Nuclear Power: A Path to Low-Carbon Energy?
Europe's nuclear phaseout divides experts over cost and climate risks
Advocates of nuclear energy never tire of emphasizing its low emissions. "Nuclear power is one of the cleanest energy sources when considering the entire supply chain," states the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Fatih Birol, head of the International Energy Agency (IEA), calls nuclear power "an opportunity for the energy sector to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions" and, for this reason, considers Germany's nuclear phase-out a "historic mistake." At a nuclear summit in March, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen described Europe's retreat from nuclear energy as a "strategic error," arguing that nuclear power is a "reliable, affordable source of low-carbon energy."
And indeed, even Christoph Pistner, head of nuclear engineering and plant safety at the traditionally anti-nuclear Öko-Institut, acknowledges: "If you look solely at the CO₂ balance per kilowatt-hour of electricity generated, nuclear power—like renewable energy—has a small carbon footprint." While CO₂ emissions do occur during uranium mining, fuel processing, power plant construction, operation, and waste disposal, he notes that these are comparable to the emissions from building, operating, and decommissioning wind turbines or solar panels.
"Once a nuclear plant is up and running, it can do an excellent job of protecting the climate," says Mathias Mier, an energy expert at the Ifo Institute. He is not fundamentally opposed to nuclear power: "Shutting down the existing, safe reactors was a mistake," he argues. But from an economic perspective, building nuclear plants in the first place was already the wrong move. "The question is: How expensive is it, and are there alternatives?"
If humanity wants to stop pumping CO₂ into the atmosphere and heating the planet, electricity generation must become CO₂-free—quickly and as cheaply as possible. Beyond nuclear power, there is also electricity from wind, solar, and hydropower. "Given these other options, nuclear power in Europe is far too expensive," Mier says. Safety requirements are extremely high. "In China, they do things differently," he notes. "There aren't the same environmental impact assessments or democratic participation."
The cost argument is misleading for another reason, Mier adds. When figures like €10 per megawatt-hour for nuclear power—significantly less than for fossil fuels—are cited, they refer only to variable costs: the price of fuel, auxiliary energy, water, and chemicals needed to produce the next megawatt-hour. To cover the full costs of a nuclear plant—including hundreds of employees, spare parts, the high investment costs of construction, and insurance for worst-case scenarios—at least €110 to €140 per megawatt-hour would be required. Otherwise, nuclear power operates at a loss and must be subsidized by the state, as was the case in Germany.
Why Are Conservative Politicians Advocating a Return to Nuclear?
There's another issue: "Planning, approval, and construction of a nuclear power plant take a very long time," says Pistner of the Öko-Institut. When the British government promised the necessary subsidies for the Hinkley Point C nuclear plant in 2013, the facility was supposed to begin operations in 2023. Now, completion is not expected until 2030—with construction costs having doubled.
Nuclear advocates, including the IAEA, also praise the baseload capability of nuclear plants. Like coal plants, they can operate almost continuously, whereas solar panels produce no electricity at night and wind turbines stand idle during calm periods.
But here's the catch: The more electricity comes from wind and solar, the less suitable nuclear plants become as a complement. "Nuclear power doesn't work well—either safely or affordably—with wind and solar," Mier explains. Since wind and solar power are cheaper than nuclear, reactors would have to be constantly ramped up and down. "That wears them out faster," he says. Better alternatives for periods of darkness and calm include, for now, gas-fired power plants, and later, battery storage, biomass, or carbon-free gas alternatives like hydrogen.
So why are senior Union politicians like Ursula von der Leyen, Markus Söder, and Jens Spahn pushing for a return to nuclear power? "Because they haven't got a clue," says Mathias Mier of the Ifo Institute. "I have no idea who put these wild ideas into their heads."
