Previously there were cabinets that wanted to build nuclear power plants. Yet they did not come. The decisions were quickly withdrawn after fierce social and political discussion. For example after the nuclear disaster in Chernobyl (1986) or the one in Fukushima (2011).
It is important that this history does not repeat itself, believes the Council for the Environment and Infrastructure (Rli), an independent advisory board for government and parliament. The current cabinet, Rutte IV, wants to prepare the construction of two new nuclear power plants, VVD, D66, CDA and ChristenUnie agreed. This time, the decision-making process should be less erratic than in the past, the RIi believes.
Not because the Rli is for or against nuclear energy – the council does not express an opinion on that. But because the energy policy must be stable, the government wants to achieve the climate goals for 2050. “If we sail a zigzag course again, if there is a delay again, we will not achieve the Paris goals,” says chairman Jan Jaap de Graeff. The advice is therefore mainly about careful decisions about nuclear energy, while the political and social discussion about it can be fierce.
The advice itself was immediately criticized on Wednesday. An external advisor who had asked the Rli to contribute ideas, Ad Louter director of uranium enricher Urenco Nederland, resigned in June because he believes the advice contains statements that are not based on facts. He fears that the advice will lead to delays and confusion. Members of the House of Representatives of the VVD and CDA also expressed in The Telegraph criticism of the report. According to the Rli, Louter’s criticism has been incorporated in the final advice.
Climate neutral
The most important decisions must be made within three years on how the energy system will be converted to a climate-neutral facility before 2050, says De Graeff. Now the cabinet is mainly focusing on solar energy and wind turbines to reduce the emission of greenhouse gas CO .2 to decrease. It should become clear in the coming years whether nuclear power stations will be added. Are there any companies that want to build such a power plant? How much subsidy and guarantees do they demand in exchange for such a decision? And where will the new power station be located? Do local residents agree?
According to Rli chairman De Graeff, the cabinet should not make hasty decisions about this new energy system. “More knowledge is needed first,” he says. For example, about the consequences of a nuclear accident for the Netherlands.
Additional information is also needed about how expensive an energy system with nuclear energy is compared to a system without. It is often said that building a nuclear power plant is expensive, but with current knowledge, the Council advises to assume that the ‘national costs’ of the energy transition with and without nuclear energy are comparable. This does not say anything about the question of whether building a nuclear power plant is profitable for energy companies.
Another lacuna according to the Rli: building a power plant takes a long time, but there is no scientific knowledge whether building that nuclear power plant will speed up or slow down the energy transition.
Also read the question: How sustainable is nuclear energy really? And can it be safer?
Variable support
So too soon is not good, but the government is in a hurry. De Graeff: “You cannot let this discussion take its course: we have less than thirty years.” And building a nuclear power plant can easily take about ten years.
Making a sustainable decision will not be easy for the cabinet. The Dutch think very differently about nuclear energy, and support can disappear quickly, just as in the past. Since Russia invaded Ukraine, fewer Dutch people are against nuclear energy, according to two polls conducted by the Rli. One at the end of 2021 and one in May 2022, after the raid. More people may find energy sources on their own soil important since Russia supplies less and less gas.
Public opinion is also changing about other forms of energy: about biomass, for example, storage of CO2 underground, and over windmills on land. But opinions differ most about nuclear energy, notes the Rli. Some are downright fans, because nuclear energy is a reliable source of energy, which takes up less space in the landscape than windmills. Others are staunch opponents, because nuclear energy is expensive and, in their view, dangerous; It doesn’t often go wrong, but when it does, it’s a disaster. In addition, there is radioactive waste that you saddle future generations with.
Yet more Dutch people now seem in favor than against. In May, 41 percent of Dutch people surveyed by Ipsos were for the promotion of nuclear energy by the Dutch government. Just as many Dutch people call themselves neutral – a surprisingly high proportion according to the Rli, given the polarized debate about nuclear energy.
Well substantiated
How do you convert an entire energy system if the support base for one or another form of energy changes all the time? The Rli thinks that by properly substantiating decisions and by discussing them with citizens.
In this way, the ‘climate council’ that the cabinet wants to set up can become a scientific intermediary in the political and social discussion. “Compare it with RIVM during the corona crisis: a scientific beacon,” says Emmy Meijers of the Rli. That council should not only include energy experts, but also ethicists, psychologists, sociologists, spatial scientists and economists.
A citizen forum can also help. The roughly 150 citizens in it should together represent the average Dutch person. Important condition: citizens must be able to have real influence on the decision. The outcome cannot be fixed. Major ethical questions must be discussed in that citizens’ deliberation. Such as: which do we find more important, the energy security that a nuclear power plant offers or exclude any risk of a nuclear accident? Do we want the energy supply to become more secure or cheaper?
According to the Rli, traditional consultation procedures offer too little space for these kinds of conversations, as there is a risk of delay and resistance later on. Now only 31 percent of the Dutch have confidence in the government when it comes to nuclear energy, Ipsos polled. “That fits with the low level of confidence in politics at the moment,” says De Graeff.
Prime Minister Rutte showed in 2021 how it should not be done. He said during a debate for the elections to the House of Representatives that the Eemshaven in Groningen would be a good place for a new nuclear power plant. There was a lot of criticism, and Rutte withdrew his suggestion. Meijers: “That underlines why we say: take these decisions carefully. Because now the whole of Groningen is against it.” Motions have now been submitted in the House of Representatives to delete Eemshaven as a possible location.