It is curious to see how some people preach one thing, but do the opposite. Something to which, unfortunately, we are very used to from a certain political class. They never tire of theatricalizing that the climate emergency is going to wipe out the planet but, at the same time, they oppose many of the solutions that would help alleviate that supposed emergency. Their strategy consists of fabricating an alibi to reject any hint of a solution in order to perpetuate a discourse that postulates a catastrophic situation from which only they can save us. The syndrome of the savior of the world, so venerated nowadays by those who seem to have a need to be saved.
A few days ago I had the opportunity to "enjoy" a hyperinflationary society, such as Argentina. How a wonderful country, full of natural resources, could have become what it is would be the subject of countless articles, but that is not my task today. There I had the opportunity to talk to one of the managers of the public company that operates Argentina's nuclear power plants. He stated that the production costs of his plants are public and stand at around 25 E/MWh. This number is consistent with that published by the U.S. government for its almost 100 nuclear power plants, with an average price in 2021 of 23 $/MWh. One plant in particular (Surry, Virginia) has had average costs of $19/MWh for the last ten years.
Spanish nuclear power plants operate with costs much higher than these costs, although their natural costs should be very similar to those of Argentina or the United States. However, the fiscal asphyxiation to which our nuclear assets are subjected endangers their continuity. Perhaps it is nothing more than a strategy, to strangle nuclear power plants with taxes so that their owners decide to close them and thus be able to exclaim: "You see how nuclear energy is not profitable?
Now, this modus operandi does not rationally fit with the narrative of urgency in the energy transition. Nuclear energy does not emit greenhouse gases and is clean energy, as the European Union decreed months ago. Despite the huge investment in renewable energies that humanity has been deploying over the last twenty years, solar or wind energy have not yet been able to reach the electricity production of nuclear power plants worldwide. Eliminating nuclear energy would be like never having installed a windmill or a solar panel. It would be to retrace the steps in the right direction. It would be an exercise in unworthy stupidity. It would be, after all, politics.
Nuclear power is better. Not only is it better, but it is absolutely essential and without it there will be no energy transition. All the world's leading countries are building new nuclear power plants. Only Germany and Spain are off the train. We always bet on a losing horse and in the end, of course, we will always pay for it.