Energy: Can nuclear power save the climate?

In Germany, the last nuclear power plants will be taken off the grid in 2023 – industrialized countries such as the USA and France, however, see this as the future. They plan to massively expand the use of nuclear energy by 2050.

The reason: the climate goals cannot be achieved otherwise. How sustainable nuclear power really is.

Why do some countries want to rely on nuclear power?

Industrial nations such as Canada, France, Japan and the USA want to significantly increase energy production from nuclear power for the benefit of the climate. Capacity should be tripled by 2050, according to a statement published at the World Climate Conference. It is noted that nuclear power plays a key role in achieving climate neutrality by the middle of the century and keeping the 1.5 degree target, with which the global community wants to prevent the worst consequences of global warming, within the realm of possibility.

Did Germany also sign the declaration?

No, and that is hardly surprising. In April 2023, Germany shut down the last three nuclear power plants Isar 2, Neckarwestheim 2 and Emsland and thus completed its nuclear phase-out. The former power plants are now being dismantled.

But in Germany too, voices are continually being raised that support nuclear power. A first draft of the new CDU policy program states that Germany cannot currently do without the option of nuclear power. They want to rely on “fourth and fifth generation nuclear power plants”, i.e. state-of-the-art reactor types that are supposed to be safer, more efficient and cleaner.

Isn’t nuclear power cleaner and more sustainable than other forms of energy anyway?

According to the Federal Environment Agency (Uba), the technology is not sustainable. One reason is the water issue, which is of central importance for the safe and efficient operation of nuclear power plants. “This high demand for cooling water can be bad for the environment or, in conjunction with heat waves and climate change, limit operations,” warns Uba. “In times of heat waves or droughts, the availability of water for cooling purposes may be limited, which can lead to cooling problems. However, such extreme events will become more frequent due to climate change.” In France, where the majority of nuclear reactors are cooled with river water, there have been increasing number of failures in recent years.

According to Uba, uranium mining also causes increased uranium and radium pollution in water bodies and small parts of rock. Radioactive dust and radon gas endanger workers and residents of uranium mines.

But supporters of nuclear power say it is at least CO2 neutral?

That is not right. When producing electricity from nuclear power, only small amounts of the climate-damaging gas CO2 are produced, but greenhouse gases are produced in large quantities, especially before and after electricity production. If you look at the entire life cycle – from uranium mining, fuel element production, power plant construction and dismantling to final storage – the individual stages of the cycle sometimes require a lot of energy, which would result in greenhouse gases being emitted, according to Uba.

What does the responsible environmental ministry say about this?

According to the ministry, nuclear power is not an option for saving the climate because it is too slow, too dangerous and not robust against climate change. With electricity from wind and sun, there has long been a much better, more climate-friendly and cheaper alternative.

Environment Minister Steffi Lemke (Greens) also warns of “exploding costs of actually building all new nuclear power plants.” Their concern is that the construction and use of reactors could become very expensive for consumers. And then it doesn’t even include the costs for the final and interim storage of nuclear waste. “But the garbage has to go somewhere at the end of the day,” says Lemke.

Where is nuclear waste disposed of?

In so-called final repositories, in which the radioactive waste is to be stored safely over very long periods of time. According to Uba, there is currently no final repository in Germany or in the EU that is actually in operation and could provide empirical evidence or scientific analyzes on the long-term effects of the disposal of highly radioactive waste.

How much of this radioactive waste is there in Germany?

A distinction is made between high-, medium- and low-level radioactive waste. Highly radioactive waste is usually spent fuel from nuclear power plants or research reactors. According to the Federal Office for the Safety of Nuclear Waste Management (BASE), these only make up 5 percent of the total volume of radioactive waste, but they account for 99 percent of the activity.

But the disposal of low- and medium-level radioactive waste – for example contaminated parts from the dismantling of nuclear power plants such as parts of the generator – also poses challenges for those responsible. According to BASE estimates, there are around 620,000 cubic meters of it in Germany – the volume roughly corresponds to the contents of more than 200 Olympic swimming pools.

Can’t the waste just stay in the interim storage facilities?

Only final repositories in deep geological layers are considered a permanently safe solution. “Concrete, barbed wire and guards” cannot replace this, says BASE President Wolfram König. Deep rocks provide a natural barrier that protects against radiation.