• 3 minutes e-car sales collapse
  • 6 minutes America Is Exceptional in Its Political Divide
  • 11 minutes Perovskites, a ‘dirt cheap’ alternative to silicon, just got a lot more efficient
  • 8 days The United States produced more crude oil than any nation, at any time.
  • 15 hours Could Someone Give Me Insights on the Future of Renewable Energy?
  • 1 hour How Far Have We Really Gotten With Alternative Energy


The leading economics blog online covering financial issues, geopolitics and trading.

More Info

Premium Content

Switzerland Scrambles To Keep Nuclear Plants Online

  • Europe’s energy crisis is pushing Switzerland to rethink its stance on nuclear power.
  • The country has been planning on closing its five reactors since the 2017 Fukushima disaster.
  • Swiss politicians are now scrambling to keep its nuclear plants online.
Switzerland Nuclear

Switzerland is the latest country to get on board the "nuclear power before country-wide blackouts" trend, following in the recent footsteps of countries like Germany. In fact, a group of Swiss politicians has launched a petition with the intent of revising the country's energy policy to keep nuclear as part of the mix, as a way to guarantee having enough power going forward.  The country had planned to close its 5 nuclear reactors after a decision was made post-Fukushima in 2017. it has already shut down one reactor. 

Now, politicians are trying to gather the 100,000 signatures necessary for a referendum to change the country's constitution and prevent nuclear from being shut out. Outcomes can take years to be put into effect after signatures are gathered, Reuters wrote this week

The politician group, called "Stop Blackouts" said this week: "Until recently, Switzerland had safe and virtually CO?-free electricity production: the environmentally and climate-friendly combination of hydro and nuclear power is to be abandoned for no reason at all."

President of the committee Vanessa Meury said: "We cannot do without nuclear power plants." 

Like Germany, Switzerland is also dealing with potential energy shortages as a result of the Russian war in Ukraine. It has already mulled the idea of four-hour regional blackouts in the case of shortages. 

As we noted days ago in a piece by Felicity Bradstock at OilPrice.com, an unjustified fear of nuclear energy is preventing the industry from moving forward.

Related: IAEA Close To Deal With Russia, Ukraine To Inspect Shelled Nuclear Plant

It pointed out that despite a lack of public understanding of nuclear technology, meaning that it can sometimes be confused with nuclear weapons, there was a general optimism around nuclear energy when it first emerged several decades ago. It seems that the current negative public perception of nuclear power stems mainly from the nuclear disasters that were seen around the world in real-time. 

Although relatively few died during these incidents compared to deaths worldwide from other energy operations, the incidents were widely televised and the fear of the unknown spread rapidly. 

The piece also postulated that perhaps the only way to improve public perception of nuclear energy is through re-education that highlights the relative safety of the technology compared to other energy operations.

In addition, as the public and international organizations put pressure on state governments to go green, better marketing of nuclear energy could help shift the public perception, as people begin to see the carbon-free energy source as necessary for a green future. However, for now, governments are feeling the mounting pressure to ‘get it right’, with the potential for any mishap to add to the long-term demonization of nuclear power. 


By Zerohedge.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:

Download The Free Oilprice App Today

Back to homepage

Leave a comment
  • DoRight Deikins on September 01 2022 said:
    «there was a general optimism around nuclear energy when it first emerged several decades ago» It's true there was a general optimism about nuclear energy and the use of radiation in all sorts of uses 50 years ago. But ...

    Have you ever sat with someone who has had recurring cancer due to excessive radiation? I have.

    Sure it hasn't killed them - yet. But sooner or later it will, as it continues to destroy their body and their organs. It is not a pretty way to die. And it is usually attributed to other causes like pancreatic cancer.

    Many years ago, radiation was the solution to everything. It was the wonder drug. It was even used to treat acne. Yet since that time, they have even found elevated cases of cancer due to naturally occurring radon gas in the Appalachians (especially in those houses where people spent considerable time in their basements). And you want to increase the amount of radiation, perhaps catastrophically?

    Count me out. I think we can do without more radiation in the environment. Give me more CO2 any day. My orchard and ground crops are loving it.

    But maybe I'm being too negative. Think of all that land near the next nuclear accident that will be available to put solar and wind power, since it will be useless for anything else.

Leave a comment

EXXON Mobil -0.35
Open57.81 Trading Vol.6.96M Previous Vol.241.7B
BUY 57.15
Sell 57.00
Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News