Climate change – the nuclear conflict

An interesting precedent was set at the last summit of EU leaders (8-9 March). Amid the pages of presidency conclusions about climate change lies a single paragraph about nuclear energy.

It might not have seemed like much, but to both sides of the debate on nuclear energy it signalled a shift of position at EU level. Nuclear energy, a politically and environmentally controversial source of power, has previously been left as a matter for national governments.

The paragraph states: "It is for each and every member state to decide whether or not to rely on nuclear energy." But those national positions on nuclear energy could have significant consequences for each state’s ability to meet legally binding targets for the use of energy from renewable sources. For some member states, nuclear power will be an important way of achieving their target.

The overall target agreed at the summit was to make renewable energy account for 20% of the EU energy mix by 2020. The European Commission now has to work out a burden-sharing scheme, "taking account of different national starting points and potentials, including the existing level of renewable energies and energy mix", according to the conclusions.

Some states, such as France, Slovakia and the Czech Republic, in which nuclear power is a big part of the energy output, argue that their use of renewables must encompass nuclear. For Austria, Ireland and Denmark, nuclear power remains anathema - and allowing some states to include it in their overall renewable energy mix gives them an unfair advantage.

Environmental groups back this latter stance, arguing that nuclear power is not a sustainable solution to climate change. "Cost is among the strongest arguments against nuclear power," says Sonja Meister, climate change campaigner with Friends of the Earth Europe. The money spent on building the power plants and on decommissioning the toxic waste material is far beyond the money needed to build wind or solar power plants, she says. Nuclear energy also requires energy to extract uranium from the earth and process it, she says. For her, the risk of terrorism associated with developing nuclear power and the possible dangers of nuclear power, demonstrated by the all too vivid example of Chernobyl, also put nuclear energy out of the question. "Renewables can make states meet the national targets," says Meister.

To mark the 50th anniversary of the founding of the EU, environmental groups want to see the Euratom Treaty, which was signed in Rome in 1957 at the same time as treaty of the European Economic Community, scrapped altogether and nuclear power phased out throughout the EU. They criticise, in particular, the use of EU money on research in the area, pegged at €550 million each year for the next five years compared with €168 million for renewables.

The nuclear industry on the other hand believes this energy source is part of the solution to the problem of climate change. While acknowledging that power plants do cost a lot of money to build (between €2-€3 billion for a 1,600 megawatt plant), Hans Korteweg, senior manager for institutional relations at Foratom, which represents the nuclear industry in Europe, says that over the lifespan of such a plant the cost of producing power is cheaper than gas or coal plants.

Some plants in the EU, for example those in France, also require less energy to process uranium, he adds.

He suggests that a changing political climate in Europe is also having an effect on how nuclear energy is viewed as an alternative energy supply. "Green governments in Europe were a phase. Now that Greens are no longer in power there is a more pragmatic approach to nuclear energy," says Korteweg.

Governments which once said they would phase out nuclear power have now revised that stance or are re-assessing it, he adds. "There is a process in place, it’s really a generational…and emotional issue," he says. For example, the previous German government pledged to phase out nuclear power but the new parties in power may be realising this will be difficult to deliver. "The German government is coming to realise that it is going to have to rely more on fossil fuels and expensive gas pipelines from Russia," Korteweg says.

But much will now come down to negotiations within the EU as to whether nuclear power should be seen as a way of reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Hardened by much of the debate on nuclear power over the past decades, neither side of the argument expects it to be easy.

Europe’s nuclear power facts­

Country/% of electricity from nuclear/State of play

EU27/31%/ EU member states are currently debating what role nuclear energy will play in reducing emissions and tackling global warming.

Austria/0%/ Austria is a nuclear free zone. Concerns about the Czech-run Temelin reactor, which is close to the Austrian border has resulted in further public opposition to nuclear power.

Belgium/55%/ In 2003, the Belgian federal parliament decided to close the country’s nuclear power plants by 2015-2025.

Bulgaria/44%/ Bulgaria was forced to close two units at Kozloduy to meet EU accession demands, but is now building a 2000 megawatt nuclear power plant at Belene. It will be ready in 2011-2013.

Cyprus/0%/ 99.97% of Cyprus’s energy needs are met by oil.

Czech Republic/31%/ Building new nuclear power units is under consideration.

Denmark/0%/ Although Denmark has no nuclear energy, some of its electricity is supplied by Sweden and Germany, both of which create electricity from nuclear facilities.

Estonia/0%/ Estonia, along with Latvia, is taking part in a project to build a new nuclear unit in Lithuania.

Finland/33%/ Finland has opted to increase its nuclear power capabilities and is building a new power plant unit at Olkiluoto. It will be ready in 2009.

France/78%/ France is a stalwart supporter of nuclear energy. It will host the world’s first nuclear fusion reactor ITER.

Germany/32%/ The last German government, a Socialist-Green coalition, agreed to phase out nuclear power, but there are questions about whether this policy will stay in place now that the Greens are out of power.

Greece/0%/ Greece gets most (60%) of its electricity from solid fuels and 57% of its total energy needs from oil. It recently agreed a deal with Russia and Bulgaria to build a new pipeline that would transport Russian oil from Bulgaria to the port of Alexandroupolis.

Hungary/37%/ In 2005, the government decided to prolong the life of the country’s only existing power plant by 20 years.

Ireland/0%/ Ireland briefly considered nuclear power in 1960s but there is strong public opposition to such a move today.

Italy/0%/ After shutting down its nuclear power programme in 1987 in the wake of the Chernobyl disaster. The government has refused to rule out the construction of new nuclear facilities.

Latvia/0%/ Latvia, along with Estonia, is taking part in a project to build a new nuclear unit in Lithuania.

Lithuania/70%/ Lithuania was forced to close its Ignalina facility to meet EU accession criteria but nuclear energy remains a major part of the energy mix. Lithuania is now working with Estonia and Latvia to build a new nuclear power plant by 2015.

Luxembourg/0%/ Luxembourg has no nuclear power, but does import electricity from neighbouring countries which do.

Malta/0%/ Close to 100% of Malta’s energy needs are met with oil. Renewables make up just 0.04% of total energy production.

Netherlands/4%/ The country’s only nuclear unit will remain open until 2033. The construction of new units is being discussed.

Poland/0%/ Poland has plans to construct a nuclear power plant before 2020. It has also been linked with Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania’s decision to build a new unit.

Portugal/0%/ The Portuguese government has shown some interest in nuclear power, but no decisions have been taken.

Romania/9%/ Two new nuclear power units are under construction at Cernavoda and are expected to be completed in 2007 and 2011.

Slovakia/56%/ Slovakia mothballed one ageing reactor to fulfil EU accession demands and another will be closed by 2008. But Slovakia has said it will replace the two units with new facilities that will be ready in 2013.

Slovenia/42%/ One reactor at Kröko - co-owned with Croatia - accounts for all of Slovenia’s nuclear energy. There is currently some discussion about building a second unit at the same site.

Spain/20%/ Spain’s socialist government is committed to phasing out nuclear power, although no deadline has been set.

Sweden/45%/ After the Chernobyl disaster in 1986, Sweden decided gradually to shut its nuclear power facilities. Two units have already been closed. But increasingly the decision is being re-examined.

United Kingdom/20%/ The UK has hinted that it may replace the country’s ageing nuclear plants - all but one plant will be closed by 2023. But the government has indicated that money for new projects will have to be found from the private sector.

Sources - European Commission, IAEA, Eurostat, OECD, Foratom, US Department of Energy, CIA World Fact Book.

An interesting precedent was set at the last summit of EU leaders (8-9 March). Amid the pages of presidency conclusions about climate change lies a single paragraph about nuclear energy.

• Primary Source