- The COP26 summit created an open and enthusiastic environment for nuclear energy promoters and suppliers.
- This was not common in the past because they felt avoided at these UN meetings.
- It seems that as the climate crisis worsens, the need to get rid of old fossil fuels has become urgent.
For more than two decades, promoters and providers of nuclear energy have felt shunned at the UN Climate Change Conference.
However, the top UN nuclear regulator told AFP that they were welcomed with open arms at the COP26 summit in Glasgow.
The ghosts of Chernobyl and Fukushima, as well as the persistent problem of nuclear waste, keep the energy generated by splitting atoms aside, even if the energy is actually carbon-free.
But as the climate crisis deepens and the urgent need to get rid of fossil fuels, people’s attitudes may change.
Rafael Mariano Grossi, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said in an interview:
Nuclear energy is part of the solution to global warming, and there is no way to bypass it. It already accounts for a quarter of the world’s “clean” (ie carbon-free) energy. This COP is my first time sitting at the table. The wind direction is changing.
Scientists say that even if there is a 50/50 chance of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius higher than pre-industrial levels-this is the threshold of a dangerous tipping point that may trigger uncontrolled warming-global greenhouse gas emissions must be within ten years Reduced by nearly half.
But things are still moving in the wrong direction: A report on Thursday stated that emissions in 2021 are approaching record levels.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) warns that by 2023, they may reach new heights.
This helps to refocus attention on the nucleus.
“At the Paris Conference of the Parties in 2015, nuclear energy was unpopular,” said Callum Thomas, head of the nuclear industry recruitment company, who was spotted wearing a T-shirt at COP26 that said “Let’s talk about nuclear energy.” .
“Some people think it is not necessary. Many countries are now studying the feasibility, especially in the case of rising natural gas prices.”
‘Never stop’
Since taking the helm of the IAEA two years ago, the Argentine diplomat Grosi has been a tireless advocate of the industry.
At his first COP in Madrid, he “despite the general belief that nuclear is unpopular.”
In contrast, in Glasgow, where nearly 200 countries are still working to add luster to the backbone of the 2015 Paris Agreement, he said that “nuclear is not only popular, it has aroused a lot of interest”.
Grossi believes that this technology can not only accelerate the transition from fossil fuels, but also promote research on technologies needed to adapt to climate impacts, from finding drought-resistant crops to eliminating mosquitoes.
He admitted that this would bring serious risks.
In 2011, the three reactors of the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan melted down after the earthquake and tsunami, which deeply shook people’s confidence in nuclear energy.
Read | Rich countries must pay the price to save the planet
The industry has not yet found a way to deal with nuclear waste, which is still highly radioactive for thousands of years.
But Grossi said that these issues are not disqualified. He believes that statistically speaking, the negative impact of this technology is less than many other forms of energy.
It can also be used as a supplement to renewable energy.
“Nuclear energy has been running non-stop throughout the year, and it will never stop,” he said.
Even so, with the extension of construction time, many people believe that it is too late to build enough nuclear energy to effectively join the fight against global warming.
But Grossi said that he believes that part of the answer lies in maintaining the normal operation of existing reactors.
A 100-year-old reactor?
He said that many power plants that have been designed and operated for 40 years are now licensed for 60 years in accordance with the strict national safety standards supervised by the IAEA.
“What could be more efficient than the facility you built that can provide you with energy for nearly 100 years?” he said.
He admitted that a factory that has been running for such a long time may be “a bit provocative.”
“But it is still possible.”
In their predictions on how to limit the rise in global temperature while meeting the growing global energy demand, the IEA considers all non-carbon sources.
The United Nations Climate Science Advisory Group IPCC also considered nuclear energy in its model, although it stated that its deployment “may be limited by social preferences.”
Read also | U.S. Congress passes huge Biden infrastructure bill
In fact, attitudes towards nuclear power vary greatly among countries.
Although New Zealand and Germany oppose it, India is discussing the construction of the world’s largest nuclear power plant with French energy giant EDF.
At the same time, both Canada and the United States are developing so-called “small modular reactors”, although only Russia has put into production a floating reactor using this technology.
Grossi said that price is no longer an obstacle in the past.
“Countries have seen a very interesting alternative in smaller units, not in the billions, but in the hundreds of millions,” he said. “As far as energy projects are concerned, this is quite affordable.”
Don’t miss a story. Choose from our newsletter Send the news you want directly to your inbox.
