Sorya Lagnaux

In view of the climate crisis, we must put in place solutions to reduce our CO2 emissions, and this includes the energy transition. Although nuclear power has been a controversial topic for many years, it could be a good alternative to fossil fuels in parallel with renewable energies.

Nuclear energy over time

Nuclear energy was born after the Second World War and immediately aroused a lot of interest.  In a world of rapid economic growth, the demand for energy has increased dramatically. Many countries put great hopes in the energy produced by a new technology: nuclear fission. Within 15 years, Switzerland built 5 nuclear power plants. Unfortunately, in 1969, the first nuclear accident occurred at the experimental power plant in Lucens, Switzerland. A series of accidents followed: Three Miles Island in Pennsylvania (1979), Chernobyl in Ukraine (1986) and Fukushima in Japan (2011). This last accident has particularly reinforced the mistrust of the Swiss. The Federal Council decided to put an end to nuclear power. It is now forbidden to build new power plants and those that exist will remain in operation as long as they meet the safety standards. A long term opposition to nuclear power has raised public awareness and put into perspective the first plans to get out of nuclear power and find alternatives for energy supply.

Kaiseraugst: One of the most important protests of the anti-nuclear movement in Switzerland, which took place in June 1986 after the accident in Chernobyl.  (Source:  Schweizer Radio und Fernsehen)

In 2017, the Greens launched an initiative calling for the shutdown of nuclear power plants after 45 years of operation at the latest. The Swiss people approved this law by referendum which aims to replace nuclear power by renewable energies. In Switzerland, the majority of the power plants are more than 40 years old and have second generation reactors. In 2020, the Mühlenberg power plant was decommissioned and started a long process of dismantling. Today, only 4 nuclear power plants are still active in Switzerland. However, the country is still very dependent on nuclear power. In 2020, 58.1%   of the electricity produced in Switzerland will come from hydroelectricity, 32.9% from nuclear energy, 6.7% from renewable energies such as wind and photovoltaic, and 2.3% from fossil fuels (SFOE, 2022).

Nuclear power produces 10 percent of the world’s electricity, making it the fourth largest energy source after coal, oil and natural gas (Fisher et al., 2021). However, the role of nuclear power varies greatly from country to country. While Switzerland will soon dismantle its last 4 power plants, Eastern European countries are betting on it again. This possible return to nuclear energy is not a coincidence. Indeed, it could allow many countries to reduce their dependency on coal and natural gas imports. As such, it contributes to the fight against climate change and could potentially allow us to get out of fossil fuels. Influential people and governments seem to be directing their attention to emerging nuclear technologies. The European Commission included nuclear energy in their plan to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 (World Nuclear Association, 2020). Bill Gates now promote nuclear energy as the best solution (Mcpharlin, 2019). The 4th generation reactors are safer, since they “work at significantly higher operating temperature” and part of the waste is reused to produce energy (Boeck, 2022). They could in the near future replace the current plants. At the same time, governments are investing in renewable energies, like in Switzerland, where the Federal Council puts great hope in photovoltaic and wind power (RTS, 2021). According to a study by SLF and EPFL the installation of wind turbines combined with solar panels in the Alps is the most effective solution for achieving energy neutrality and autonomy in Switzerland (Perroud, 2021). While new renewable energies are gaining in popularity, the development of nuclear power, as implied by the 2017 votes, is only weakly supported by the Swiss population. A poll from 2022 shows that this trend has hardly changed: only 44% of the Swiss population would support the construction of new power plants (Imseng, 2022). Should we then really abandon nuclear power in favor of renewable energies?

The advantages of nuclear power

The main objective today is to stay below 1.5 degree by 2050 and for that we must imperatively reduce our CO2 emissions. Nuclear power is above all very attractive because the power plants allow to produce electricity efficiently while emitting very few greenhouse gases, if only water vapor. Nuclear power has many advantages over some renewable energies in meeting climate goals. First of all, its carbon footprint is extremely low and comparable to that of solar and wind power   (Michaille et al., 2021). It distributes energy day and night without interruption and regardless of the season. Wind and photovoltaic are, on the contrary, intermittent energy sources, since they depend on the presence of wind and sun.  Some renewable energies are controllable: this is the case of hydroelectric energy that can be activated (in some cases) on demand. But this is not the case for the “new” renewable energies, wind and solar, which we are trying to develop as part of the energy transition. Electrical energy is difficult to store, especially when its production is irregular. Nevertheless, the storage of wind and solar energy is an area where research is evolving very rapidly. Another point of comparison is efficiency. It takes about 700 wind turbines of 2MW (Swiss standard) to equal the power of the Mühlenberg power plant, taking into account that a wind turbine runs on average only 75% of the time with variable speeds depending on the wind. If these turbines were to be installed, they would cover the lakes of Lugano, Thorne and Biel (EPFL, 2021). In this case, a power plant would take up much less space. As a second advantage, nuclear power is cost competitive with other forms of electricity source. Although power plants are expensive to build they are cheaper to run than gas plants (World Nuclear Association, 2017).

According to a study on the impact of different energy sources on the environment, nuclear power has the best results followed by hydro power (Michaille et al., 2021). Without taking space into account, wind power would come second to hydro. While photovoltaics, which is often at the center of political campaigns, scores poorly due in large part to production factors.

Despite the low environmental impact of nuclear power, it remains criticized for the use of uranium, a metal extracted from the earth’s subsoil in mines. Uranium is often imported from other countries and resources are dwindling. However, several scientific groups propose to use thorium as an alternative. It can be transformed by neutron capture into fissile uranium. It is found almost everywhere on earth, which makes it easily accessible and cheaper than uranium. In addition, thorium reactors would greatly reduce the longevity of nuclear waste. A Swiss start-up, Transmutex, is proposing this new model, which would reduce the half-life of a radioactive particle from 300’000 to 300 years (Transmutex, 2021). The process which is at the origin of such an improvement of the waste treatment is the “transmutation”. Fast neutrons are bombarded on the atoms of long-lived waste to transform them into stable elements while producing energy.
Due to all these advantages, research in this field has taken off and many consider nuclear energy as one of the solution to reach the climate objectives.  These new innovations give nuclear power a new visibility and credibility, but is it enough?

 Nuclear: a heated discussion  

The anti-nuclear policy is still holding back innovations. Technologies are just starting to advance and it is often difficult to implement them due to lack of financial support or strong regulations. The establishment of a new power plant for example, or simply the use of an existing reactor for testing, requires difficult to obtain permits. Today, Swiss politicians are still very closed on the subject since the vote of 2017. This is why most of the projects to improve existing technologies are carried out abroad.  By the end of 2021, the world was ready to welcome 57 new power plants, including 16 in China (Swissnuclear, 2022). In my opinion, it is a shame to abandon nuclear power entirely. It seems all the more risky to close down the existing power plants because we have to find an alternative energy source. We cannot currently rely solely on renewable energies such as wind power or photovoltaics, a sector that is still too underdeveloped to rely on it all. In Switzerland, we have already taken this step, as we can still rely to a large extent on hydropower. Unfortunately, an exit from nuclear power should not lead to an increase in, for example, foreign gas or fossil fuels. A change of course in Switzerland is difficult to perceive. Any change will have to be voted on by the people. The procedures are long and in this case too long for the time we have before we reach the +1.5 C degrees. The future of nuclear power rests largely on the politics of the country and its history with it.

Beyond the roadblock posed by anti-nuclear policies, there are a number of arguments that make nuclear power unattractive. According to the last report of the IPCC, limiting warming requires greenhouse gas emissions to peak before 2025 at the latest, and be reduced by 43% by 2030. The energy transition must therefore be done as soon as possible. Would reinvesting in nuclear power take too long? Indeed, a nuclear power plant requires a minimum of 5 years to be built, without taking into account the time required for such a project to be accepted (Brouet et al., 2022). Nuclear power always involves risks that should not be underestimated despite the climate emergency. The safety of reactors can surely never be guaranteed at 100%. The construction of new plants also carries a high political stakes, since they can be bombed in a war and and therefore cause great damage. It is nevertheless surprising to observe that the nuclear sector kills less than other energy sources such as coal for example. Nevertheless, wouldn’t the risks of climate change be higher anyway?

Personally, I think it is imperative today to put all the odds on our side by developing every sector that has potential to avoid climate catastrophe. Even if a power plant takes time to be built and new technologies are still struggling to find their place, they remain a zero carbon energy source and therefore a solution that cannot be neglected. Since renewable energies are still poorly developed, getting out of nuclear power too quickly is a mistake. Some regions, such as France and Bulgaria, still rely heavily on nuclear power and will not be able to abandon it overnight. This is why, in my opinion, innovations in this sector must continue to be supported. In this way, nuclear may not be the only solution to reduce our carbon emissions but should definitely be part of the energy transition.

Bibliography 

Boeck, H. (2022). Is nuclear energy safe? gisreportsonline.com. https://www.gisreportsonline.com/r/nuclear-energy-safe/

Brouet, A.-M., Smith, B., Barraud, E., & Uberschlag, L. (2022). Energie 2050: comment sortir du carbone? | Dimensions – EPFL Magazine. longread.epfl.ch. https://longread.epfl.ch/dossier/energie-2050-comment-sortir-du-carbone/

EPFL. (2021). Combien faut-il d’éoliennes pour remplacer une centrale nucléaire ? | Energyscope. energyscope.ch. https://www.energyscope.ch/fr/questions/combien-faut-il-deoliennes-pour-remplacer-une-centrale-nucleaire/

Fisher, M., Alina, C., & Liou, J. (2021). The Use of Nuclear Power Beyond Generating Electricity: Non-Electric Applications | IAEA. iaea.org. https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/the-use-of-nuclear-power-beyond-generating-electricity-non-electric-applications

Imseng, S. (2022). Sondage sur l’énergie en Suisse – Près de la moitié de la population soutient le nucléaire. tdg.ch. https://www.tdg.ch/pres-de-la-moitie-de-la-population-soutient-le-nucleaire-369675542288

Mcpharlin, K. (2019). Why We Should Listen to Bill Gates on Nuclear Energy. nei.org. https://www.nei.org/news/2019/bill-gates-on-nuclear

Michaille, P., Grenêche, D., & Mazière, M. (2021). 1 Impact sur l’environnement des différentes sources d’énergie. In Transition énergétique : la France en échec (S. 81–100). EDP Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1051/978-2-7598-2295-9.C006/HTML

Perroud, S. (2021). La Suisse doit miser sur le solaire et l’éolien en montagne. slf.ch. https://www.slf.ch/fr/news/2021/05/la-suisse-doit-miser-sur-le-solaire-et-leolien-en-montagne.html

RTS. (2021). Les énergies renouvelables au coeur d’une grande réforme du Conseil fédéral. rts.ch. https://www.rts.ch/info/suisse/12287234-les-energies-renouvelables-au-coeur-dune-grande-reforme-du-conseil-federal.html

SFOE. (2022). L’électricité consommée en Suisse en 2020 provenait à 76% des énergies renouvelables. admin.ch. https://www.admin.ch/gov/fr/accueil/documentation/communiques.msg-id-84908.html

Swissnuclear. (2022). L’énergie nucléaire dans le monde. kernenergie.ch. https://www.kernenergie.ch/fr/l-energie-nucleaire-dans-le-monde-_content—1–1071.html

Transmutex. (2021). TECHNOLOGY. transmutex.com. https://www.transmutex.com/

World Nuclear Association. (2017). Title: Nuclear Power Economics and Project Structuring: Bd. 2017/001.

World Nuclear Association. (2020). Generation IV Nuclear Reactors. world-nuclear.org. https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-power-reactors/generation-iv-nuclear-reactors.aspx