Skip to main content

A Ban Falls: Sweden Refocuses on Nuclear Energy

persona Sometimes, you focus your eyes one place while all the action is happening somewhere else. (Where would magicians be without this idea?) In our case, we’ve been patiently waiting for Germany to  overturn their ill-considered nuclear ban while over in Sweden, they’re actually, um, overturning their ill-considered ban:

Sweden is a leader on renewable energy but is struggling to develop alternative source like hydropower and wind to meet its growing energy demands. If parliament approves scrapping the [nuclear] ban, Sweden would join a growing list of countries rethinking nuclear power as a source of energy amid concerns over global warming and the reliability of energy suppliers such as Russia.

While we’re still a touch wobbly on the notion of nuclear energy being used as emergency rations to fend off Russia, Sweden’s issues seem based on a desire to keep their carbon emissions down. To us, that gives nuclear energy a firmer basis for moving forward as part of a broader energy policy. Sweden already has 10 operating plants and it was doubtless the prospect of retiring them (scheduled for next year) that gave the country second thoughts.

We’re not claiming a win against wind and hydro here – we doubt the Swedes ever thought it plausible to replace the 10 plants (supplying – get this – 46% of their electricity) with those technologies. But it does remind us that between European nations banning nuclear after TMI and/or Chernobyl and now, no one seems to have figured out what might happen next. If carbon reduction had not become an issue, would Sweden have opened coal-fired plants (with carbon capture and sequestration, of course)? We can’t know – but we can know that nuclear’s use as a fear engine is just about done. Let’s let the New York Times tell us where we are:

Last year, the British government invited companies to build new reactors on existing sites. France, which already generates more than 80 percent of its electricity through nuclear power, plans to expand its installations. Finland is building a reactor scheduled to open early in the next decade that is expected to become the most powerful reactor in commercial operation.

And let’s add Bulgaria and Slovakia, which we obsessed over last week, too. Okay, that’s it: back to Germany.

Is that the soul of nuclear energy coming into focus there? Why no, it’s Liv Ullmann in Ingmar Bergman’s Persona (1966). The boy reaching to her is Jorgen Lindstrom. If you want to see someone’s head explode, have a friend watch this movie and then ask them to  explain it to you. Boom!

Comments

Rod Adams said…
Don't forget Italy on your list of countries that are turning back to nuclear power after taking it out of their domestic energy mix after Chernobyl. Of course, they still depended a bit on French nuclear power coming over the border, but there were four operating reactors in Italy before Chernobyl and there are none today.
Arvid said…
We are not planning to retire a unit next year. Our plants will start running down in the 2020's and 2030's.

Further, those 46 % are 46 % of a very high per capita use, due to our economy being lainged to heavy industry.

Even though we only get 45 % of our power from nuclear and the French get 75 %, we still use more nuclear kWh's per capita.

Most in the world actually.

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Nuclear Is a Long-Term Investment for Ohio that Will Pay Big

With 50 different state legislative calendars, more than half of them adjourn by June, and those still in session throughout the year usually take a recess in the summer. So springtime is prime time for state legislative activity. In the next few weeks, legislatures are hosting hearings and calling for votes on bills that have been battered back and forth in the capital halls.

On Tuesday, The Ohio Public Utilities Committee hosted its third round of hearings on the Zero Emissions Nuclear Resources Program, House Bill 178, and NEI’s Maria Korsnick testified before a jam-packed room of legislators.


Washingtonians parachuting into state debates can be a tricky platform, but in this case, Maria’s remarks provided national perspective that put the Ohio conundrum into context. At the heart of this debate is the impact nuclear plants have on local jobs and the local economy, and that nuclear assets should be viewed as “long-term investments” for the state. Of course, clean air and electrons …