Two years ago, during COP28, more than 20 countries agreed to triple nuclear capacity by 2050 as necessary to achieve climate neutrality. Many experts consider this the starting point of the nuclear rebirth. This month, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) comes to confirm the new path of fission and It projects that by 2050 the installed power will have multiplied by 2.6. Right now there are 416 reactors in operation in 32 countries and another 62 are under construction in 16 nations. China leads the bet with 27 new plants which would be added to its 58 already operational. Next year it will surpass France in installed power and in 2040 it will double the capacity of the United States. For his part, President Trump has opted to stop aid for wind and solar from his predecessor’s IRA program and only finance the nuclear park. In part, large technology companies push with the energy needs of their large data centers and the consumption of AI developments. A few days ago, without going any further, Google presented its plans to reopen an old headquarters in Iowa.
SMR
The growing interest also has a technological side. SMRs or small modular reactors promise cost reductions. “His power ranges between 80 and 300MW, which reduces construction periods from 14 to 4-5 years and the cost more than half compared to the 10-12,000 euros per installed kWh of the current large reactors. We have to wait for the first projects, but the concept is promising and hence the expectation it is generating, especially to power data centers. There are already some in operation, such as the Russian icebreaker Academik Lomonosov,” comments Jaime Segarra, president of the Energy Commission of the College of Industrial Engineers of Madrid. Also from Russia comes another technological novelty that was announced a few weeks ago at the Moscow Global Atomic Forum: the development of the first nuclear reactor with a closed cycle with which Russia would be able to reuse 90-95% of the spent fuel during fission.
Pedro Fresco, general director of the Association of Renewable Energy Companies of Valencia (Avaesen) calls for caution with nuclear promises. «On paper it may make sense, but we must not forget that they are experimental technologies and when something is built for the first time it never comes cheap. The forecast for SMRs is that the first generation will be expensive. Furthermore, the analyst recalls that in the United States nuclear technology is receiving economic incentives.
The investment returns
In this sense, the nuclear revival is supported by the financial sector. A few months ago, the World Bank lifted its historic veto on this energy. An 80 billion dollar agreement has been signed in the United States to deploy a new generation of reactors and the United Kingdom has allocated 13.6 billion pounds of public money to promote the construction of a new plant (despite the fact that it has had delays and cost overruns in one of its latest projects). Coming to Europe, inclusion in 2022 of this energy in the European green taxonomy It represents a boost for new investments. Even Italy, which has been prohibited by law since 1987 from investing in this energy, is watching these developments with interest.
Almaraz
In Spain, In 2019, electricity and the government agreed on a nuclear shutdown schedule which now meets its first milestone. The closure of the first Almaraz group was scheduled for 2027, but the request from the electricity companies to keep the two groups in operation until 2030 reopens the debate on this energy, beyond the confrontation over the future of this plant.
What will happen beyond 2030 with Almaraz if its useful life is extended? And with the rest of the plants that must be closed between now and 2035? What energy mix does Spain want? Jaime Segarra recalls that “it makes a lot of sense that only a three-year extension has been requested for Almaraz, because nuclear power plants have a review of their safety program (includes the state of materials and maintenance) every ten years. It is directed, of course, by the Nuclear Safety Council. In the case of Almaraz it was done in 2020, so it was valid until 2030.
energy price
For his part, Pedro Fresco points to cost issues to explain this extension of the plant’s life: «The nuclear closure was certified in 2019, but in previous years the companies themselves were already saying that they did not want to operate plants beyond 40 years. Then, The electricity market was between 45 and 50 euros per MW. Today the perspective of how electricity will be in the last years of this decade shows a figure of between 58 and 60 euros per MW. That is fundamentally what has changed. Maybe if additional investments are not requested from the plants, and hence the short extension, and if they manage to lower their taxes, the cost will come in a bit,” says Pedro Fresco.
In any case, what will happen after 2030? “The Government should force companies to a moratorium on the closure schedule beyond the three years they have requested, studying, as in other countries, what part of the cost should be assumed by the State as public aid,” says Economist Jordi Sevilla in Cinco Días.
Almaraz can open the door to the request to extend the life of other plants such as Ascó or Confrentes and with the extension time can be gained, but Spain will have to decide sooner or later what energy mix it wants for the future and invest to ensure that this mix is stable, safe and as least polluting as possible. «Spain has been a strongly antinuclear country for decades, but now it seems that it is beginning to reverse that situation. But what happens with all this? Very uncertain circumstances are opening up, and this is not good for renewables either. If the extension is approved, no one would know how to define Spain’s energy policy, because the need for electricity to replace a nuclear power plant exists if you have predictability as to when said nuclear power plant will close. The message that the Spanish government sends in 2019 with the closure and with the Comprehensive National Energy and Climate Plan, is that Spain at the end of ten years was going to need more renewable electricity because they were going to close the reactors. If you now reopen the closure melon, a fire effect is automatically generated where you do not know if those MWh are going to be necessary or not. The investor itself is going to withdraw. Spain currently has more than 30,000 renewable MW with construction authorization and about 5,000 MW in storage projects in the pipeline. Probably not all of them will be built, but if tomorrow the Government of Spain reopens the nuclear melon, practically nothing will surely be built. It is a shame because years of processing and administrative work are lost in a country with the renewable potential of Spain. And there would also have to be political will to subsidize nuclear energy,” says Pedro Fresco, who also clarifies that now electricity demand is lower than in 2019.
Segarra believes that “a serious study of everything is needed, of what electrical model we want and if the life of the plants is extended, what investments are necessary and how it is assumed. On the tax issue, there is no business in Spain that is as recorded as nuclear production. Taxes amount to approximately 28 euros per MWh. There are solutions, such as acting on the special tax on electricity production or spent fuel, but they must be studied. It must also be taken into account that Spain has a privileged position to install data centers, but that requires 24-hour availability of energy, which can be done by expanding the current park or covering it with renewables that have storage,” he clarifies.
Europe also focuses on new reactors
►Europe produces about 25% of its electricity through fission. Significant are Italy’s positions. The construction of reactors was prohibited by law here in 1987, however, the current president Giorgia Meloni has declared that she wants to end this prohibition. «They have created a consortium between three companies Enel, Leonardo and Ansaldo, to position Italy on the issue of small modular rectors. Italy is also one of the promoters of the Industrial Alliance for SMR in Europe,” Segarra clarifies. France, which always remained faithful to this energy (except for a short period during the mandate of François Hollande, which in 2014 opened the door to a reduction in the nuclear presence in production to 50% (it represents around 80%)). It has six new reactors in its portfolio and 60 billion euros budgeted for them. Belgium, which had a shutdown schedule like Spain’s, has delayed nuclear shutdowns until 2035.
Germany finished closing its plants in 2023, although this has cost them an increase in the price of electricity for their industries, more dependence on gas and more emissions. “The price of electricity for industry is 23% more expensive now. The CDU wants to resurrect the issue, but the socialists don’t even want to talk about it. That’s why they have looked for a middle way, which is to strengthen interconnections with France to import the energy it needs, and they are betting very heavily on fusion, but this is still 10 years away,” comments Jaime Segarra.