The Nuclear Comeback of Europe
Why Brussels is reopening the nuclear option in the race for climate neutrality and strategic autonomy
For years, nuclear power was the black sheep of European climate policy — a legacy technology many policymakers hoped to phase out sooner rather than later. But as geopolitical winds shift and the continent’s electricity system strains under the pressure of the energy transition, a remarkable policy pivot is unfolding in Brussels. Under the leadership of Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission is no longer merely tolerating nuclear energy; it is cautiously re-embracing it.
The change reflects a broader reassessment of Europe’s energy security. The war in Ukraine, the collapse of Russian gas imports and growing concerns about grid stability have forced policymakers to rethink the balance between renewable expansion and reliable base-load electricity. At the center of this new debate is a technology that, until recently, existed largely in theoretical designs and pilot projects: Small Modular Reactors.
“Nuclear energy is available around the clock, providing electricity all year. The nuclear tech race is on. Europe has been a pioneer in nuclear technology. And it can lead again.”
Ursula von der Leyen
President, European Commission
Source: Speech at the Nuclear Energy Summit, Brussels (March 2024)
Her statement signals a subtle but consequential shift in Europe’s energy narrative. Instead of framing nuclear power as an inconvenient relic of the twentieth century, the Commission increasingly portrays it as a strategic tool — one capable of stabilizing the electricity system while the continent rapidly expands wind and solar capacity.
A Strategic Recalibration
Europe’s climate ambitions remain among the most ambitious in the world. Through the European Green Deal, the EU aims to reach climate neutrality by 2050 while dramatically reducing emissions already by 2030. Wind and solar power are expected to carry most of that transformation. Yet the reality of an electricity system dominated by intermittent energy sources has created new challenges.
Renewable energy generation fluctuates with weather patterns. Long periods of low wind or limited sunlight — the so-called “Dunkelflaute” phenomenon — can leave electricity systems under strain. In such moments, the grid requires reliable sources capable of providing constant power.
For decades, that role was filled largely by coal and natural gas plants. Today, however, the EU is trying to phase out both for climate reasons. Nuclear energy has therefore re-entered the conversation as a potential stabilizing force within a largely renewable energy system.
The debate is far from settled. Across Europe, governments remain divided over the role nuclear power should play in the future energy mix.
A Divided Continent
Few policy areas reveal Europe’s internal tensions as clearly as nuclear energy. Some governments see reactors as indispensable for maintaining stable electricity supplies during the energy transition. Others view them as an expensive distraction from renewable expansion.
“Nuclear power is not competitive. It is too expensive and takes far too long to build. Our focus should be on expanding renewable energy, which is faster and more affordable.”
Olaf Scholz
Federal Chancellor of Germany
Source: Interview with Deutschlandfunk on Germany’s energy security strategy
Germany’s nuclear phase-out — completed in 2023 — represents the most prominent example of anti-nuclear policy within the EU. Berlin argues that renewable energy, supported by storage technologies and grid expansion, can provide a cleaner and more cost-effective path toward decarbonization.
Other countries strongly disagree.
France, which generates roughly seventy percent of its electricity from nuclear power, views the technology as a cornerstone of both its energy system and its industrial strategy. The French government has actively promoted a nuclear renaissance across Europe.
“There can be no credible decarbonisation strategy in Europe without nuclear power. It is a pillar of our energy sovereignty. Nuclear power is part of Europe’s climate solution.”
Emmanuel Macron
President of France
Source: Press conference on the France 2030 investment strategy
For Paris, nuclear energy is not merely a climate instrument; it is also a geopolitical asset. Maintaining a strong nuclear sector ensures energy independence while supporting a powerful industrial ecosystem led by companies such as Électricité de France.
This divergence between nuclear supporters and opponents has created one of the most persistent fault lines in European energy policy.
The Promise of Small Modular Reactors
At the heart of the renewed nuclear debate lies a technological concept designed to address many of the traditional criticisms of nuclear power: cost, construction time and project risk.
Small Modular Reactors differ significantly from the large nuclear plants built during the twentieth century. Instead of massive, bespoke infrastructure projects that can take over a decade to complete, SMRs are designed as standardized units that can be manufactured in factories and assembled on site.
In theory, this modular approach could dramatically reduce construction time and financial risk. A typical SMR produces up to roughly 300 megawatts of electricity — far less than the 1,000-plus megawatts of traditional reactors — but multiple units can be combined to match larger power stations.
Advocates argue that this flexibility opens new possibilities. SMRs could be installed near industrial clusters, integrated into hydrogen production systems or deployed in regions where large nuclear plants would be impractical.
“Nuclear energy, alongside wind and solar, is a necessary component to keep our energy system affordable, reliable and CO₂-free. Small Modular Reactors could offer new opportunities for industry.”
Sophie Hermans
Minister for Climate and Green Growth, Netherlands
Source: Parliamentary letter on the progress of nuclear new-build projects (2024)
Several European countries — including the Netherlands, Poland and Romania — are already exploring SMR deployment as part of their future energy strategies.
Yet the technology remains largely unproven at commercial scale.
Critics Warn of a Costly Detour
Environmental groups and some energy economists argue that SMRs may arrive too late — and at too high a cost — to play a meaningful role in Europe’s near-term climate targets.
“Small Modular Reactors are a dangerous distraction from the real solutions. We don’t have time to wait for unproven technologies when wind and solar are ready to scale today.”
Markus Trilling
Campaigner, Climate Action Network Europe
Source: Response to the launch of the EU SMR Industrial Alliance
Critics point out that no SMR design has yet demonstrated large-scale commercial deployment in Europe. Even optimistic timelines place widespread adoption well into the 2030s.
Others raise long-standing concerns about nuclear waste, safety risks, and financial viability.
“Nuclear energy is not ‘green’. The problem of radioactive waste remains unsolved for generations. It’s an expensive detour on the road to a 100% renewable future.”
Leonore Gewessler
Minister for Climate Action, Environment and Energy, Austria
Source: Statement during EU taxonomy negotiations at the COP climate summit
These objections highlight a broader dilemma confronting European policymakers: how to balance long-term technological innovation with the urgent need to cut emissions this decade.
The Supply Chain Question
Beyond the technological debate lies a deeper geopolitical dimension. Nuclear energy is not only about power plants; it also involves complex supply chains for uranium mining, fuel processing and reactor technology.
Europe’s effort to reduce reliance on Russian fossil fuels has also exposed vulnerabilities in nuclear fuel supply chains. Several EU member states still depend on Russian enrichment services or fuel assemblies for their existing reactors.
As Brussels promotes a new generation of nuclear technologies, it is simultaneously seeking to diversify these supply chains through partnerships with countries such as Canada, the United States and Kazakhstan.
This effort underscores a broader shift in European policy thinking: energy systems are no longer viewed purely through the lens of climate policy. They are increasingly understood as strategic infrastructure.
The Bigger Question
Whether nuclear power will ultimately reclaim a central role in Europe’s energy system remains uncertain. The economics of SMRs are still evolving, public opinion remains divided, and renewable technologies continue to advance rapidly.
Yet one thing is clear: the political conversation has fundamentally changed.
For decades, the European debate centered on how quickly nuclear energy should disappear. Today, the question has become whether the continent can achieve its climate ambitions — and maintain its strategic autonomy — without it.
As the next article in this series will explore, the success or failure of Europe’s nuclear comeback may ultimately depend on whether technologies like Small Modular Reactors can move from ambitious concept to industrial reality.
This article is part of the series Europe’s Nuclear Comeback, exploring the shifting role of nuclear power in Europe’s energy transition. Read the full series here:
https://altairmedia.eu/europes-nuclear-comeback/
Photo credit:
Illustration generated by AI / ChatGPT (OpenAI), 2026.
Caption:
Illustration depicting the political divide within Europe over the role of nuclear energy in the energy transition, with EU leadership at the center and competing national strategies shaping the debate over the future of Small Modular Reactors and renewable energy.
