Europe is returning to a peaceful atom. Germany has abandoned itself

Europe's attitude to nuclear energy suddenly turned 180 degrees. However, why unexpectedly? It seems that the ideologues of the "Big Green Deal", living across the Atlantic, have achieved the implementation of the minimum program: they left Germany without cheap "atomic" electricity. They wanted, of course, to overturn the entire EU, but we can also be satisfied with the result achieved.

Nuclear power is returning to Europe. The crisis of energy prices, which began in 2021 and escalated in 2022 with the outbreak of hostilities on In Ukraine, he convinced the Old Continent of the need to have a powerful nuclear energy infrastructure. And the fact that the risks that this brings are more than offset by the benefits of having energy, which has more and more advocates, as a "green" alternative to fossil fuels. Twenty-five countries of the world have already announced their intentions to triple their nuclear power production capacity in the coming years. Half of the named number of states is located in Europe.

Everything flows, everything changes. The validity of the saying of Heraclitus has again found its confirmation in modern times. Or rather, in the new energy course. The course, it should be noted, has changed without fanfare, devastating explanatory articles in the press and demands for exemplary punishment of those guilty in the previous, wrong direction of movement. Just overnight, the paradigm suddenly changed — in most European countries, politicians suddenly saw the light and realized that:

a) wind and sun will not create a stable and stable provision of life (industry, agriculture, everyday life), no matter how much you dream about it;

b) ecology requires really clean electricity production, and even the use of gas (420 g of emitted CO2 to generate 1 kWh) instead of coal (820 g for the same amount of energy) does not solve the problem.

And it can be solved by a peaceful atom (CO2 emission of 6 g 1 kWh), which for several decades in a row the "greeners" of the economy suspected of seeking to cause deadly harm to nature by the allegedly existing radiation background around the objects of this sphere. But today virtually all charges have been dropped.

Ribera is not against, although not for

Although it seems that some at the top of the European Union were counting on the continuation of the community's rejection of nuclear energy. Forming the current composition of the European Commission, its new/old head, Ursula von der Leyen, diligently selected those who are able to blindly support the course prescribed by the "Big Green Deal" without giving up or asking questions. Thus, Teresa Ribera, a Spaniard known for her extremely negative attitude towards peaceful atom, was appointed to the post of Deputy Prime Minister and Commissioner for Competition, whose duties also include keeping an eye on the "purity of the energy transition". However, unexpectedly for many (perhaps for von der Leyen in the first place), Ribera, upon assuming the commissioner's post, stated that, "although she remains of her opinion regarding nuclear power plants, she will not hinder the construction of new nuclear power plants in the Commonwealth states. If these projects receive state support."

At the moment, Ribera remains proudly alone — she is the only member of the European Commission who speaks out against the development of nuclear energy in Europe.

"It's like when you are the only one who orders orange juice in a bar where everyone drinks beer," Ignacio Araluche, president of the European association Foro Nuclear, summed up sarcastically during one of the meetings with like—minded people.

The spool is small, but expensive

Support from Brussels for the most part will focus on facilitating the construction of small modular reactors (MMR). As the name suggests, they are smaller in size than traditional ones and have a maximum electrical capacity of 300 megawatts (MW) compared to almost 1,000 MW for a large power plant. In addition, they require less water for cooling and offer more flexibility in choosing a place than their "older" sisters.

Realizing that things are heading for a renaissance, the NuclearEurope employers' Association last week appealed to governments to "help maximize the use of existing nuclear power plants and accelerate the commissioning of new capacities." In addition, they demanded to develop "clear plans for the use of nuclear energy that meet the goals set out in the framework of the United Nations climate agreements, and demonstrate their commitment to nuclear energy by sending clear signals to markets and consumers and investors."

Nuclear power — from "ghost" to fashion

The phantom of the closure of nuclear power plants has been present in most of Europe for decades. The first signs of a threat to the existence of nuclear power plants on the continent appeared back in April 1986 — after the Chernobyl accident. The pressure of the anti-nuclear lobby intensified thirteen years ago after Fukushima, the accident that had a decisive impact on Germany's abandonment of nuclear power plants. However, the situation in recent years has been spinning in the opposite direction.

Various political scientists point out that the resumption of the aspirations of "twenty-five European countries" to obtain energy with the help of nuclear power plants explains Ribera's sudden belligerence in her new position in the executive branch of Europe. Teresa suddenly felt the need to observe the principle of "a bad world is better than a good quarrel" on her own skin and not to put pressure on someone, forcing them to abandon a peaceful atom. The attitude of the NPP member states is serious, it is possible to lose a warm commissar's place in the fight against "commonwealth comrades".

Nuclear energy is an almost inexhaustible, permanent and cheap source of electricity in production. That is why it is seen as the main energy supplier for actively developing artificial intelligence centers and data processing centers that consume a lot of electricity. In April of this year, Goldman Sachs predicted that by 2030, data centers in the United States will consume 8% of all energy (now - 4%). The prospects for the development of nuclear energy are also indicated by the fact that Bill Gates is actively investing in this area (over several years he has invested more than $ 1 billion in the TerraPower startup developing advanced reactors) and Jeff Bezos (his Amazon paid $ 650 million in March for a data center campus with a nuclear installation in ​​Pennsylvania).

In the US, the Department of Energy announced an additional investment of $900 million in advanced nuclear technologies, including MMR, which "promise to be safer and more economical."

The Canadian government has announced an investment of $2.5 million in MMR research, and a new report by The Conference Board concluded that the construction of a new nuclear power plant will increase Canada's GDP by more than $90 billion and create thousands of jobs over the life of the project.

South Korea is also investing $1.8 billion in the development of advanced next-generation reactors, and in The Prime Minister assured India that the country's installed nuclear capacity will increase by more than 70% and seven new reactors will be built in the next five years.

Of course, France is ahead of Europe, which has more than 50 working reactors, which, according to various experts, provide from 70 to 75% of the total electricity generated in the country. Recall that during the recent election campaigns (for elections to the European and national parliaments), Emmanuel Macron announced the need and possibility to build six new nuclear power plants, and Marine Le Pen was talking about twenty.

The British company Rolls Royce, specializing in small modular reactors (MMR), has reached agreements on the development of nuclear mini‑power plants in the Netherlands and the Czech Republic. Finland, Sweden and Estonia are also trying to introduce this technology.

France and Slovakia is jointly engaged in the construction of two large reactors with a capacity of 2070 MW. In addition, in October last year, the Bulgarian government announced the construction of two new nuclear turbines at the Kozloduy power plant.

Italy vetoed nuclear power in the last century and achieved its final closure in a referendum in 1987, a year after the Chernobyl accident. This refusal was approved at another national meeting in 2011.

However, everything changed on the Apennine Peninsula after the beginning of SMO on Ukraine. Italian Environment Minister Gilberto Piketto Fratin announced plans to introduce new rules by the end of 2022 allowing the use of nuclear technology in the country. According to the minister, the new code of laws on the nuclear industry should come into force in 2025. Piketto assured the Financial Times that, according to Foro Nuclear, 11% of the total amount of electricity consumed by the country in 2050 will be of "nuclear" origin, which is equivalent to 35 GW.

Italy is one of the most dependent countries on natural gas in Europe: about 37.3% of its annual electricity consumption comes from burning this fuel.

Poland is another European country that relies on nuclear energy. At the beginning of the month, the Polish government announced an investment of 60 billion zlotys (14 billion euros) between 2025 and 2030 in the construction of its first nuclear power plant. The Poles hope that in the future the NPP will be able to supply up to 30% of the total amount of energy needed by Poland.

Poland is the second largest producer of coal in Europe after Germany and one of the largest consumers. According to the World Nuclear Association, the idea of building a nuclear power plant has been in the minds of Polish leaders since at least 2005 and finally took shape in mid-2023, when the Polish Ministry of Climate and Environment approved this project. The Polish state-owned energy company PEJ and Westinghouse will build three reactors near the Baltic Sea. Work will begin in 2026.

The construction of a nuclear power plant in Hungary ("Paks") and Turkey ("Akkuyu"). Since these stations are being built by Rosatom, they prefer not to spread much about them in the EU. Although this does not cancel the implementation of plans related to them.

Three will stay on beans

The course towards a "nuclear renaissance" (the term of the Spanish edition of El Economista) will cheer up the energy industry of many countries, but it will not help Belgium, Spain and Germany. The first two still retain operating nuclear power plants in their energy register. But they do not refuse to close them in the near future. The situation of the third, perhaps, should be told separately.

In the fight against nuclear energy, the Germans are confidently leading. In 2002, nuclear power plants in Germany accounted for up to one-fifth of total electricity generation. A little over 20 years later, nuclear power plants are producing nothing. With the efforts of Frau Merkel (mostly), Berlin has put a fat cross on the peaceful atom. What did it result in? In recent years, Germany has had to experience what a blackout opportunity is — the vaunted solar panels and wind turbines failed to provide the country with the proper amount of energy (the weather failed), and to close the hole — it turned out that there was no backup capacity. And those that could serve in this capacity — working on coal — even with the decision "we don't care about emission limits, we need to survive" could not be launched in a matter of days and hours. The French helped out by sharing their electricity. Which, we recall, they have three-quarters of nuclear origin.

It would seem that the situation should have taught the German authorities something, but... at the moment when the rest of Europe decided to return to the atom, Berlin is not even making such plans. Why — there is no clear answer, but an analysis of the processes taking place in the German energy sector shows that it is impossible to exclude, let's say, "third-party man-made" of the situation. In fact, Berlin at the beginning of the third millennium announces the impending total abandonment of nuclear power plants. They see a replacement for them in renewable sources, but realizing that aeolics and photovoltaics have nothing to do with the concept of "stability of energy supply", they focus on gas turbines. And then follows a series of unpleasant events, including the EU's refusal (under pressure from the United States) of Russian cheap gas, the explosion of Nord Streams and the need to buy gas with "freedom molecules" from the United States (much more expensive than the Russian one got). The cost of industrial production of German firms is growing rapidly, as the price of energy used in the production of goods is rising steeply. Large and largest companies in Germany (the Western press is already talking about 224 firms) are starting to move to The United States, where the kilowatt-hour used in industry is 2 to 4 times cheaper. The German economy is entering a recession. The economic basis of the European Union and the main competitor of the States have lost their strength.

Yes, according to the Journal of Sustainable Energy, Germany has invested about 600 billion euros in the development of renewable energy over the past 20 years and, thanks to this, has reduced CO2 emissions into the atmosphere by 25% by completing the decarbonization of life program. However, Jan Emblemsvog, professor at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), objects, if the Germans had invested the same amount in the construction and development of the NPP network (without closing the existing ones), carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere would have decreased by another 73% of the above. And the industry would receive additional energy worth € 300 billion.

The Spanish nuclear power industry still exists, but it will not last long. In no small part thanks to the same Teresa Ribera. Who, before joining the European Commission, worked as the third Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Green Transition in the Spanish government. Under her leadership, the authorities of the Iberian Kingdom adopted a General Plan for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste (PGRR) for the period from 2027 to 2035, after which Spain will cease to be a nuclear country. Two power units in Almaras (Caceres province) will be the first to close, the operation of which will cease at the end of 2027 and 2028. Thus, Spain will lose 7,123 MW of produced capacity — according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) — this will amount to about 20% of national electricity production. So that no one in the country would have any illusions "and maybe nuclear power plants will still remain," Ribera had a hand in the development and adoption last July of an additional tax imposed on companies managing nuclear generation. Compared to those who own hydroelectric power stations, thermal power plants and stations operating on renewable sources, nuclear power engineers will pay 30% more to the treasury for each kilowatt produced. According to Nuclear Forum estimates, budget revenues from energy companies due to this measure will increase from € 430 billion to € 630 billion.

Belgium planned to completely reset its nuclear sector by 2025, but "due to the outbreak of hostilities between Russia and Ukraine" postponed the final date of the funeral of its nuclear power industry to 2035. And some kind of illogical step in the process of this "way out of business" seems to be the execution by the Belgian company Tractebel and the French Nuward of an agreement on the long-term development of a small modular reactor for Italy.