Operator Engie sees no point in ‘stretching’ the lifespan of some Belgian nuclear reactors. Those scenarios are on the government’s table to avoid a power shortage in the coming winters. “Impossible within the current nuclear safety regulations,” it sounds decidedly.
On Wednesday, the core cabinet of the federal government, supplemented by Minister of Energy Tinne Van der Straeten (Groen), will discuss a new risk analysis on the security of supply in our country. This shows that there is a threat of a power shortage in the coming winters because the availability of the nuclear park in France is assumed to be lower. Especially in the winter of 2025-2026 – when all Belgian nuclear reactors are at least temporarily switched off – there is a threat of a major power shortage.
To deal with this, various scenarios are on the government’s table. For example, energy minister Van der Straeten is in favor of a so-called ‘fuel extension’ of nuclear reactors Doel 4 and Tihange 3. The reactors will run on a lower back burner in the summer in order to save the nuclear fuel for the winter of 2025-2026. According to the current planning, Doel 4 and Tihange 3 would be at a standstill at that time to carry out safety works necessary for the lifespan extension to 2035, which the government is currently negotiating with operator Engie. (see chart)
“We can keep Doel 4 and Tihange 3 running after 2025,” says Groen co-chair Jeremie Vaneeckhout. “To extend the lifespan, we can run the plants in the winter at peak times. In the summer they can then lie still for the necessary works.” The Greens refer to this as a “2+10” scenario: two years of operation only in winter, followed by an effective life extension of 10 years. Another option that is circulating, but which is therefore not favored by the Greens, is to extend the the lifespan of the three older power stations Tihange 1, Doel 1 and Doel 2. Here too, the power stations would only operate in the winter, so that they can remain operational for longer.
“Nuclear Safety”
However, whether these are realistic scenarios remains to be seen. “Officially, we have not yet been informed of this new report or of the scenarios that are on the table,” says Engie spokeswoman Hellen Smeets. “So we cannot comment in detail. However, we can state that the theoretical concept of ‘fuel extension’ is simply not possible within the current nuclear safety regulations. We follow a 10-year operating cycle where we must demonstrate that we can safely operate our units for 10 years. You can’t just go for an extra winter. That’s not how nuclear safety works.”
The FANC, which monitors nuclear safety, also points out that a series of safety checks and works are necessary before the reactors can be safely extended. Which raises questions about the timing needed to deal with the looming power shortage in the troubled winter of 2025-2026. “We have not yet received an official question about a fuel extension or other new scenarios,” it sounds. “Only when the government does this or the operator submits a proposal can we look at it and assess it in terms of nuclear safety. In any case, it is clear that the necessary safety works must be carried out, whether it is a two-year or ten-year extension. The later this is started, the later those reactors will be ready for extension. That goes without saying.”
Power shortage looms in winter of 2025-2026, government is considering ‘fuel extension’ of reactors: what is that? Can it be done safely? And isn’t it too late? (+)
Extension nuclear power plants back on the federal government table: this is the stake in 5 questions (+)
Free unlimited access to Showbytes? Which can!
Log in or create an account and don’t miss a thing of the stars.