In the United States, there have been two major nuclear construction projects. One is in Georgia, and the other is in South Carolina. The project in Georgia took over ten years to barely complete. It was truly a struggle to finish it. As for the one in South Carolina, it is still ongoing after many years. The reason for this is fundamentally a lack of workforce. There are simply not enough people available to work. For example, even skilled welders are hard to come by. To construct a nuclear facility, there are many pipes and various components that need to be covered. Since these cannot all be manufactured in a factory, welding must be done on-site. However, there aren't enough qualified individuals available to perform this work. This requires highly skilled welders with extensive experience.

There should have been nuclear power plants, but no one has experienced that. When did it start to disappear? It began to disappear from 1979. Oh, really? There was an incident called the Three Mile Island accident in 1979. Yes, in 1979, there was a nuclear accident at Three Mile Island. No one died in the incident; not a single person lost their life. The containment barriers, which are protective structures, melted down to the fourth level. However, it did not completely melt down to the last level. So, there was no leakage or anything like that, but people were really shocked. As a result, President Carter declared that the U.S. would not pursue nuclear power anymore. This led to the realization that nuclear power had no future. Consequently, American students stopped majoring in nuclear-related fields, did not attend universities for that purpose, and avoided jobs in that sector.

And then, as a result, there were no orders for nuclear power plants, and the company, Westinghouse, lost its projects. Eventually, Westinghouse was acquired by Toshiba, and it went bankrupt, selling off assets everywhere in chaos. Moreover, in 1986, there was the Chernobyl disaster in Ukraine, which was part of Soviet territory at the time. That was a very significant event. After being hit hard by that incident, the world recognized that nuclear power was not viable anymore, so everyone stopped pursuing nuclear energy. As a result, the projects disappeared. Then, in 2011, the Fukushima nuclear disaster occurred, leading Japan to also halt its nuclear energy programs. Despite this, there are still countries that continue to develop nuclear power, such as Russia, China, and South Korea. However, during the Moon Jae-in administration in South Korea...

The government had declared a shift away from nuclear power, but now, with the Yoon Seok-yeol administration, they have announced a return to making nuclear energy a key industry and have changed direction. If South Korea had continued the phase-out of nuclear energy, we might have lost all our capabilities by now. The workforce would have diminished, and if the companies supplying parts had all gone out of business, it would be extremely difficult to revive that industry. France experienced something similar after the 2000s. Consequently, the construction period for nuclear plants has to be extended, and costs inevitably rise. At one point, there were about 200,000 people working in the nuclear sector in France, but now, almost all of them are gone. This situation is somewhat similar to what we hear about the defense industry these days; the structure is quite comparable, especially with the exclusion of Russia and China.

The structure is the same, isn't it? And we had that military factory continuously operating, while countries like Germany had been stopping because they didn't need it, right? Yes, it's the same structure. So, we were always almost fully prepared. Right, we didn't really align with the global trend. We paradoxically went in a different direction. Yes, while the whole world was moving in one way, we weren't following that path. This is partly due to the existence of North Korea. The reason other countries were not pursuing nuclear power was that they believed it could be replaced by renewable energy sources. They thought of solar and wind energy, but in reality, it works well only in countries with favorable weather. For solar energy, it makes sense in countries that get a lot of sunshine, and similarly for countries that have strong winds.

Wind power doesn't make sense. In our country, we don't produce much even if we try hard, and there are winters. Also, the wind isn't that strong. So, even if we invest in wind power generation, the efficiency isn't that high. It might work in places like Jeju Island, but wind power on land doesn't work well. Therefore, whether we like it or not, aside from nuclear power, we really don't have other options. 

So, in a way, we've been continuously operating, and we were always ready for construction. But now, we're currently utilizing that. However, we have to see how things go until early next year, as there are potential threats. You mentioned Westinghouse from the U.S., and they are planning to file a lawsuit over intellectual property rights. This is about their core technology.

Why are you trying to make money in the Czech Republic with that technology without our permission? If there are issues there, wouldn't this jeopardize the main contract? What do you think? This is a model of what we call the Korean-type nuclear power plant, and it's a type 1 model. The design blueprint is from a company called Combustion Engineering, which in the past was acquired by Westinghouse. A significant portion of that blueprint was used to create the Korean-type nuclear power plant. Since Westinghouse acquired that company, they hold the intellectual property rights to that technology. This is because they acquired it. However, according to the contract, if you want to export a nuclear power plant made with American original technology, you need to...

The government approval is required, and it needs to be the approval of the U.S. government. Aren't you supposed to get that approval? Didn't you proceed without it? This has raised some issues. I don't know the exact details, but Westinghouse has filed a lawsuit in a U.S. district court. They are arguing that the contract is invalid, claiming that Korea cannot export technology-based reactors to foreign countries without the approval of the U.S. government. However, the district court dismissed the lawsuit, stating that there was no need for a hearing and essentially ignoring it. The reason is that the U.S. government has the authority in this matter, and they questioned why Westinghouse would file a lawsuit about it. But what is the stance of the U.S. government? It's nonsensical.

The U.S. government is not mentioning anything about Guatabuta. So, if the relationship between the South Korean government and the U.S. is good, they will probably remain silent. However, if the relationship worsens, they might raise concerns. That would be acceptable; they could indeed raise issues in such a situation. However, Westinghouse is essentially trying to negotiate. They don't want to block this; they want to receive payment. They want royalties or something similar. They want us to give them something in return. In the past, during the deal with the United Arab Emirates, they also received money and provided some work opportunities, collaborating in that manner. I believe this will happen again; it has to. The reason is that Westinghouse fundamentally lacks construction capability. Therefore, the U.S. is focused on construction.

Currently, there is a lack of capability. Fundamentally, in order to sell their intellectual property, they need a place where they can execute projects. Among those capable of executing projects, the most reliable options are in South Korea, such as Hyundai Engineering & Construction or Doosan Heavy Industries. They have no choice but to collaborate with those companies. Westinghouse, on its own, struggles because they only have the intellectual concepts. It's similar to the semiconductor industry; American companies handle the design while TSMC does the manufacturing. Without TSMC, American semiconductors cannot function at all; they only exist in the design phase. The same situation applies to nuclear reactors. Therefore, they do not have any intention of undermining South Korea; rather, they see potential for significant profits. Ultimately, this can be viewed as a way to collaborate positively.

It would be good to collaborate with a company like Westinghouse in Korea, but the issue is that it incurs costs, and there are some concerns about low-bid contracts. Of course, it's hard to confirm 100%, but it should be a profitable venture. However, I'm a bit worried about the profitability. What do you think? There seems to be a lot of talk about low-bid contracts here and there. In my opinion, if Korea does its best, it can end up with low bids. The reason is that construction costs are fundamentally low here, which means that compared to developed countries, it naturally becomes a low bid. For example, this shows the construction costs of nuclear power plants. It indicates how much it actually costs to build nuclear power plants. At the top is India, then China, and South Korea follows. Then there's India, China, and the Barakah nuclear power plant.

The French Flaman and the British Clier that I mentioned earlier, as well as the American Bogi, which recently began operations, are all part of the construction costs. It refers to how much it costs per megawatt. In reality, we have built many projects at a price comparable to France and the United States. Right? Of course, we would bid at a price slightly higher than this, but still lower compared to them. So when they ask how we can bid at such a low price, it doesn't make sense to them, and they point out that we are underbidding. However, we have built projects like this in the past. Yes, that's right; Koreans undertake such construction. But China offers even lower prices, and India is even cheaper. However, the question is, which countries are reliable? South Korea is one, but not China or Russia.

Should we consider this as cost-effectiveness? Yes, that's the case with our country's weapons as well; the cost-effectiveness is very high. The same goes for smartphones and cars; it's true across the board. You can see that the situation with nuclear power plants is quite similar. It seems like there is a parallel theory between K-nuclear power and defense industries. That's right. Looking at it globally, we have the technology, actual manufacturing capabilities, and we take responsibility for our actions, so the cost-effectiveness must be the highest. This is not just a nationalistic statement; it's an objective fact. That's true; it's interesting. Based on that technological strength and high cost-effectiveness, we need to expand our nuclear territory to other countries as well.

As mentioned earlier, the BRICS countries are close to Russia and China, so it won't be easy. You can think of it as their market. So, what about other European countries? There is France, but I think if we do well this time, and if we successfully secure the Czech project and manage it smoothly for about two years, then the project duration could last at least five to six years. If we can continue to progress smoothly for about two years, I believe other countries will start to take an interest in Korea as well. They will say, Please include us too. This is because these are Eastern European countries, and among them, there are nations planning to build or expand nuclear power plants. If you look at them, they are all involved in it.

If combined, it amounts to 130 billion euros, which means, in our currency, approximately 200 trillion won. This market, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, is in Eastern Europe. However, Finland also needs to expand, and Sweden too, and the Netherlands is in the same situation. All these countries are currently facing this sudden change. The reason is that for a long time, there was a global trend toward phasing out nuclear energy. But after Russia invaded Ukraine, gas and oil prices surged. Russia, being a significant oil and gas producer, faced sanctions, which led to a general increase in energy prices. Furthermore, there has been a growing awareness of the limitations of renewable energy. People are realizing that it won't be sufficient; it cannot cover even 20% of the total energy needs. Of course, this varies from country to country.

It varies from country to country, but no matter how many there are, it cannot exceed 30%. So, if we don't use nuclear power, what comes next? That would be coal. We can't allow that. Nuclear power is better than coal. This is how it works. Therefore, countries are inevitably increasing their nuclear power generation. On a global scale, nuclear power is considered almost on the same level as alternative energy and renewable energy. This decision has been made on a broader scale as well. 

Yes, yes, yes. The demand for nuclear power in Europe is significantly increasing, and the same goes for the United States. In the U.S., the construction of new nuclear power plants had almost come to a halt, but now the U.S. is also planning to increase its nuclear power generation. So, if the U.S. expands its nuclear power, who will carry out the construction? Ultimately, I believe it will be Korea that takes on that role. This could lead to a series of developments.

So, it seems feasible to explore almost all regions except for BRICS, right? But especially in the BRICS nations, particularly in the Eastern European market, Eastern European countries are particularly influenced by Russia. So, who is Daehan? It refers to South Korea. On top of that, the United States also needs to build nuclear power plants. Until now, the country with the most nuclear power plants in the world is the United States, with over 90 reactors. However, they haven't constructed any new ones; the majority were built a long time ago. But where did they source their uranium fuel? They sourced it all from Russia. Now, with the situation of not being able to import uranium from Russia, there is a growing sentiment to find solutions, and the atmosphere is shifting toward the need for new nuclear power plants to be constructed in the U.S.

The nuclear power plant is Westinghouse, but Westinghouse lacks construction capability. It also seems to lack equipment manufacturing capability. Excluding China and Russia, the only country left is South Korea, which has a very large market. So, they must be waiting continuously, right? If they show well in the Czech Republic, then the defense market and the nuclear power market are very similar, as you have already mentioned, representative. It's quite fascinating. But what about concerns regarding uranium? Once the nuclear power plant is built, how do we ensure there are no issues with the supply of uranium? We have to make fuel rods with uranium, right? How will the supply chain be managed? Also, South Korea is fundamentally in a situation where it has to import uranium, and currently, I think, although I'm not sure of the exact numbers, most of it is probably supplied by Russia.

It seems that the United States is also doing this. The U.S. has started to become self-sufficient in uranium. Therefore, it is likely that uranium enrichment and the production of fuel rods will also begin to take place independently within the Western bloc. This doesn't require particularly advanced technology; it's a matter of competitiveness and cost-effectiveness. Russia used to have a competitive edge in terms of cost, but if the Western bloc starts producing, the prices will likely go up. The cost of fuel will increase. However, that is something that cannot be avoided. Recently, uranium prices have risen significantly. You can see that this increase is happening in the Western bloc. The prices within Russia are likely low since they cannot export. With the inability to export, there are continuous breaks in the flow, and the dynamics in this situation are quite complex.

It's important, right? It's a very crucial industry. I hope to hear that our K nuclear power plant has officially signed a contract at the beginning of the year. If that happens, it could make us a central country in the world. If we dominate nuclear power and become the main supplier, we become that central nation. Energy and defense, right? We are a source of weapons and a source of energy. If we become that, we truly become a central nation. There are many discussions about including South Korea in the G7 plus 2, making it G9. If nuclear power and defense grow even more, we could actually become part of the G7. We are better than Italy, so we could aim for G7, not just G9.

It’s better than Italy. Yes, yes, yes. What’s going on in Italy these days? Well, tourism is good. Yes, yes. In the past, we didn’t have that, so I have nothing to say about it. Anyway, from the perspective of how much we can supply to other countries, I think Korea is facing a very good opportunity. I believe that. It’s great; I’m looking forward to it. 

One thing I’m certain of is that I’ve always seen things faster than others. Yes, the transformer prices have risen more than six times, and I was the first to mention defense stocks. They are still rising, right? Everything is going up. In the end, all the sectors that were supposed to rise have risen. The fact that it can be easily explained means that I understand the basic principles or framework behind it. You can see that. That’s real insight. Hurry up and check the pinned comment.

"우리가 중심국가" 에너지와 무기를 장악하는 세계의 중심, 한국 / 김정호 교수 (2부)

"지식과 자산의 복리효과" 그 길을 복길이 여러분과 함께 걷습니다.
( 업로드 : 오전 11시45분, 오후 4시, 오후 7시 )
제휴 문의 : ystreet2021@gmail.com

인터넷 언론사 제호 : 와이스트릿 / 등록번호 : 서울 아53714 / 등록일자 : 2021.05.24
주소 : 서울시 영등포구 국제금융로8길 27-9 여의도 동북빌딩 910호
대표번호 : 02-6949-1701 / 팩스 : 02-6949-1702
이메일 : ystreet2021@gmail.com
발행인 : 이대호
Copyright © 와이스트릿  YSTREET ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 와이스트릿의 모든 콘텐츠는 저작권법의 보호를 받으며, 무단 전재·복사·배포 등을 금지합니다.


"우리가 중심국가" 에너지와 무기를 장악하는 세계의 중심, 한국 / 김정호 교수 (2부)

"우리가 중심국가" 에너지와 무기를 장악하는 세계의 중심, 한국 / 김정호 교수 (2부)

스크립트