Nuclear Power

Europe Needs To Take The Nuclear Power Option

By Nicholas Newman 15 September 2006

Is it time we reopened our coal mines and built new nuclear power plants? The answer surprisingly seems to be ‘yes’. Why? To put it bluntly Europe has an energy problem, which is likely to get worse. There are plenty of solutions, but the oft hyped ones of more investment in renewable energy, are being treated with increasing scepticism. As Bjorn Lomborg author of the ‘Skeptical Environmentalist’, argues alternative energies have their own environmental and social costs, which mean the price of such energy supplies would have to fall substantially to compete with fossil fuels.

No, Europe won’t run out of energy, the problem facing EU member states is more complicated. Though Europe’s indigenous primary energy supplies are declining, and this is making us more vulnerable to imported energy, especially in the case of oil in the politically unstable Middle East, nevertheless according to BP, Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia held more than 44% of the World's proven reserves at the end of 2003, whilst the European Commission estimates Algeria and Russia will make up 59% of European gas imports by 2020 - although down from 97% in 2000, given that increased imports from Libya, Azerbaijan, and Iran, still represent a substantial additional reserves.

Europe’s 1% to 2% per annum expansion in demand for energy is predicted by the European Commission’s DGET (Directorate General for Energy and Transport) to raise our dependency on imported energy from the current 50% to 70% by 2030, making the European economy increasingly vulnerable to the vagaries of the world energy market. Recently, in November 2004 the BBC reported oil reached $50 a barrel, due increased world demand.

This ‘increasing dependence is dangerous’ for the Continent’s energy security interests, says Friedemann Müller, energy specialist at SWP (German Institute for International and Security Affairs). As for renewable resources they “cannot compensate for imports, not by a long shot" Müller has stated. The EU already has a target of generating 21% of electricity from renewable energies by 2010, though at 6% currently it is unlikely to meet it. It looks like Europe will have to rely on its old friends nuclear and coal. Even Mike O’Brian, Britain’s Energy Minister agrees that these options must remain open.

Even Europe’s Green’s are deeply divided about renewable technology. Some argue for massive investment in new technology, while others argue for greater investment in energy saving and efficiency. Those who favour higher levels of public spending in renewables like Jeremy Leggett of Solar Century, claim this will achieve ‘rapid progress in energy efficiency, implementation and cuts in greenhouse gas emissions and meet much of the expected increase in electricity demand? But fail to convince that these measures would provide a complete solution, apart from the social and economic costs involved.

While cynical opponents, like TV eco-warrior David Bellamy argue that despite much progress it would be more cost effective to invest public money in energy saving and efficiency schemes that would have less of an environmental and social impact, reports Oliver Morgan, The Observer, Industrial Editor. Even in the UK there are protests reported against wind farm schemes because of there perceived visual damage and even solar, hydro and bio-mass have their environmental problems, notes European Voice. The point is renewables are part of the solution, but much to the disappointment of many Greens, the facts demonstrate that sustainable technologies can on only be a relatively small part of the total solution, at present.

Outside the relative merits of different types of technology are the economic issues renewables must face. To put it simply renewables are not competitive enough with more conventional methods, it is heavily dependent on depends on heavy subsidies. Add to this, , much of Europe has agreed to the Stability and Growth Pact, Peter Skinner MEP says ‘which puts responsibility on the shoulders of governments to spend only what they receive in taxation - reducing some options for public borrowing’, together with a changing economic climate which means , no longer do member states individual energy markets operate in isolation, due to the creation of a Single European Energy Market, for there is now one continental wide marketplace regulated by EU energy law.

Answering ‘yes’ to more conventional technologies including nuclear and coal, especially for electricity production, as the Commission’s Green Paper admits we are increasingly dependent on external energy sources, and there is very little room to manoeuver in terms of the conditions of energy supply that are essentially able to attempt to meet predicted levels of demand.

The chief advantages of fossil fuelled power stations over renewable energy are that of cheapness and a higher certainty in supply. The cost of oil and gas fuel only makes up a small percentage of the total energy cost – in 1995 the fossil fuel cost amounted to 16% of the total cost of energy delivered to your door. Over the last decade there have been significant efficiency gains and operating cost reduction for fossil fuelled plants reports Bjorn Lomborg, which mean competing renewable generating plant will still need to depend on public funding and tax rebates for a while yet.

As for meeting Kyoto emission targets, Mike O’Brian Britain’s Energy Minister argues that both gas fired and coal fired power plants can fit FSG (flue gas desulphurization) to provide clean coal technology that does not emit carbon dioxide. Though gas plants are £50 million cheaper to build at £100m than coal powered stations fitted with FSG. In terms of generating new employment prospects both the nuclear and coal options are attractive to economically depressed regions like Cumbria, and reopening coal mines would, not only, creates jobs, but indigenous coal is cleaner and costs in November 2004 about the same as world prices reports International Coal Market Intelligence. Already there are proposals to reserve a certain portion of the power station market for domestic coal production notes Steve Dawe of UK’s Green Party. At the same time both France and Finland have announced in recent months plans to order new nuclear power stations and Germany is considering extending the life of its present plants reports Greenpeace. While elsewhere China has decided that 30 new power stations will be constructed, ‘it may be that soon only Europe and the USA show little sign of meeting the Kyoto objectives’, notes Peter Skinner MEP.

But, the main selling point of nuclear and indigenously mined coal power stations is that increased security and stability of energy supplies can be achieved, enabling more radical technology the breathing space to deliver. Because, if things go on as at present the International Energy Agency expects the Continent’s energy markets will for up to thirty years, be dependent for 90% of its oil, 70% of its natural gas and 100% of its coal. Other troubles facing Europe’s are declining reserves of exploitable energy reserves notes DGET and the need to replace and modernize, over the next twenty years much of our energy infrastructure, reports Britain’s DTI (Department of Trade and Industry) Energy White Paper (2003).

So what lies in the future for those who live in fear that Europe will again face power cuts, petrol queues and no television to watch? Its is lucky for us that the level of debate has improved from that of an ill-informed dinner party discussion, as to which wine goes best with pudding to one based on a strategic policy debate. What this will mean for us consumers in this new world is continued investment at current levels in research and development into both fossil fuels and renewables. It is likely that we will see new coal mines opening in Europe, together with other countries following France and Finland’s decision to order new nuclear power stations or keep ones open longer than originally planned. It does start to look that we must not rest on our laurels, we will still need to improve on energy policies improving energy saving and reducing energy consumption if Europe is going to have a more secure energy future.

The bottom line is Europe needs a Common Energy Policy that works.