Europe Pushes Ahead with Revival of Nuclear Power

LONDON — The nuclear industry in the United States is beginning to show signs of life after years of lying dormant, but is still weighed down by concerns over accidents, waste disposal, and the possibility that fuel might wind up in terrorists' hands.

For inspiration, America needs only to look to Europe, where nuclear energy is increasingly being seen as the only way to tackle the twin problems of climate change and energy security.

After years of resistance, the British government last month gave the go-ahead for a new generation of nuclear power stations. As many as 10 new reactors are in the works. Around the world, up to 90 nuclear reactors are being planned, many of them in Europe.

Adam McCarthy, associate director of Energy Policy Consulting in Brussels, said "there is a growing realization that nuclear will have to be part of the energy solution for Europe."

He said the main driver is the desire among Europeans, who tend to be more environment-minded than Americans, to reduce the carbon emissions that cause global warming. Another factor is rising oil and gas prices.

The situation marks a U-turn in European attitudes. After the Chernobyl accident in the Ukraine in 1986, much of the continent lost its taste for nuclear energy. Italy banned construction of new nuclear reactors, while Spain, Sweden, and Germany pledged to phase out theirs.

It has now been about two decades since a reactor has been built in Western Europe outside of nuclear stalwarts such as France and Finland. Only about 30 percent of Europe's electricity is produced by nuclear plants, versus about 20 percent in the United States.

But a burgeoning reliance on nuclear power is likely here.

Widespread media coverage of a new generation of reactors that are safer and cleaner than existing reactors has helped alleviate fears. New reactors will boast features such as water-filled basins that would capture and cool the core in the event of an accident.

The new reactors also will create less waste — perhaps only one-tenth of that generated by current reactors, according to some estimates.

"Public concerns about safety seem to be less of an issue due to the long and excellent track record of safe operations," said Gilbert Brown, coordinator of the Nuclear Engineering Program at the University of Massachusetts at Lowell. "Waste issues are addressed in Europe by countries pursuing deep geologic sequestration."

Even concerns over nuclear material falling into the wrong hands are lessening as a result of the International Atomic Energy Agency's safeguards.

Striving to be a leader in the fight against climate change, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown did an about-face when he agreed to refresh the country's nuclear reactors.

New reactors would be financed by private companies, while taxpayers may be called upon to foot the bill of waste disposal.

Nuclear reactors currently supply nearly 20 percent of Britain's electricity. But as they age, all but one of the country's 19 reactors will have to be taken out of commission by 2023.

The government chose not to replace that generating capacity with carbon-spewing coal and gas plants, especially with the European Commission proposing that the European Union slash carbon emissions by 20 percent by 2020 compared to 1990 levels.

"Our carbon emissions are going up 2 percent every year and the public is growing concerned," said John McNamara, a spokesman for the Nuclear Industry Association in London. "Polls show that 65 percent of the public now believes nuclear should be part of the energy mix."

Polls also show a growing appetite for nuclear energy in Italy, Sweden, and Germany.

Perhaps if there is still one remaining worry in Europe over nuclear energy, it is the disposal of the radioactive waste — and even that worry is being addressed, said Luis Echavarri, director general of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development's Nuclear Energy Agency in Paris.

"Waste has always been a worry, but countries are dealing with it," he said.

In France, where nuclear energy provides 78 percent of electricity, much of the waste is reprocessed and turned into energy again.

In Finland, where the private company TVO is building the world's largest nuclear reactor scheduled to open in 2011, a repository is being built deep in the earth.

In Britain, too, a government advisory committee has found that the best long-term solution is to bury waste deep in the ground.

"We feel the best long-term solution is deep repositories in stable geological formations," Echavarri said. "The problem is that the populations around repository sights often don't like the idea. But putting waste a mile underground is the safest way to dispose of it, and the public is being educated on this."

While new reactor designs offer hope of easing fears of catastrophic accidents in the United States, the waste issue remains an obstacle.

The United States has shied away from reprocessing because of fears it could lead to nuclear weapons proliferation. And progress on a planned repository at Nevada's Yucca Mountain has slowed to a crawl in the face of strong opposition.

Some European environmentalists, too, have yet to be convinced of the merits of nuclear energy.

"There are still no firm answers to the safety and waste issues," said Lisa Weatherley, a spokeswoman for Greenpeace UK. "Britain can meet its energy needs through renewables and decentralized energy, whereas nuclear power will cut our CO2 emission by only 4 percent."

Jim Green, nuclear campaigner for Friends of the Earth Australia, a federation of environmental groups, said that — as in the United States — there is still no permanent repository for high-level nuclear waste anywhere in Europe.

"Finland and Sweden have made some progress but are still some years — perhaps decades — from having a functional high-level nuclear waste repository," he said. "And any reductions in waste volumes from new reactor types would be marginal.

"More nuclear energy is not the answer," he said.