Nuclear power resurgence in Europe and USA

There has been a sudden and significant shift in Europe's stance on nuclear energy. However, this shift in attitude is somewhat unexpected.
Nuclear power is now experiencing a resurgence in Europe. The energy price crisis that began in 2021 and worsened in 2022 with the outbreak of hostilities in Ukraine has led to a recognition across the continent of the need for a robust nuclear energy infrastructure.
It appears that the previous serious potential health risks are now outweighed by the benefits of having an energy source that is increasingly seen as a green alternative to fossil fuels.
Twenty-five countries worldwide have already announced plans to triple their nuclear power generation capacity in the coming years. Of these countries, 50% are located in Europe.

In business, it is important to recognise that change is a constant and that everything flows. The veracity of Heraclitus's assertion has once again been validated in the modern era. To be more precise, this is reflected in the new energy strategy. It is worth noting that the course did not undergo a dramatic transformation. Instead, it evolved gradually, without the fanfare typically associated with such changes.
There were no sensationalist press articles or calls for punitive action against those responsible for the previous direction of movement. The paradigm shifted abruptly overnight in most European countries, prompting politicians to recognize two key realities:

a) Wind and solar energy cannot sustainably and reliably power industry, agriculture, and everyday life, despite the enthusiasm for this approach;

b) Ecology requires clean electricity production, including the use of gas (420 g of emitted CO2 per production of 1 kW h) instead of coal (820 g for the same amount of energy), which does not fully address the challenge.

The solution is the peaceful atom, which emits just 6 g of CO2 per kWh. For several decades, those promoting green economics have accused this sector of causing irreparable damage to the environment through its use of radiation. However, it is now clear that all allegations have been been channeled down the memory hole

It would appear that some of those at the upper echelons of the European Union were counting on the community continuing to reject nuclear energy. When forming the current composition of the European Commission, its new/old head Ursula von der Leyen selected individuals capable of unquestioningly supporting the course prescribed by the "Big Green Deal," without retreating or asking questions. Consequently, Teresa Ribera, known for her strongly negative stance on peaceful nuclear energy, was appointed Deputy Prime Minister and Commissioner for Competition. Her duties include overseeing the "cleanliness of the energy transition". However, unexpectedly for many (perhaps for von der Leyen first of all), Ribera stated upon taking up the post of Commissioner that although she remains of the same opinion regarding nuclear power plants, she will not prevent the construction of new nuclear power plants in the EU states. Should these projects receive state support.

Currently, Ms. Ribera is the sole member of the European Commission to publicly oppose the development of nuclear energy in Europe.

A significant portion of the support from Brussels will be allocated to the promotion of small modular reactors (SMRs) in construction. As the name implies, these reactors are smaller than traditional models, with a maximum electrical output of 300 megawatts (MW), compared to approximately 1,000 MW for a large power plant. Furthermore, they require less water for cooling and offer greater flexibility in location than their larger counterparts.
Now before I continue I would like to make an appeal,if you like and enjoy my videos you can help me fund the channel and my websited sco brics insight .com and to further develop it. You can do this by making a small donation which you can do by clicking on the thanks button at the bottom of the video screen. Everybody who donates does get a personal thank you from me.

In light of the ongoing renaissance in nuclear energy, the  association NuclearEurope has urged governments to facilitate the optimal utilisation of existing nuclear power plants and expedite the commissioning of new capacity. Furthermore, they called for the development of transparent and achievable nuclear energy plans that align with the targets set out in the United Nations climate agreements. They also urged governments to demonstrate their commitment to nuclear energy by providing clear signals to markets, consumers, and investors.
The possibility of nuclear power plant closures has been a significant concern in Europe for decades. The first indications of a potential challenge to the continent's nuclear power plants emerged in April 1986, following the Chernobyl accident. The anti-nuclear lobby intensified its campaign thirteen years ago following the Fukushima accident, which had a significant impact on Germany's decision to move away from nuclear power. However, recent years have seen a reversal of this trend.

From Bogey Man To Green Saviour
Political scientists have noted that the renewed interest in nuclear power among the 25 European countries may be the reason for Ribera's change of stance in her new role within the European executive branch. Teresa felt it was necessary to adhere to the principle of "a bad peace is better than a good quarrel" and avoid exerting undue pressure on others to abandon peaceful nuclear energy. The mood among the NPP member states is serious. In the fight against "comrades in the EU", even a warm commissar's position could be at risk.

Nuclear energy is a virtually inexhaustible, constant and cost-effective source of electricity. It is therefore regarded as the primary energy source for the rapidly expanding artificial intelligence and data centre sectors, which consume a significant amount of electricity. In April of this year, Goldman Sachs forecast that by 2030, data centres in the United States will account for 8% of all energy consumption (the current figure is 4%). The potential for growth in the nuclear energy sector is also reflected in the investment decisions of prominent figures such as Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos. Gates has invested over $1 billion in the startup TerraPower, which is developing advanced reactors, while Bezos' Amazon paid $650 million in March for a data center campus with a nuclear facility in Pennsylvania.
The US Department of Energy has announced a further $900 million investment in advanced nuclear technologies, including SMRs, which are expected to offer enhanced safety and cost-effectiveness.

The Canadian government has announced a $2.5 million investment in SMR research. A new report from The Conference Board finds that building a new nuclear power plant would 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 developing next-generation advanced reactors, while in India, the prime minister has pledged to increase the country's installed nuclear capacity by more than 70%, with seven new reactors to be built in the next five years.

France is the clear leader in Europe, with over 50 operating reactors providing between 70 and 75% of the country's electricity. It is worth noting that during the recent election campaigns (for elections to the European and national parliaments), Emmanuel Macron highlighted the potential for the construction of six new nuclear power plants, while Marine Le Pen spoke of the possibility of twenty.

British company Rolls Royce, which aims to become a leading provider of small modular reactors (SMRs), has entered into agreements to develop mini-nuclear power plants in the Netherlands and the Czech Republic. Additionally, Finland, Sweden and Estonia are pursuing the implementation of this technology.
France and Slovakia are engaged in a joint venture to construct two large reactors with a combined capacity of 2,070 MW. Furthermore, in October of last year, the Bulgarian government announced plans to construct two additional nuclear reactors at the Kozloduy power plant.

Italy permanently terminated its nuclear power programme in 1987, following a referendum that year, which took place just one year after the Chernobyl disaster. The aforementioned rejection was subsequently endorsed at a further national meeting in 2011.

However, following the commencement of the NWO in Ukraine, a shift in perspective was observed on the Apennine Peninsula. Italian Environment Minister Gilberto Pichetto Fratin has announced plans to introduce new regulations allowing the use of nuclear technology in the country by the end of 2022. The minister stated that the new set of laws on the nuclear industry is scheduled to come into force in 2025. Mr. Pichetto assured the Financial Times that, according to the nuclear energy industry group Foro Nuclear, 11% of Italy's total electricity consumption in 2050 will be of "nuclear" origin, equivalent to 35 GW.
Italy is one of the most reliant on natural gas in Europe, with approximately 37.3% of its annual electricity consumption derived from the combustion of the fuel.

Poland is another European country that is placing its trust in nuclear energy. Earlier this month, the Polish government announced a planned investment of 60 billion zlotys (14 billion euros) between 2025 and 2030 in the construction of its first nuclear power plant. It is anticipated that the plant will be able to supply up to 30% of Poland's total energy needs in the future.

Poland is the second-largest coal producer in Europe, after Germany, and one of the largest consumers of the fuel. According to the World Nuclear Association, the concept of constructing a nuclear power plant has been under consideration by Polish leaders since at least 2005. The project gained approval from Poland's Ministry of Climate and Environment in mid-2023. Poland's state-owned energy company, PEJ, has entered into a partnership with Westinghouse to construct three reactors in a location near the Baltic Sea. Construction is scheduled to commence in 2026.

Construction of the nuclear power plants in Hungary (Paks) and Turkey (Akkuyu) will continue as planned. Given that these facilities are being constructed by Rosatom, the EU has chosen to limit its commentary on the matter. However, this does not affect the implementation of plans related to them.
The proposed course of action, which has been dubbed a "nuclear renaissance" by the Spanish publication El Economista, will invigorate the energy sector of many countries. However, it will not benefit Belgium, Spain and Germany. The first two countries still have nuclear power plants in operation. However, there are no plans to close them in the near future. It would be beneficial to examine the situation of the third party in greater detail.

In the global effort to phase out nuclear energy, Germany was at the forefront of the movement. In 2002, nuclear power plants in Germany accounted for up to 20% of total electricity generation. A little over 20 years later, nuclear power plants are no longer operational. As a result of the actions of Chancellor Merkel, Berlin has taken a significant step towards a nuclear-free future. What were the consequences of this?
In recent years, Germany has experienced a significant disruption in its energy supply. Despite the deployment of solar panels and wind turbines, the country was unable to meet its energy needs due to unfavorable weather conditions. Additionally, the lack of reserve capacity further exacerbated the situation. Furthermore, even those coal-fired plants that could serve in this capacity – despite the decision to override the emission limits – could not be launched in a matter of days or even hours. France provided assistance by sharing its electricity resources. It should be noted that three-quarters of this energy is of nuclear origin.
It would appear that the circumstances should have provided the German authorities with a valuable learning opportunity, but... At the time when the rest of Europe was making plans to return to atomic energy, Berlin was not even considering such a move. While the precise reason remains unclear, an examination of the developments within Germany's energy sector indicates that it is not feasible to rule out the possibility of external, man-made influences contributing to the current circumstances. Indeed, at the beginning of the third millennium, Berlin announced its intention to phase out nuclear power plants entirely.
They view renewable sources as a replacement, but recognise that wind and solar power are not a solution to the issue of energy supply stability. Consequently, they are focusing on gas turbines. Subsequently, a series of unfavourable occurrences took place, including the EU's refusal (under pressure from the United States) of inexpensive Russian gas, the explosion of the Nord Stream, and the necessity to purchase gas with "freedom molecules" from the United States (significantly more expensive than the Russian option).
The cost of industrial products produced by German firms is rising rapidly due to the sharp increase in the price of energy used in production. A significant number of Germany's largest companies (the Western press reports that 224 firms are affected) are relocating to the United States, where the cost of a kilowatt-hour used in industry is 2-4 times cheaper. The German economy is entering a period of recession. The economic foundation of the European Union and the primary competitor of the United States have experienced a decline in strength.
As the Journal of Sustainable Energy confirms, Germany has invested approximately €600 billion in renewable energy over the past two decades, resulting in a 25% reduction in CO2 emissions. This achievement aligns with the country's decarbonisation goals.
However, Jan Emblemsvåg, a professor at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), asserts that if the Germans had invested the same amount in the construction and development of a network of nuclear power plants (without closing the existing ones), carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere would have decreased by a further 73% of the aforementioned figure. Furthermore, the industry would have received an additional €300 billion in energy.

The Spanish nuclear power industry is still operational, but this is not a long-term scenario. In large part due to the efforts of Teresa Ribera. Prior to joining the European Commission, she served as the third vice-premier and minister of green transition in the Spanish government. During her tenure, the Spanish government adopted the General Plan for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste (PGRR) for the period from 2027 to 2035. This plan will result in Spain ceasing to be a nuclear country after 2035. The first to cease operation will be two power units in Almaraz (province of Cáceres), with the last day of operation being 31 December 2027 and 2028.
According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Spain will lose 7,123 MW of produced capacity, representing approximately 20% of the country's total electricity production. To prevent any misunderstanding that nuclear power plants might remain operational, Ribera played a role in developing and implementing in July of last year an additional tax on companies managing nuclear generation. In comparison to other energy producers, nuclear power companies will be required to pay the government 30% more for each kilowatt produced. The Nuclear Forum estimates that energy company revenues will increase from €430 billion to €630 billion as a result of this measure.
Belgium had planned to completely shut down its nuclear sector by 2025. However, due to the outbreak of hostilities between Russia and Ukraine, the final date for the burial of its nuclear energy has been moved to 2035. Furthermore, the execution of an agreement between the Belgian company Tractebel and the French Nuward on the long-term development of a small modular reactor for Italy appears to be an illogical step in the process of exiting the nuclear energy business.