Mar 11 - McClatchy-Tribune Regional News - Laurie Goering Chicago Tribune


A year after the Three Mile Island nuclear accident, amid panic worldwide about the safety of nuclear energy, Sweden voted to ban construction of new nuclear power plants and phase out its existing ones.

Now, like many countries across Europe, it is changing its mind. Last month, the government proposed allowing the construction of new reactors to replace the country's aging ones, which provide nearly half the nation's electricity.

Swedes have made their peace with nuclear plants, not only because memories have faded and safety records improved after 30 years, but also because reactors are seen as one of the few options available to nations wanting to rapidly slash greenhouse gas emissions.

"People shout about wind power, but it's only providing 2 percent" of Sweden's electricity, said Ake Hjort, a Swedish energy engineer. "To replace one nuclear plant you need 5,000 to 6,000 windmills. For us, it's not a question of wind power or nuclear power but the proper mix."

As the Obama administration and other governments around the world look for ways to reduce dependence on imported fossil fuels and cut greenhouse gas emissions, nuclear power is enjoying a revival, even among some of its toughest critics. And some nations where green movements once railed against nukes now are at the forefront of finding solutions to lingering problems such as long-term storage of radioactive waste.

The United States, which has more than 100 working reactors -- the world's largest number -- has 32 new plants either planned or proposed. China, in an effort to cut air pollution from coal plants and feed huge new demand for power, is building 11 reactors and laying plans for nearly 100 more.

Europe, which has focused on building renewable-energy capacity to cut greenhouse gas emissions, now acknowledges that meeting its tough targets will be nearly impossible without new nuclear plants.

"It's the only large-scale ... technology we have for zero emission power," said Ian Cronshaw, head of energy diversification for the Paris-based International Energy Agency.

Enthusiasm for nuclear power is coming from some remarkable quarters. Italy, which shut down its last two nuclear plants after the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in 1986, now plans to build eight to 10 new reactors to cut its heavy reliance on imported energy. Finland and Sweden are well on their way to building long-term nuclear waste storage.

Even oil-producing nations such as Venezuela and the United Arab Emirates are among more than 40 new nations interested in acquiring nuclear power.

The two energy giants, like Russia, "want to sell their oil and gas at nice prices to people hooked on it and not use too much domestically," said Steve Kidd, director of strategy and research for the World Nuclear Association, a London-based nuclear power lobbying group.

President Barack Obama, while promising to "safely harness nuclear power" for the U.S. energy mix, has so far shown more enthusiasm for renewable power than nuclear plants. On Thursday, his energy secretary also confirmed that a 27-year effort to build a national nuclear waste depository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada is being abandoned.

But Britain's government, which five years ago held a similarly skeptical view of nuclear power, "today realizes renewables can't do everything," Kidd said. With production from Britain's aging gas fields dropping about 8 percent a year, the country now plans to use up to six new reactors to make up some of the shortfall, Cronshaw said.

Whether the more than 370 reactors proposed or planned worldwide are ever built remains in considerable doubt, nuclear experts say. Nuclear power plants are more expensive than most fossil-fuel alternatives, and finding financing for them will prove difficult as the world grapples with widespread recession.

Long-term storage of nuclear waste also remains a serious problem. Finland and Sweden, the only countries in the world closing in on a long-term solution for high-level nuclear waste, plan to put theirs in underground bedrock tunnels but are still grappling with issues of the long-term security of the material, which will remain radioactive for a hundred thousand years.

France manages its own nuclear waste problem in part by reprocessing spent fuel, which produces new usable uranium but also, controversially, the plutonium needed for nuclear weapons.

lgoering@tribune.com

Copyright © 2008The McClatchy Company