Greta Thunberg Changes Tune on Nuclear Power as Europe Faces Historic Energy Crisis

Steam gushes out of the cooling tower of the Isar 2 nuclear power plant in Essenbach, Germany, on Sept. 13, 2022. (Jan Woitas/dpa via AP)

Commentary

Greta Thunberg made headlines this month after criticizing Germany’s plan to close its remaining nuclear power plants.

In an interview with German journalist and television host Sandra Maischberger, the 19-year-old climate activist was asked if shutting down Germany’s remaining nuclear plants was a bad idea.

“It depends. If we have them already running, I feel its a mistake to close them down in order to focus on coal,” Thunberg responded.

“But then close them down as soon as possible?” Maischberger asked.

“It depends. We don’t know what will happen after this,” Thunberg replied.

This may not sound like a full-throated endorsement of nuclear power, but it’s a clear change from the few previous public statements Thunberg has made on nuclear energy.

“Personally I am against nuclear power,” Thunberg said in 2019, though she conceded that the United Nations says “it can be a small part” of a carbon-free solution.

Things have changed since 2019. As winter approaches, Europe is facing a historic energy crisis that has sparked economic turmoil, social unrest, and fear.

Just this week 100,000 people descended on the streets of France demanding higher wages to cover the costs of surging energy bills, leading to clashes with police and broken store windows. The protests followed similar scenes of unrest in Berlin, Leipzig, and Potsdam organized by unions and environmentalists under the slogan, “Enough is enough. We won’t freeze for profits.”

Profits are not to blame, however. A lack of supply is the problem.

European countries in recent years have shifted away from energy production, becoming reliant on imported energy, particularly from Russia, which supplied 40 percent of Europe’s natural gas prior to the invasion of Ukraine, mostly by pipeline. Shipments of natural gas have fallen by roughly 90 percent, largely because of Russian trade machinations and the halt of supply from the Nord Stream 1 pipeline.

As a result, prices have surged. In August future gas prices on the continent’s leading trading hub hit 321 euros per megawatt-hour ($313). A year ago it was 27 euros ($26), meaning this was a more than ten-fold increase. Many European families can no longer afford to pay their energy bills, and key businesses have been crippled by the high prices—which is why European leaders are flirting with price controls.

Price controls can’t solve the underlying problem, however—a shortage of energy—and will almost certainly make the shortage worse because they will increase demand and discourage supply. This is where the fear comes in.

Facing an energy shortage, surging prices, and the specter of price controls, the prospect of a winter catastrophe is a real possibility. In England and Wales alone, an estimated 28,300 excess winter deaths (pdf) occur in a given season; for all of Europe, it’s more than 220,000. This is in winters without an energy crisis.

Which brings us back to Greta. It may not be a coincidence that Thunberg suddenly is singing the praises of nuclear power. Europe’s efforts to replace fossil fuels and nuclear plants with the “green” energies Thunberg has championed have proven disastrous, and not just economically.

In their haste to “quit” fossil fuels and wean themselves off nuclear energy, European leaders gorged themselves on Russia’s fossil fuels, placing themselves at the mercy of Vladimir Putin, and jeopardizing the welfare of their own people.

Fortunately, like Thunberg, many countries around the world are taking notice. From France to Japan to progressive California and beyond, nuclear power is making a comeback.

The move makes sense. The global population will soon hit 8 billion, and it will require vast amounts of energy to sustain. The reality is the modern world cannot exist without fossil fuels, but if the goal is to transition off them—as many propose—nuclear power must be part of the solution.

The fact that Thunberg recognizes this matters.

As Maischberger notes in her interview, for better or worse the young climate activist has become “an icon for millions of teenagers and adults.” She was Time magazine’s Person of the Year in 2019.

One can question the prudence of a culture that turns a teenager into an icon in this fashion, but there’s no denying Thunberg’s influence. For this reason, her admission that nuclear power should be part of humanity’s energy future is no small matter.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.