Controversies with nuclear power around Europe

Reading Time: 3 minutes
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/energy-crisis-revives-nuclear-power-plans-globally-2022-08-04/

The war in Ukraine and the reduced influx of gas coming into Europe from Russia made electricity prices rocket. It is estimated that the prices will stay high until 2024 which is going to be tough for many people. This arrived in a worldwide debate about the significance of using renewable sources of energy. One of them is nuclear power which is seen as one of the most efficient ones and the best possible out of every source of energy we know so far. Yet, there are voices that the cost of them is highly expensive and because of that, we cannot base the whole electricity market on it, as it is not profitable in the short-term (as the building process takes years) and it does not leave sustainable opportunities when the nuclear plants are not operating.

Firstly, to produce nuclear power uranium is needed. It is often forgotten that uranium is not a common material and most European countries import it from Russia. Russia is the second biggest exporter of uranium, right after Nigeria. Cutting off export significantly affects the nuclear plants and therefore even the electricity market in countries that rely on nuclear power a lot, like France. Therefore, the use of nuclear power is not independent enough to be the main source of national energy which many green activists or states promote.

Secondly, the overtake of the Ukrainian nuclear plant in the Zaporizhzhia region by Russian forces raises fears about the weaponization of nuclear power which stand as an alarming problem for the future. Not only does it paralyse the country’s electricity but it creates a potential ‘uncontrolled nuclear reaction in a nuclear reactor could result in widespread contamination of air and water.’ Fabian Lüscher, who is the head of the nuclear energy section at the Swiss Energy Foundation claims that ‘ Europe’s ageing nuclear fleet is not adapted to deal with contemporary terrorist attacks and cyberattacks.’ His quote and the Russian occupation of the nuclear facility create a question of whether nuclear plants nowadays are truly as safe as they are described in public and what can we do about this problem. So far, the problem has not been raised in the public with greater success.

https://www.chathamhouse.org/2022/08/attacks-ukraine-nuclear-plant-whats-stake

In addition, the main problem raised by the activists is waste. They claim that because nuclear-powered countries powered are interlinked when they transfer between each other energy there are ‘risks of nuclear accidents extending across borders.’ Moreover, because of the hazardous features of the waste, it creates a threat to the environment as it stays hazardous for thousands of years until it decays from being radioactive. Yet, the statistics say something different about the danger that the waste present. The health issue associated with nuclear waste is not a problem as the radiation never harm people in nuclear history moreover the crucial part is that the potential contact with the waste either by the environment or a human would not be harmful because the world we live in is already radioactive at the acceptable levels and the potential leak of radiation would be 50 times smaller than the environmental one. In addition, out of all of the waste that is produced 90% is classified as low-level waste which is ‘lightly-contaminated items, such as tools and work clothing, and contains only 1% of the total radioactivity.’

War in Ukraine pushed some countries to speed up their plans by relying more of their energy on nuclear plants, like Poland. The lack of gas and coal supply coming out of Russia posed a higher need for other means of energy. This approach would significantly reduce Poland’s carbon emissions as it is ranked one of the most carbon emission countries in the world, placing the 20th place. On the other hand, experts say that the use of nuclear energy promises is based mainly politically, as there are upcoming elections and the government tries to distract the public from the rising energy prices and give them hope as it cannot provide cheaper prices. It shows that plans for nuclear energy cannot be made during a crisis and that in times of shortages of energy or problems with the usage of the facilities (militarization or renovation) nuclear power is useless.

Bibliography:
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-63245112
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1147442/imports-of-uranium-to-eu-by-country/
https://world-nuclear.org/nuclear-essentials/what-is-nuclear-waste-and-what-do-we-do-with-it.aspx
https://www.dw.com/en/poland-chooses-us-company-to-build-its-first-nuclear-power-plant/a-63591358
https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country/

Pictures:

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/energy-crisis-revives-nuclear-power-plans-globally-2022-08-04/

https://www.chathamhouse.org/2022/08/attacks-ukraine-nuclear-plant-whats-stake

Tagged

Leave a Reply