people that there will be a period where their children will be really benefiting from this nuclear power plant the risks well you will have a lot of time to talk about the risks of the nuclear power plant what might happen of course here the so-called design basis accidents are accidents where we can handle and they are calculated and there are beyond design basis accidents which may happen people say this is a very rare event the objectives I mean the opponents say it's very rare event but in the last years we had three of these so they should happen once in 10,000 years luckily in the first 30 years happened three so obviously we have to be very very careful when we really calculate the real risks but at the end of the day Fukushima look at Fukushima I can talk about Chernobyl but it will take a lot of time although there we have to say the real victims of Chernobyl are a bit bigger than what usually is being discussed not what is being discussed by millions of people and a friend of mine was asking can you have a Belgian stylist here can talk a lot about because he was leading the agency project about Chernobyl but I will talk about Fukushima how many people will die from radiation disease in Fukushima nobody well there are a couple of workers which have received a little bit half of the dose but these were the maintenance workers this happens in a normal so they are under control but they have death people because of the evacuation you know why they decided to evacuate to the hospital in Fukushima which had this department of the hospital where are the extreme cases these people which are sitting on the equipment and this and that with heart attacks and all this type of things so they said oh they will be over irradiated and so on and so forth they were dead on the road because they should not have them evacuated in the extreme care department radiation is not the risk for these people the big risk was that they will die if they will be disconnected from the artificial heart or whatever they have been connected so one has really when calculating the risks of nuclear one has clearly to understand if you put it into let's say number of deaths for certain amount of energy produced nuclear down down on the lid what you say we produced for 1000 megawatt hours produced how much people died from nuclear it's very close to zero I would say in the global world production of nuclear electricity the wind probably has more in terms of deaths per unit of energy it's more dangerous wind because of the people falling from the tower there coming and doing some maintenance and falling there or something like this so obviously risks have to be carefully but people don't like to do this honestly and in balance they prefer to be afraid of something which they don't understand falling from let's say 50 meters and smashing your head is something which you okay he was simply unlucky if anybody dies nuclear power plant next minute this is on CNN oh there are three people in the nuclear power plant what they how they were dead because all of a sudden some of them didn't know and touch the electricity switchboard or whatever it is and so on and so forth so one has really to be very careful in calculating the real risks of nuclear technology there are some data with which I will pass principality is protection of the people not talk too much about this because you will have the people from the safety department telling you a lot about this but the use of nuclear energy should be such that people and the environment are protected in compliance with the IAEA safety standards and other internationally recognized standards that is how we formulated this principle and this is part of the responsibility safety is a responsibility to those who use nuclear technology and it's not a responsibility of the control panel operate only sometimes we think it's a responsibility of the state that the state has to institutionalize the system laws, regulations, control functions and so on and so forth it's a responsibility of the technology developments, it's a responsibility of the industry and of course it's also the operating company although for legal reasons we channel all the responsibility to the operating company but I think it is also responsibility of all the other players in the in this well these are the IAEA safety standards you understand that the fundamentals, the general safety requirements and the specific safety requirements which are there so that is the basis for protection of people in the environment currently of course if you look at the basic safety I mean safety fundamentals you will see that everything is directed into protecting the people from the harmful effect of radiation the world is harmful effect of nuclear radiation and if you look at which is the harmful effect of radiation frankly speaking nuclear power is somewhere here this is the Chernobyl accident this is the fuel cycle this is the medical diagnosis this is the radon this is the terrestrial radiation in full cosmic radiation technological radiation exposure cannot be seen people don't want to accept this they don't want to accept here in the Valfirtl this is a region above Vienna they don't want to accept that their soil and the rock is so rich in irradium that their radon in their houses is the biggest and the most dangerous source of radiation they believe that it is the Czech power plant, it is Chernobyl and they send that and it's very difficult to convince this type of people because you don't have a communication channel if this is a well educated person at least he understands something from physics and engineering he will understand about what we are saying I go personally with a dose meter with a radiation meter and I show him that in his cellar where he keeps his potatoes the radiation is very very high he was looking in me and said is this equipment correct? the first thing is probably your apparatus is broken it's not and if you go nobody cares if you go to the dentist and you say okay here I have a little kareas the dentist looks at you the dentist looks at you and says go immediately to the x-ray machine he puts you here the thing and you get your dose you don't even protest I don't protest because then the doctor sees seven up is a little bit of a problem if you can see it with his eyes he first of all puts you on radiation exposure and that is the medical radiation but people believe in the benefit they say oh this for my health it's good so there is a good radiation and bad radiation there is nothing like this every radiation creates the same problems now nuclear safety of course these are the concepts the radiation that depends in depth and so on and so forth which is how to say basically is the fundamental issue of nuclear safety of course the biggest envelope in the nuclear safety and that's something which I would only mention because the rest first of all I guess you know and second you will be given more detailed lecture about this is the safety culture that envelopes everything what you have to do from the design safety going to operational safety and so on and so forth safety culture Mr. Tudakov said something surprisingly for me very close to what I say safety culture means three things if you look at the agency definitions it's a long one safety culture has a lot of features this and that it is the specific behavior the impo has principles agency has five principles and so on and so forth I have three principle number one of safety cultures you have to know what you are doing in a nuclear installation which means you have to train educated knowledgeable when you do something do you know what you are doing second you have to know the consequences if you do it wrong if the people in Chernobyl knew what may happen if they do wrong they probably will not do it and the last thing is you have to be a very responsible person you don't have to say today I will do it correctly tomorrow I can violate a little bit and these three principles of safety culture are really fundamental knowledge, competence training understanding the consequences and being a very responsible person now the responsible use also includes the principle of security we have to take a new account of the risk of all the malicious use of nuclear and other radioactive source material this is something which Mr. Martin in the morning mentioned we don't only have to look at what we know that can happen but we also have to think of what we don't know that can happen and I will give you a simple example but don't tell you that I'm training terrorist I was talking to a very very responsible person in my country probably one of the most responsible and I said at such a radiation terrorist attack is possible he said how? Very simple do you know that each company that does non-destructive testing produces drops of iridium it says you sometimes cobalt 16 and so on and so forth and they keep them somewhere what happens if I load all these defective scopes they're called and if I load them in a truck and put a lot of explosives and I go here in front of your office and explode the truck I may not kill anybody I will contaminate the whole bloody place and this will not be possible to be used in the next 10-20 years until you dig it until you clean I will make such a how to say panicking the people he was looking at me and said is this possible? I said it is why not? but you don't use it because they should be under very strict control these sources but in some countries and in some parts of the world they are not they're locked somewhere I mean it's not impossible so security in terms of physical protection sabotage and theft let's say legal issues and nuclear terrorism this is something that we have to be very very careful when using nuclear technology my first meeting with this was in 1975 for the first time I entered the nuclear power plant we had to do certain analysis there I was still working for the university and all of a sudden in front of the central room where are the two VVR reactors there is a guy with Kondinizan and Kalashnikov and machine gun inside the power plant and I was asking why this guy is sitting there he said well if all of a sudden a normal worker insider decides to do this he has to shoot him inside the plant because a terrorist or let's say a sabotage can be done not only from outside but somebody that is inside official with the cart and then he creates a problem so the security is very specific area I don't talk much about this because I honestly I understand the principle but I'm not part of the security system they will never tell you what they do about this and that but there are certain principles of security which have to be followed and this has to be well understood by all the people that are working not only in the nuclear power plant with radioisotopes because the panic which a dirty bomb without killing people is just as big as how to say an accident in the nuclear power plant nonproliferation very important principle is principle 5, nonproliferation when you embark on a nuclear program you have to take due account of the risk of diverting the program into a military aspect this is a political issue it's not that much of a technical issue because technically me and you cannot decide all of a sudden to make a nuclear weapon it's a country that has to put let's say this task and start to do this so obviously nonproliferation is a political issue and as long as the agency is the single and trusted by the government's organization to observe to control and to verify this element of use of nuclear energy I think this principle carries with it a lot of things the safeguards agreement signing all the conventions committing the government to nonproliferation issues and so on and so forth of course we are talking, we have been talking that there must be also a technological solution but some of the people agree others don't but more or less one of the problems which somebody was asking about the small and medium size reactors is that they definitely will operate at a higher enrichment level in order to be efficient and then they create an issue of proliferation and how it is going to be sorted out is still to be seen so of course proliferation means material accounting technological export control comprehensive test ban IA inspections and so on and so forth each of these elements contributes if you don't make nuclear tests so you are not developing a nuclear weapon if all the technology which you need to produce a nuclear weapon is being controlled of course this is also another element material accounting the agency that's what safeguards does accounts every gram of uranium 235 or whatever so all the material you have and so on and so forth so that was one of the important things when the non-proliferation treaty was signed and that's the IEA safeguards but you will hear more about from my colleagues in the safeguards the important thing is that the IEA as I say once the the board of the IEA decides that there is a non-compliance or some program cannot be verified fully as you see and completely verified that the fissile material is under control and available then the director general that can go directly to the security council and bypass all the other things well this principle we talked about this long-term commitment if there are questions I will say but believe me long-term commitment is another type of philosophical and political issue which I don't have personally an answer you will see this milestone document saying long-term commitment be prepared what does it mean long-term commitment today when I have to see what will be the governance of my country 100 years from now I look back 100 years and I said well 100 years ago this country was under under Russian whatever control the other part was Versailles contract or whatever treaty was doing and so on and so forth so we had certain sovereignty certain things we didn't after that came the Second World War then we were on the losing side and so on and so forth you look 100 years behind in your history and you say okay how can I forecast what's going to happen in the next 100 years but we have to say a nuclear power plant today is designed is designed to live 60 eventually plus life extension 80 years and another 20 years of decommissioning it's really essential essentially committed to the principles of nuclear energy how we are going to achieve this for me is still a question mark but let's say step number one is that we have to work in this direction we have to start to prepare to teach every generation because nuclear is a transgenerational technology 100 years minimum of 4 generations we'll have to live work for this plant for the regulatory authority technical support organization and that's what it means long term commitment all of these have to be probably put in the proper legal framework in the proper legislation about education, about training and so on and of course you have still the route waste management well the radioactive waste that is one of the issues which are currently being discussed very much and it's also discussed with the newcomer countries because one of the biggest questions is the radioactive waste I'll tell you an example of my experience 1972 first power plant was under construction 1973 I'm a PhD student at the university two big Russian academicians come to Bulgaria one of them is Florov you know Florov was the person who during the Second World War wrote the Stalin that we can produce a bomb from this and that and so forth so he's a famous Russian scientist academician participated in their project and Bluhintsev came he was in charge of the academy of science and we were sitting in our laboratory my boss was the chairman of the atomic energy commission and then we asked the same question to this Russian famous scientist what shall we do we're building the nuclear power plant what about waste then he told me something very simple Russia is so big there are places where 1,000 km nobody exists we shall make a big hole we shall put them there and that's it we looked at this and said ok if they say like this probably this can happen now we are almost 50 years after that the situation is pretty complicated there is a pretty complex international regulation this is the joint convention for spent fuel and rod waste management in Europe every country according to this has to deal with this on its own territory which is stupid because I think that the European commission and the European Union is a assembly of very stupid people especially those who manage the rest of the people are clever but these are really very stupid because the country may not have even the geological how to say structures to do this Bulgaria is a very seismic country in terms of that we don't have the Finnish big granite plate which they can dig a hole and leave it there because Finland is always given as an example, Sweden as well we don't have this structure Russia doesn't care because they have such a territory which is tens of thousands of kilometers obviously there must be an international solution somehow which can handle this in an appropriate place there have been even discussions with Australia on islands, Marshall Islands or whatever with this and this and that can we jointly together manage the high level waste because the low level waste is not a problem then the high level waste, what is the high level waste is to spend fuel basically or after reprocessing the question is it a waste or is it a resource and still this has to be decided in the future whether this type of thing is a resource for something else which we can use in the future but anyway it really is not a technical and scientific problem and that's what we have to explain to the people is that in principle we can handle the radioactive waste the problem is where and how much because operating a nuclear power plant is beneficial every day a nuclear power plant produces about 1,000 megawatt at average European prices produce about 2 million euros daily that is the cost of the electricity on the market between one and a half and two million depending now taking care of the radioactive waste is only using money and when the company has to do this or the country they are saving on unprofitable investment so basically at present there is the so-called decision wait and see the technology to do this is more or less in place we know how to handle it especially low and medium level waste the high level waste for the time being is kept the fuel is stored in dry stores and in other wet stores and so on and so forth and obviously we will find a solution in the future whether we waste what we currently call waste will not be more or less a resource for other fuel or for other type of reactors you know about the duplex cycle many other types of things fast reactors can use spent fuel and produce new type of fuel new type of fissile material and so on so it's really difficult to tell the people this and that but you see one of the examples which is given nowadays is really Sweden where two places were fighting who to get the waste repository because of the benefit of the work say and the payment which they will get there resource efficiency that is principle number 7 we say that nuclear energy should make efficient use of resources what does that mean? this means that what we do today the current fission reactors are extremely inefficient regarding the resources when we put the fuel in the reactor and when we take it out after let's say 50,000 megawatt whatever per ton per day or whatever is the level of irradiation of the fuel we use 3-5% of the fuel the rest is still there so obviously the current fission reactors pressurized water or boiling water reactors are not the most efficient source we obviously have to use this fuel in fast reactors let's say to continue to increase the efficiency of the use of fissile material so that is something which is critically important you've heard about this nuclear power is always how to say linked to the availability of uranium somebody was asking and if you look at the countries which are looking seriously for me it was a little bit of surprise to find out that Uganda has serious activities in this respect but then I looked at the brown book and I looked at Uganda has quite a substantial percent of the world reserves of uranium so obviously those countries which are rich in uranium of Kazakhstan like Niger and others are carefully looking in these options to use them of course you need enrichment capacity but that is one of the stories which Mr. Cholikov mentioned in the morning I will not go deeply into this that it's not necessary going into enrichment is a very expensive I would say it's a very expensive technology very energy consuming and so on and so forth some countries you see one of the ways countries have been doing is like our Romanian colleagues using Kando technology doesn't mean enrichment although recently because of safety issues there is also enrichment in Kando designs slides but still there is enrichment but then you have to produce heavy water which is another another spending and so on and so forth so at the end of the day countries are concerned that what happens if I don't have access to fuel to enrich the uranium the answer is very simple of course the agency has created fuel bank it's a political step to calm down the countries number one the supplier at the beginning when you sign the contract for delivery you sign also a fuel contract with the supplier and this fuel contract will continue for tens of years that he is supposed to produce the fuel for your reactor because if I give you the enriched uranium which is a black dust what shall you do with this you can afford it to the reactor you need the fuel the fuel assembly so the bank is very nice it's a political step which is very good but at the end of the day it doesn't solve the problem fully so you have to make sure who can produce the fuel assembly because your reactor needs a fuel assembly not how to say enriched uranium powder which is step number one step number two who is going to produce me the fuel assembly that enters which is licensed, which is tested and so on and so forth if you want to change the fuel of your reactor it's a pain in the neck how much steps you have to go if you want to do this last principle and I will stop here I see Nixon dramatically and what shall I do too many questions the principle of continuous improvement imagine a technology of 100 years life span how shall you work with this technology if you continue to operate it as it is the first computer on each control panel of the reactors we had a computer these were Soviet reactors and the machine was called spark 60 for those who speak Russian it was an analog machine like when you have seen in the old American movies when operator connects you can talk this was like this machine we can make certain arrangement and this can calculate what is needed for the operator this was in 1974 when these reactors were shut down in 1986 they had, as I called, IVM wrist stations imagine only this imagine what technology development goes through these years when you have to operate this nuclear power plant because the life span of a nuclear power plant depends on the pressure vessel steam generators can be changed it's a bulky and expensive operation but still they can be changed you calculate how much you invest how much you extend the life the pressure vessel is the the most critical thing in a pressurized water reactor in the conduit system it appears that all the calamity can be changed so the conduit system is really they can live forever if they can maintain it so if, let's say 20 years ago the temperature control was analog with the needle or the pressure now it is digital the nuclear power plant now whatever was talking somebody in the morning about big data the nuclear power plants are also looking at big data because they digitize even the old power plants digitize all their equipment now if you have a big computer and an appropriate way to handle this enormous amount of signals a nuclear power plant produces between 25 to 35,000 signals every second so imagine this is temperature flow and everything salinity neutronics and all these types of things imagine you start to maintain this data and to accumulate them and start to look at what happens when this and then you look at that moment one minute before that the temperature rose in this circuit nowadays analyzing big data for nuclear power plants opens a completely new territory how to say of analysis and behavior of the nuclear power plant we can understand a lot more let's say if we are looking analog so obviously continuous improvement is not only this, continuous improvement is also human resource improvement new elements of training let's say at the beginning people were trained on the control panel now they have a full scope simulator which is remarkable something that they can really feel the nuclear power plant although behind is only a big computer which operates the whole thing so obviously continuous improvement is a basic principle you cannot live with the technology for 100 years and you leave it as it is at the beginning so obviously the safety performance is shown with just a second this is the continuous improvement in technology we believe that's why people say we have the first generation second and third the agency is looking differently into this distinguish evolutionary reactors and so on and so forth innovative reactors knowledge has to be permanently innovative because what we knew 100 years ago and what we know now and what is going to be 100 years is also something that we have to take care and my last slide is fusion is still 50 years in the future well 50 years ago they said it is 50 years away now they say again it is 50 years away so I don't know I will not be available when they will say another 50 years away but we have to do it that's the problem we have to do it because really fusion is another source of energy it's the natural source of energy of the sun and if we are able to control this we are able to control the fission which we have been in Ghana there has been a natural reactor but it is by chance but fusion probably is one element of this and the balance is very simple the benefit the responsibility and the knowledge that is nuclear energy and if you remember at least this balance I think I apologize to the organizers and to you for keeping you so crazy but unfortunately this is a long lecture number one you have to put me 15 minutes down because we started 15 minutes behind so well I am half an hour over time and over budget thank you very much but it was very interesting lecture


All right, some things you are, you are putting an offer together and you're drafting your sales page and you say, I want to talk about this but I don't want to feel too seem too salesy when I talk about it but so tell us a bit about the offer. So, two of us so that the one, the basic one is a basic human design chart reading. I've been writing case studies on medium. I feel hesitant to share the link to the sales page or share with friends who I know might be interested. Okay, yeah, so it's not.  That's when salesiness comes in it's like, wait, it's not something I want so why are you keep putting in front, but the great thing about social media, right, or email newsletter I know you have some email subscribers or you have blog readers. The thing about broadcasting messages is that if someone doesn't want something they just keep scrolling. So it's no worries at all they said okay, because I mean all of us are used to seeing advertisements on social media, and if it's something from a friend of ours is like oh cool that's what she's doing not interested okay keep going right. So I don't think we need to feel salesy about about social media posts, unless we are posting about it, you know the fifth time in two weeks on the same social media platform to people that are generally not interested in what we offer but I think, in your case beings that people have heard you talk about human design, many times. So whether it's on Facebook or or Instagram or your medium profile they've heard about you talk about. So I think when you make the offer to say alright now I'm, I'm, I'm now, I mean, I'm now offering this, or more reminding you all that this is available. I think the people who have enjoyed your for your human design content will be open to it, open to see it in other words it won't seem strange, or it's certainly not salesy, but when it comes to one to one though. Okay, you're even reaching out to someone one to one. And you genuinely believe that they will they might have an interest in this. I think it's fine to send it to them once to say hey, George, I know you had expressed interest in it. I know that this is happening in case you know somebody who would be interested in this. And then you don't keep emailing me personally I mean if I'm on your email that's sure you can email your email and several times. You see you see what I mean so, but if I, if I ask you information then then it's totally acceptable that you share some more information, but is that helpful. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you.