The Spanish Nuclear Society, SNE, has consistently maintained that energy should not be considered a weapon riddled with half-truths and ideology. Once again, we wish to set out our proven and published arguments, placing truth at the forefront, and request that decisions be made in accordance with these criteria.
As we have previously stated in this editorial, the decision regarding the energy future of our country should be based on technical criteria, with the aim of contributing to the fight against global warming, maintaining competitive prices (including for new projects) and ensuring security of supply.
Time and again, we have emphasized that the nuclear professionals represented by the SNE defend the continued operation of all Spanish nuclear power plants, including Almaraz NPP. We have repeatedly called for dialogue and decision-making processes that guarantee the continued operation of these facilities, which are in perfect condition.
Ignoring the activity of any of the nuclear groups operating in Spain would result in a significant loss of high capacity, frequency and voltage control in the electricity system. This would occur at a time of uncertainty surrounding the timely completion of renewable and storage projects, and when the market is subject to economic, regulatory, market and geopolitical fluctuations. These factors can influence market prices, which affect what consumers pay. We provide certainty and reliability, as opposed to theoretical scenarios on paper.
Let us put this issue on the table for open discussion and debate. We should consider what immediate and realistic alternatives exist today to replace the energy generated by the Almaraz NPP and other nuclear power plants in Spain. We should also consider the real impact of losing these facilities.
Almaraz NPP and other Spanish nuclear power plants provide reliable energy, do not emit greenhouse gases and ensure the security of the electricity supply by regulating grid frequency and voltage. This is important in a context of increasing electrification. Discontinuing their use prematurely would require them to be replaced, at least partially, by more expensive or higher-emission technologies, thereby jeopardising the security of supply. While paper may be able to bear anything, it will be us, the citizens, who will have to deal with this new reality: a possible future without nuclear power plants in our country, with no clear explanation of how this will affect us.
A limited and conditional extension, such as the one being requested, is a prudent option for ensuring supply and price stability. If we are to be listened to, an orderly transition that is fair to people and the environment — as well as taking into account other geopolitical and geostrategic considerations — should not exclude nuclear energy.
