France reopens the European debate on the role of nuclear power in the green race with Spain against

• Rafael Grossi (IAEA): "Governments will have to review their nuclear shutdown plans after the pandemic

• Spain stands out from Macron's drive for nuclear power: "There will be a staggered closure that society mostly supports"

The announcement by French President

about the construction of new nuclear reactors in France fully reopens the debate on the role that these plants should play in the European ecological transition. His words come in the midst of a price crisis on the continent and in the face of the threat of shortages due to the lack of gas from various parts of the world. In addition, they occur in full debate of the

on whether nuclear can be considered as 'clean energy' by not emitting CO2. Doing so would significantly lower the financing of atomic technology by opening the door to European funds and could lead several countries to rethink the future of their nuclear facilities.

It does not seem to be the case of Spain, with a government totally opposed to this energy that has set a plan for the definitive closure of the plants that will last until 2035. The ecological vice-president herself

has campaigned in Brussels so that nuclear is not considered clean, since despite not emitting CO2 it does generate a series of radioactive waste that is difficult to preserve. Spanish power companies also seem to have thrown in the towel and have their view, and especially their income statement, oriented towards millionaire renewable investments.

Saying no to nuclear, in any case, will not be a simple process.

Today this energy accounts for 22% of Spanish electricity generation with seven plants in operation.

This is a relevant quantity, although less than 35% of the supply registered in the 1990s.

Nor will it be a free process, since Spain will have to accelerate the installation of manageable renewables and batteries that can store surplus energy when there is no sun or wind with which to cover the supply.

WHAT IS GREEN?

In Brussels, the debate has been taking place in a discreet background for months under the inscrutable label of the "taxonomy" of sustainable finance, but it is intense, aggressive and has an immense political charge. The discussion is complicated but the terms are reasonably straightforward. The EU launched a historic recovery plan in July 2020, with 800,000 million euros to overcome the consequences of the pandemic thanks to joint debt issues. But as the priorities of the community legislature were the green transition and the fight against climate change, the 27 and the European institutions initially set limitations. The first, that almost

The second.

And here comes the controversy, the definition of what is 'green' and therefore can receive investments.

The knee-jerk answer would be renewables, but not everyone agrees and the fight is fierce to include virtually everything that isn't coal in the end.

At the beginning of this year the European Commission began to draw up the taxonomy, a list to clearly define what is environmentally sustainable and what is not, and therefore which investments can be financed with EU funds.

There is a huge amount of money at stake now, including 'green bonds' in community emissions, but especially in the long term, as decarbonisation should go hand in hand with more green bets.

And the problem is that in some capitals, starting with Paris, the resistance is immense.

Emmanuel Macron, leading the nuclear resurrection in France, wants the output of reactors to fall under the green umbrella and is close to getting his way. And Germany, about to conclude the controversial

gas pipeline

with Russia, is asking the same with gas, supported by Eastern Europe. That has made the deal impossible for months because of the opposition of the Nordics (except Finland), for example, to any political measure that distorted the nature of the idea.

Right now there are a dozen countries, very combative, in defense of nuclear energy, because it helps to reduce emissions, they argue, and it cannot be renounced when there is such a strong energy dependence on countries as unstable as

.

They have not given in and are putting constant pressure on the Commission, the Council and Parliament.

Nine months ago they had discreet support, but with the rise in the price of electricity (France gets almost three-quarters of its total with reactors) its position has gained whole.

They also appeal that

, the European Atomic Energy Community, signed in 1957 as the Treaty of Rome, is one of the pillars of the EU itself.

evolution more generate (nuclear)

The European Commission seems resigned to reaching a satisfactory agreement, to yield and accept nuclear energy in the green category, to the outrage of environmental groups, NGOs and part of the European Parliament.

The decision on what is or is not should be merely technical, scientific, but politics is being and will be the final criterion.

It is very difficult to resist when France starts up its very powerful machinery, and on this issue Macron, just over six months before the presidential elections, is being relentless.

Diplomatic and Commission sources point out that the Paris effort is overwhelming, at all levels and in all circumstances.

They have taken out the arsenal and are looking for allies and pulling outstanding debts at all ranks, and President

seems resigned.

Germany, which has given up nuclear, is formally against it, but Merkel's position in recent months has been less firm at key moments. A way to allow a negotiation that can benefit Berlin in other aspects of the debate. "It is almost done," a community source acknowledges with some regret. "They are looking for the least harmful formula that offers a dignified way out, with reservations and limits, taking care of the language, but the door is clearly open and it is not going to close," he adds.

The concession goes against the spirit of the legislature, of the efforts that are being made these same days in

but Brussels knows when there is a winnable battle and this one does not seem like it.

The resistance is too strong, the moment is too delicate, and you cannot fight against all circumstances.

If the 'yellow vests' have been key, and there is already growing resistance to certain measures of the green transition and its costs, France or Finland are not going to throw in the towel.

Not at least now.

ASIA: NEW NUCLEAR POWER

While Europe is shedding the daisy on 'nuclear yes' or 'nuclear no', other countries in the world continue to rapidly build reactors with which to fuel their strong economic growth.

The great driving force is

, which in the last five years alone has connected 17 new reactors to its network and has another 29 planned. The Asian country will soon surpass France as the world's second largest nuclear energy potential and threatens the leadership of the United States. with 91 active centrals.

In addition to China, other countries with nuclear investments underway are Russia, India,

which backed down in its closure plan after the Fukushima disaster, or

operating plants (nuclear)

"If the world has decided that one of its biggest emergencies is climate change, then no one can say no to nuclear. We don't like it because it generates waste, there have been accidents ... but the truth is that it contributes a lot to limiting the climate change ", explains

president of the Nuclear Forum. This expert considers that Brussels' support for technology in the fight for decarbonisation would be decisive as it leads to lower financing costs and, above all, the acceleration of the time it takes to connect to the network a central: while in Asia the The time from when the first stone of the reactor is laid until it is operational is 68 months, in the US the last plant that was connected to the grid required a process of 250 months.

This delay has promoted new technologies such as mini-reactors in which France precisely wants to invest 1,000 million.

It is an incipient technology that reduces the scale and especially the cost of building large reactors, never below 4,000 million euros.

The first of these cores are expected to be installed in Russia and the US starting in 2027.

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

Know more

• France

• Spain

• USA

• Russia

• European Comission

• Finland

• Paris

• India

• China

• Asia

• Europe

• Berlin

• Angela Merkel

• Algeria

• Germany

• Nuclear energy

MaghrebMercenaries' elections and exit mark the first international meeting in Libya

Conflict Battle in the UN Security Council for Western Sahara

Energía Sánchez is satisfied with the EU debating the rise in electricity in December: "In Europe they have different rhythms"

See links of interest

• The Palm

• Last News

• What

• Holidays 2021

• 2022 business calendar

• Christmas Lottery 2021

• Loteria del Niño 2022