Nuclear Revival in Europe

It seems inevitable.

Citizens and leaders all over the world are wrestling with the dual challenges of: 1) a strong demand for cost-effective energy; and 2) a desire to switch away from fossil fuels. One possible solution is nuclear energy. Although it's been out of fashion in the Europe and the United States for a number of years, that could change:

Recent news reports from Europe suggest that a nuclear revival in the European Union is increasingly likely. Soaring hydrocarbon prices and lasting uncertainties regarding hydrogen-based solutions are making the combination between civil atomic power and alternative energy a promising prospect for governments in the European Union.

That's from the Power and Interest News Report, an indispensable source for useful information and opinions on international issues. Here's more:

The bottom line is that as environmental concerns rise in the European Union, and since European states have made ecology a top priority, the above mentioned dynamics are getting stronger: the more that CO2 emissions and global warming become urgent issues, the more atomic energy will be viewed through a new light.

In fact, because China, India, Brazil, and other countries are rapidly emerging as new economic giants in the world, hundreds of millions of people will soon need electricity. As a consequence, great powers will need to decide whether new energy will be provided by hydrocarbons or by other methods, such as nuclear energy.

While the European Union is known to have had difficulties in formulating a unitary energy policy, it is likely that it will soon be called to take a decision on nuclear energy at a continental level. It is also almost certain, in light of recent surveys, that more and more European citizens will be ready to accept a return to nuclear power.

What do you think? Will the the U.S. follow Europe's lead and reconsider their refusal to build more nuclear power plants? Should they?

Mike Treder

Tags: nanotechnology nanotech nano science technology ethics weblog blog

Comments

[Brian Wang]

The UK will be reversing its decision to phase out nuclear. Europe will go more strongly towards nuclear. If Germany is hypocritical and chooses to not have nuclear then they will just be importing more electricity from nuclear power plants in France and eastern europe.

The US has already started on a significant move back to nuclear with the 2005 energy bills. The financial terms have been adjusted to clear the way for 27-32 more nuclear plants. Existing plants will have more operating extensions. The remaining half that have not been extended to 60 years will get those extensions. Then most to 80 years after that. There will be more power uprating as well.

Any 2007 or 2009 climate change bill will up the cost of carbon/coal and make nuclear clearly the cheapest. Then nuclear and renewables will triple. Any stronger climate bills in Europe will have similar effect on the economic choice.

Stronger climate bills will cause new coal plants to not be built and old ones will be phased out. It will be the economical choice for utilities and power companies.

There is a new IEA plan for stabilizing world CO2 at the 450 parts per million level for less global warming.

Nuclear capacity under this projection would more than double from its current capacity to 833 GW by 2030. Even if this increase were to happen, nuclear would account for only 16% of the necessary reductions in CO2 emissions worldwide. This should speak to the monstrous challenge the world faces in curbing CO2 emissions. Improved fossil-fuel efficiency would account for 27% of the reductions; end-use energy efficiency would provide 13%; biofuels for transportation, 4%; renewables for power, 19%; and CO2 capture and storage, 21%.

===I think the latest IEA plan can be surpassed with more nuclear. MIT has power uprating research for 50% more power from existing reactors. Donut shaped fuel and nanoparticles in the coolant liquid.

The climate bill passages in the US and Europe and even faster building in the interior of China could combine to increase power by another 800GW by 2030. 1.6 TW.

http://advancednano.blogspot.com/2007/11/short-mid-and-long-term-energy-and.html

[Tom Craver]

Market forces will cause the world to use oil until the cost of production is too high, even if we build a lot more nuclear.

Greater energy independence is a great idea for other reasons. But adding more nuclear probably won't result in reduced CO2. It'll just be burnt in different places, by people who might not otherwise be able to afford it, who aren't blocked by "climate change" laws.

[sashley]

Our Greenies are far more rabid against Nuclear Power than those in Europe. Further the European Green lobby has do contend with a well established, nuclear power industry with a great safety record.

Until proven wrong, I'm still betting that the Greenies in the U.S. will take a cleaned up coal fired plant over a Nuclear one.