April 26, 1986 was the darkest day for the nuclear industry. Shortly after that Russians heard Western stations vaguely penetrating through the noise of Soviet radio jammers: “Chernobyl, Chernobyl.” Along with Hiroshima, the name Chernobyl soon began to denote disaster – a nuclear disaster. A radioactive cloud covered not only Belarus, but also Western Europe as far as the British Isles. Chernobyl shaped a very negative attitude to nuclear energy in Europe for years to come.
Even a Cold War saying – “Better active today than radioactive tomorrow” – came back into the highlight.
Western Europe suspended most of its nuclear programmes after a Soviet reactor breakdown. Italy, for example, halted all of its four reactors in 1987.
However, the plans to meet the entire industrial demand for power with the help of solar, wind and biomass energy are unlikely to materialise soon. Nuclear reaction is still the only realistic way of producing relatively cheap energy.
A quarter of a century has passed since that dreadful April day, and economic reasoning is gradually gaining over the fear of another disaster. Growing fossil fuel prices are rapidly turning more and more people into advocates of nuclear plant projects.
The recent “gas war” between Russia and Ukraine also contributed to the process. European countries have long been working to find alternative energy sources to break their dependence on Russian oil and gas supplies. The Russian-Ukrainian conflict has forced European leaders to accelerate the work on a strategic energy security concept.
Earlier, Europe’s policy was to boost public awareness of the dangers of nuclear fission, but now they more often focus on nuclear energy’s advantages. For example, nuclear waste and radiation levels emitted by a nuclear power plant are easier to evaluate compared with other types of generators. Their impact on human health and the environment can be determined with precision, which is a huge advantage compared with a coal-powered thermal station. Radioactive elements contained in brown coal cannot be fully eliminated, so part of them is discharged into the air during burning. A coal-burning power plant pollutes the environment dozens of times more than a nuclear one.
Despite the high construction costs, nuclear power projects are rightfully referred to as investments in the future, as advanced modern technologies can extend a nuclear plant’s service life to 40 and even 60 years.
Neither do nuclear plants add to global warming or other climate changes. This reasoning is often used by advocates of peaceful use of nuclear energy, who argue that the safety of nuclear plants and spent fuel storage is only a matter of technology and control.
Over 440 nuclear reactors are currently operating across the globe, and 100 more are planned for the next few years.
India and China top the list of nuclear power generation leaders, Vietnam and Indonesia are actively developing the sector, and Turkey has recently announced plans to build nuclear plants.
Nuclear reactors account for a mere 17% of the global power generation and only 3% of energy consumed, one-tenth or less the level for oil and gas fuelled generators.
In Europe, nuclear plants produce 34% of the total energy, and in France, which is a “highly nuclear” country, 78%.
The aggregate capacity of the world’s nuclear power plants is 360 GWe, the United States accounting for a quarter of that amount, with its 104 nuclear power generation units with total capacity of 98 GWe.
The light water reactor or LWR is the most widespread type of nuclear reactor, as 80% of all reactors are LWRs. They are essentially different from the RBMK’s, or high power channel type reactors, now also referred to as the Chernobyl type.
Modern nuclear power projects of third generation and beyond (3G+) involve either pressurised water reactors or boiling water reactors.
The United States initiated the Generation IV Forum in 2000 where the leading nuclear technology countries are represented (the US, Japan, France, Britain, South Korea and other).
The Forum’s goal is to develop six specially selected types of nuclear reactors.
Projects involving the production of hydrogen, along with power, are in the focus of the forum, as modern physicists see hydrogen as a promising source of energy. Hydrogen is expected to replace petrol as auto fuel in the future.
In the European Union, nuclear power generation issues are handled by the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom), which France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands set up in Rome in 1957.
The group helps to pool knowledge, infrastructure, and funding of nuclear energy. It ensures the security of atomic energy supply within the framework of a centralised monitoring system. Euratom does research, and draws up safety standards and ensures the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
Euratom also encourages and promotes investment in the industry, supports nuclear research, and handles related health and environmental issues, and spent fuel storage technologies.
Nuclear energy is used for power generation in 14 of the 27 EU countries, with France in the lead with 59 reactors.
Overall, 34% of all electric power generated in Europe comes from nuclear plants. This makes the EU the world’s largest “nuclear power.” However, each country has a different share of electric power produced by nuclear plants, from a mere 4% in the Netherlands to over 78% in France and Lithuania.
Coal ranks second in Europe among power plant fuels (30%), followed by natural gas (18%) and oil (6%). Renewable energy sources account for 14% of electricity produced in Europe.
However, it would be premature to announce Europe’s complete unity on the issue of nuclear energy, not after the shock Europe had in 1986. France and Austria, both old and influential EU members, hold opposite views on the matter, one actively developing the nuclear energy industry, and the other ardently criticising nuclear projects even in neighbouring countries.
Germany could soon be forced by the economic developments to reconsider its programme of gradually abandoning nuclear power generation. Its current plan is to halt the last reactor on its territory in 2022.
Italy has already made a decision to resume its nuclear programme and is planning to build several new-generation reactors. The decision was prompted by its severe dependence on fuel imports (89%), which makes electricity prices in Italy higher than anywhere else in Europe. Albania offered Italy help in resuming its nuclear programme, proposing building a nuclear centre for Italy in its own territory.
Sweden, only recently an ardent opponent of nuclear energy, has developed a programme involving nuclear power plants. Two more European countries, Finland and France, are building new reactors, and Switzerland is likely to join the club, planning three more nuclear power generators in addition to the existing five.
The new EU members have “nuclear appetites” that are even stronger than in the “old” European countries.
This is not surprising, as they badly need cheap energy to boost their economies and living standards.
Romania is ready to begin building the third and fourth units at its Cernavoda plant. Poland will also abandon its non-nuclear status and begin the construction of two nuclear power plants with Frenchmade reactors in 2012–2013.
Bulgaria and Slovakia even considered activating their old idle reactors at the peak of the RussianUkrainian gas crisis, which had led the two countries to the brink of an economic catastrophe.
The prospect of running a reactor built back in the socialist times unnerved the whole of Europe.
Bulgaria has not abandoned the idea entirely and is asking for the European Commission’s clearance to launch two nuclear reactors at the Kozloduy plant.
They were shut down in 2006 with the country’s accession to the EU although their service lives were to expire only in 2011 and 2011. Bulgarians unanimously voted for halting the reactors, forgetting the national pride they took in Kozloduy.
Opinion polls suggest that Lithuanians and Czechs are the most tolerant to nuclear programmes in Europe. The Czech Republic plans to augment the share of nuclear plants in its power generation to one-half from one-third by 2030.
Overall, the EU intends to build 750 power plants before 2020, which means that a generation unit will be commissioned every five weeks. Those who five or seven years ago dreamed of a non-nuclear Europe are in for a bitter disappointment, as a European nuclear renaissance is imminent.
