FROM THE EDITOR
capacity without newbuild
nuclear
A pivot on the value of nuclear has led to a raft of projects that will see the nuclear contribution to the energy mix continue without necessarily building new reactors.
K government backing for construction of Sizewell C to the tune of £14.2bn ($19.3bn) and the confirmation that EDF will take more than 10% stake worth more than £1bn has garnered much attention of late. Certainly, the significance
of the project should not be underestimated given that it signals a commitment to nuclear revival in the UK that could scarcely have been imagined just a few years ago. But what seems to have slipped by with rather less fanfare are a swathe of announcements that signal the true extent of Europe’s nuclear renewal and which actually represents a far more profound change. Sticking with EDF, for example, the French Authority for
Nuclear Safety & Radiation Protection (ASNR – L’Autorité de Sûreté Nucléaire et de Radioprotection) has approved a proposal to extend the life of the French 1300 MWe PWR reactor fleet. This suggests that as many as 20 units – France has a total of 56 – will now operate far beyond their initial 40-year design life. A review for each individual reactor will take place to determine what works will be necessary and the life extension work will last until 2040, but the implication is a substantail increase in French nuclear capacity without even strating on the addiotional six reactors it has planned. Meanwhile, in the Czech Republic plans are afoot to modernise the turbine halls at the four-unit Dukovany nuclear plant to extend its operational life to 60 years.
New
Work should start in 2030 and owner and operator ČEZ has noted that new technologies can reduce operating costs as well as increase equipment performance and reliability. ČEZ had already managed to increase the output of the VVER 440s to 512 Mwe each. There are also plans for significant turbine hall modernisation at the Temelín NPP, which could include replacement of the steam generators as part of a similar life extension programme. In Belgium, the Federal Agency for Nuclear Control
(FANC – Federaal Agentschap voor Nucleaire Controle) has approved the restart of unit 3 at the Tihange plant which had been shut down for extensive maintenance and upgrades with a view to operating for another decade. Tihange 3 and Doel 4 were scheduled to close in November, but both are now allowed to operate for another 10 years and the possibility of further extensions also exists. This is quite the turnaround from the nuclear phase out plan that had previuously been in place. Even European countries which have previously
abandoned nuclear power are now also looking to re-enter the club. In Lithuania, which closed the two-unit RBMK Ignalina plant as part of its accession to the European Union, is discussing the possibility of developing new nuclear capacity and has agreed to establish a working group at the Ministry of Energy. This plan will involve the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant in preparing development options. The two units at the site are expected to be fully decommissioned by 2038, but Lithuania’s National Energy Independence Strategy, which was approved last year, actually envisages a nuclear capacity of 1.5 GWe by 2050 for Lithuania.
This snapshot is hardly comprehensive but does give a
real flavour of the massive upswell in support for nuclear power. It’s seems counterintuitive that existing long-lived, clean, reliable and safe power genartion assets would be closed down prematurely, but such is the dogma that has long dogged the nuclear sector. Now, given the widespread new emphasis on life
extension and reuse of existing nuclear sites, it’s clear just how profound this change in philosophy is. Nuclear capacity doesn’t necessarily mean immediately building new reactors. Instead a rather more nuanced approach to these assets is the order of the day and evidently represents the best option to maximise their societal value. Simply put, why not? ■
David Appleyard
www.neimagazine.com | July 2025 | 3
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45
