Saudi Arabia: the nuclear mirage, costs and alternatives
Last February the Russia’s President Putin led an institutional two day visit to Riyadh in the name of a reinforcement of political and economic bonds with the Saudi Kingdom. On the occasion of the meeting with the Russian delegation the Saudi Foreign Minister, Prince Saud Al-Faisal, declared the beginning of formal collaboration with Moscow on the development of a civil nuclear program in partnership with Russian experts and scientists.

Even though Saudi Arabia represented for several years the most authoritative backer of a “nuclear free” Middle East, opposing both the Israeli atomic arsenal and the Iranian energy program, today Riyadh opens a new chapter. This follows the occasion of the conference of the Cooperation Council of the Gulf: in that circumstance the representatives from six Persian Gulf countries (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Oman, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates) announced their will to begin an exploratory study on the possibility of developing nuclear energetic stations, this in full observance of the limits imposed by international rights and by the Non-Proliferation Treaty. The Iranian nuclear threat and the success of it’s uranium enriching program - in spite of the opposition of the United States, the European Union, and the United Nations - seem to have convinced Riyadh of the political feasibility of a project deferred in the past for fear of diplomatic reprisals. The project would seem attractive from an economical point of view.

Today Saudi Arabia has neither the basic technical competences, nor the necessary know-how to open within its national borders uranium enriching processes or the production of isotopes, on which the functioning of atomic power stations for civil use are based. However Saudi scholars have enjoyed an ultra decennial partnership with European countries, the United States, and Pakistan for academic study of the subject; in this network the main role is played by the national Institute of Research on Atomic Energy, founded in 1988 and responsible for the training of staff specialised in the study of radioactive elements.

One of the most important elements in support of a Saudi atomic programme would be the availability of raw materials and of mineral resources on national territory that – once a reactor is built - will make the logistical network of provisions safe. In fact the Saudi Kingdom can count on some limited quantities of uranium and thorium discovered in the Tabuk basin, in the central and north western regions of the country. This area’s resources haven’t been mined and exploited, but - given their scarcity- they are unlikely to guarantee self-sufficiency alone for the uranium enriching cycles. However, noticeable phosphates deposits are present in the country, they have already been exploited for several decades. Even though the cost of obtaining uranium from phosphoric acid is usually higher than the price of uranium on the international market, the benefits in terms of safe exploitation of a domestic supply source could balance the greater expense. The areas of Al Jalamid and Al Amud have the largest concentration of industries for the transformation of raw materials into fertilizers and other products. The country does not lack - at least in the coastal areas on the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf - the infrastructure necessary to connecting a nuclear reactor to the electric grid of the areas with the highest energy consumption of the Kingdom.

Already in the past Saudi scholars examined the feasibility of the construction of nuclear power stations in the country. In selecting the most adapt location for such a station the studies made in the eighties, and later confirmed, indicate the two industrial areas of Jeddah and Dhahran. The first situated on the Red Sea and the other on the Persian Gulf coast. Obviously the station’s construction would be strictly tied to the requirements of national energy consumption, reaching a peak in the high-density industrial areas, particularly those tied to the refining and distribution of oil resources.

A credible proposal would concern the development of a power station - or more than one - on the coast, near some of the over thirty desalination plants working today in the country. Such structures - vital to the sort of a desert land - are characterised by high energy requirements and already in the suggestions have been made as regards alternatives to thermo combustion power stations.

Studying the level of energy consumption in the Kingdom it can be observed that in the last decades the country has always succeeded in resolving the increase in national electric demand through its own resources; even with production based entirely on fossil-fuel thermo stations. Over the last years, however, energy consumption has increased by an incredibly high rate (7% per year), this could bring the existing electric system to a crisis situation within 5 years. The Government estimates that the country will need 20 gig watt (GW) of further electric production capacity by 2019, a quantity almost equivalent to the actual productive capacity of 26,6 GW. In this scenario the appeal of nuclear reactors that – although with very high initial investments - would assure the stability of future electricity production is perfectly clear.

It can be observed that previous development projects by the Ministry of Industry and Electricity recognised in natural gas the ideal fuel for new power stations that - on the model of many Mediterranean countries - would make energy production in the country safer and less polluting. Among the concerns of the governmental are also the proposals for diversifying national electricity production to divert crude oil extraction almost exclusively to exportation on the global market, considered in the next decades more profitable for the exhaustion of the oil supplies of other countries. In this scenario increasing national investments in extraction, processing and exploitation of natural gas could be crucial to allowing the country to face new domestic energetic requirements without renouncing the profits derived from commerce in oil.

Ina addition we need to consider the positive trend of the development of renewable energies, already understood and appreciated by some Persian Gulf “cousins” (the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Bahrain in the forefront) that would make unnecessary any investment in the nuclear sector. Currently the costs of electricity production with concentrated solar power (CSP) - structures made of hundreds of huge mirrors - could make the photovoltaic option favourable in a few years as it is particularly suitable for the never-ending deserts of the country. In such a case initial investments would be quickly recovered and would allow the Saudi Government to succeed in facing the increasing energy demand in a short space of time. On the contrary any possible investment for the realisation of nuclear station would turn out to be profitable only in the long term; on average 15 years are required for the construction of a plant - the construction of a nuclear power station could turn out to be disadvantageous also in economic terms.

An element to take into consideration in the construction of a reactor will be the complicated question of the removal of toxic waste, something that previous studies by the Riyadh University already considered. Currently there are some locations for the storage of radioactive elements derived from research activities and from the major Saudi hospitals, but such places would be insufficient for the quantities produced by nuclear reactors. In this the backing of Moscow’s Government would be crucial, considering the considerable Russian experience in the transport and removal in Siberia of waste, some produced by other European countries.Finally, although investigations are being conducted by almost every Gulf state, strong doubts remain as regards the security level of nuclear structures in Saudi Arabia. The Kingdom remains one of the countries at the highest risk of terrorist treat and Islamic fundamentalism. Given the facts, the increasing national energy demands cannot justify the construction of nuclear power stations in the country and the political and strategic considerations cannot but confirm the need to turn attention to sources that are an alternative to the nuclear choice.