The abandonment of nuclear power plants as the main liberal madness in the energy sector, which finds less and less support from politicians in the West

Read Time:10 Minute, 48 Second

If after the outbreak of the war in Ukraine and the resulting energy crisis, it seemed to some that the madness of the “radical leftist environmentalists” had begun to wane, this was an incorrect and premature conclusion. And the main target of these “peaceful terrorists” continues to be nuclear power, which in reality is innovative and causes the least damage to nature, but in the eyes of destructive liberals and socialists is positioned as a chthonic evil that must be destroyed. At the very end of last year, the leftist government of Pedro Sánchez in Spain decided, following Germany, to dismantle all nuclear power plants in the country. According to the authorities, all nuclear power plants will finally close in the next 10 years until 2034. In total in Spain today there are five operating nuclear power plants with 7 operating reactors, which produce less than 25% of all energy consumed in the country. Spain has been on the path of abandoning nuclear power for a long time, with the most recent closures being José Cabrera nuclear power station in 2006 and Santa Maria in 2017. It is hardly rational to abandon technologically and environmentally friendly nuclear power in favor of a dubious “green alternative” in the form of wind farms and obviously dirtier gas-fired power plants. And yet, Spain, which is not the most industrialized country in the world, was able to at least reassure by maintaining a stable supply of oil and gas during the crisis.

Against this background, the politics of Germany, whose industry has suffered from the energy crisis to the maximum extent, looks like a real suicide, devoid of common sense, because it is Berlin that wants to be the “leader” in abandoning nuclear power plants in the European Union. Thus, on the night of April 16, 2023, the German authorities shut down the last three nuclear power plants operating in the country. Supporters of this decision scare the public with a “collective Chernobyl” with the help of propaganda, which was also the famous 2019 mini-series, and constantly point out that the risks associated with nuclear power are “too high”. There are also sound voices of those who are against the closure of nuclear power plants, and these people talk about a possible energy crisis and believe that Germany should look for safe options for nuclear technology but not abandon it, which is a perfectly sensible argument. Entire countries are following such a path, and almost simultaneously with the shutdown of German nuclear power plants, Finland started commercial operation of its nuclear reactor, which became the largest in Europe. Sweden, Great Britain and other countries of the continent are also counting on developing, not destroying nuclear power. At the same time, Europe is discussing the need to impose sanctions against the Russian nuclear industry, and supporters of this measure believe that the Russian authorities are using the West’s dependence in the energy sector to put pressure on European countries. And this becomes a political lever in the hands of the Greens to convince politicians and society to abandon the “peaceful atom”, which is also dangerous politically. This once again raises the question of what the future of nuclear power is in Europe and the West as a whole.

Apparently, despite the hysteria of “environmentalists”, it is not so bad, as is well demonstrated by France, which is solving its energy and economic problems in more adequate ways. Europe’s leading country in the use of nuclear energy is today considering a bill to speed up the construction of new reactors, part of President Emmanuel Macron’s plan to gain energy independence and modernize the economy, which is one of the few obvious pluses of his controversial in every sense rule. The new law is supposed to streamline the process of approving and building new power plants in the country, and also includes a reversal of a pledge by Macron’s predecessor to limit the share of nuclear power in the country’s energy consumption to 50%. Against this background, Paris was expectedly attacked by German liberals, who began demanding the implementation of “pan-European environmental solutions”, which were supported by those countries that are not associated with nuclear power. An important problem for nuclear supporters in this fight is that one-third of the EU’s operating nuclear reactors are approaching the end of their life cycle in 2025, giving the Greens a trump card in their attempt to build a scheme where they block investment in new reactors to replace the old ones.

About 25% of energy in the EU, as in the already mentioned Spain, is generated by nuclear power plants, but more than half of that share is in France. In total, 13 of the 27 EU member states have about 100 reactors in operation, and in 2023 they provided about half of the low-carbon electricity that the Greens don’t care about anyway. And the issue here is the myths they are implanting in the heads of infantile Europeans. After all, after the Three Mile Island accident in 1979 and the Chernobyl disaster in 1986, public opinion about nuclear power changed dramatically. And in Germany, which wanted to be an “advanced country”, in 2002 the alliance of the SPD and the Greens, who were then in power for the first time, passed a law to stop building new nuclear power plants, and all existing reactors must also be shut down in the future. This was part of a transition away from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources such as wind and solar, and in those years of the “liberal fairy tale” it seemed quite feasible. Although nuclear power was considered “low carbon”, it was argued that because nuclear reactors produced no direct CO2 emissions, it used uranium as fuel, which was energy intensive to mine and process. However, already after the economic crisis, the fairy tale began to crumble, and in 2010 Angela Merkel announced that the lifetime of Germany’s nuclear power plants would be extended to increase the supply of low-carbon energy. Just a year later, the Fukushima Daiichi accident in Japan reignited a serious debate on the subject, and within months there were mass protests across the country, leading the Merkel government to announce under pressure that all nuclear power plants would still be closed by 2022. At the time of the war in Ukraine, which confused all the cards for the “green crazies”, there were only two countries that had nuclear power plants and had completely abandoned the use of nuclear energy for electricity generation, and they were Italy and Lithuania.

It has to be said that Lithuania, which decided to shut down a Soviet nuclear power plant back in 1991 amid the start of EU integration, is not a true example of a balanced nuclear policy, and in Italy the topic is still highly controversial. All of the country’s nuclear power plants were closed by 1990 following a referendum on nuclear power, and since then the government has tried to propose its revival, with a plan to build 10 new reactors proposed in 2008. However, the 2011 accident in Japan, which was competently promoted by the Liberals and Greens, swayed public opinion and 94% of the country voted to ban construction in a referendum. Although, changed circumstances and the rise to power of the right-wing, led by Giorgia Meloni, may raise the issue again, because the inclination of patriots and nationalists to protect nuclear power is as strong as the hatred of the “left-wing idiots” against it. This energy source is also controversial in other EU member states, including Belgium, Portugal, Denmark and Austria. The pro-nuclear group is led by France, which generates up to 70% of its energy by this method and has long been a European leader in nuclear power, pushing for its recognition as a low-carbon energy source that fundamentally cannot be subject to restrictions. In February 2023, it was one of 11 countries that formed an alliance in support of nuclear power in Europe. Their leaders signed a declaration stating that nuclear energy is “one of the many tools to achieve our climate goals, to generate baseload electricity and to ensure security of supply”. In addition to France, the group includes Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Finland, which is keen to rebuild its nuclear industry after a hard break with Russia on this issue. The alliance aims to promote research, innovation and “common safety rules” – essentially a cure for “environmental terrorists” and their lobbies and to consider how cooperation could lead to the construction of more reactors.

The U.S. has also entered the nuclear race, having previously followed the path of phasing out the construction of nuclear power plants. However, a lot of time has been lost, and the American plans to return to the peaceful atom market and compete with Russia and China, which, due to the lack of a “green agenda” in these countries, are leading in this strategic area in the new competitive world, seem less and less realistic. Washington has organized an entire media campaign for this purpose, and although it has been limited to this campaign so far, it is already a sign of a serious change in the “nuclear paradigm”. In the summer of 2023, the U.S. finished a multi-year project with great difficulty and launched new nuclear power plant units in Georgia. However, it took 12 years due to the bankruptcy of Westinghouse, instead of which new players Kairos Power and NuScale Power appeared on the market, trying to start production of small modular reactors. However, they have not built any of them yet, and plans to build a nuclear power plant in Idaho have already fallen through. The technology of small NPPs has not been mastered by American startups, but the White House is already trying to sell them to other countries, and has found customers in Poland and Romania, to whom they promise to deliver them by 2030. Ghana, the Philippines, Bulgaria and Indonesia are also in line. The Americans tried to agree on the construction of nuclear power plants with Saudi Arabia, but the war in Gaza buried it. Well, contracts with other countries are in doubt due to the banal reason of lack of experience and technological base to build small NPPs. Meanwhile, Russia is currently completing 19 large NPPs and several small ones. China is building 22 modular NPPs. In America, 25 of the remaining 93 NPPs will close in the next few years, and almost no new ones are being built. Still, it is indicative that Washington is hurriedly trying to catch up with Russia and China in order not to be in a situation of technological backwardness, which clearly distinguishes its policy from the “hatred” of NPPs in Germany or many EU countries.

It is also indicative of the fact that Canada, at the initiative of the United States, intends to work with its allies to make it possible to produce low-enriched uranium, which is used to fuel nuclear power plants, in order to free itself from dependence on Russian supplies. This was announced by Kathryn Huff, head of the U.S. Office of Nuclear Energy at the U.S. Department of Energy. The U.S. wants to realize this one in cooperation with Japan, Britain, France and, first of all, Canada. These countries intend to create an international supply network to have independence from Russia. Now in the U.S. the share of nuclear power is 20%, and the U.S. can only provide itself with fuel for 30% on its own, and fuel supplies from Russia account for about 20%. At the same time, in 1991 Canada was the world’s leader in uranium mining, and now it ranks third with a market share of about 9.5% and uranium production of 4,600 tons per year. Convenient logistics create prospects for Ottawa to become the largest supplier of uranium to the U.S. market, for which it needs to increase its uranium production in the next 5 years, which has been on a downward trend lately. As a result, positive developments are taking place even in Germany, which at one stage extended the operation of its last three nuclear power plants. In 2022, this was due to a threat to the country’s energy security due to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which kept them “alive” until the spring of 2023. But perhaps soon the creation of nuclear power plants will no longer be a concession to difficulties, but a deliberate policy of the leading countries. After all, abandoning nuclear power plants is the main liberal madness in the energy sector, which finds less and less support among Western politicians against the backdrop of the growing clash with Russia and China, where infantile “green fairy tales” simply have no place.