Right in the middle of a relentless political and business battle to extend the life of the Spanish atomic park, the harsh reality of the market has imposed itself. While top executives discuss the long-term future, the present has hit the table: the owner of the Almaraz II nuclear power plant notified the Nuclear Safety Council (CSN) of an unscheduled shutdown of its reactor and its decoupling from the electrical grid.
The alarms did not go off due to a security problem. In fact, the incident was classified as level 0 (no significance for security) on the international INES scale, to which we have had access. The real reason was purely economic and motivated by causes related to the electricity market. As explained The Extremadura Newspaper, The recent succession of storms triggered renewable production —sinking electricity prices— which, added to an “unaffordable tax burden” that represents more than 75% of its variable costs, made it completely unfeasible to keep the reactor on.
The recent pulse: from disconnection to extension
This disconnection collides head-on with the intense corporate movements of recent weeks. At the end of October, Iberdrola, Endesa and Naturgy presented to the Executive a formal request to postpone until June 2030 the closure of Almaraz, whose two reactors were scheduled to be disconnected for 2027 and 2028.
But the ambition of the sector does not stop in Cáceres. According to Five Daysthe president of Iberdrola, Ignacio Sánchez Galán, has confirmed that they will request the expansion of other plants in the future, ensuring that “most of them can reach 60 and even 80 years.”
This position is supported by technical and logistical arguments from the industry. As detailed in The Economistthe CEO of Endesa, José Bogas, aspires to prolong “in round numbers about 10 more years” the entire Spanish nuclear park. Bogas argues that it does not make logistical sense to proceed with the complex dismantling of two groups of the same plant on different dates (2027 and 2028). Meanwhile, the CSN is already analyzing the documentation to issue its mandatory report, foreseeably in summer, as reported in a press release from the regulator itself.
The possible extension of Almaraz has opened a huge gap between two irreconcilable visions of the energy transition. In the block of those who defend extending atomic life, economic and labor arguments set the pace. According to the statements of Ignacio Sánchez Galán collected by Vozpópulinuclear power plants are a key element in reducing the price of electricity. In fact, the president of Iberdrola recalls that European countries that lack this type of energy, such as Italy and Germany, pay “about 20 euros more” per megawatt hour for electricity compared to Spain and France.
Added to this defense of competitiveness is the warning about the direct impact on the final consumer’s pocket. A recent report from the OBS Business School alert that if Almaraz closesthe inevitable dependence on gas would increase the electricity bill by around 23% for households – between 150 and 250 euros more per year – and up to 35% for industry. Beyond the receipt, there is the territorial factor. The College of Industrial Engineers, in statements to The Energy Newspaperremember that this plant not only generates 7% of the electricity in all of Spain, complying with the highest international safety standards (WANO 1), but is also a vital economic engine to sustain 4,000 direct and indirect jobs that stop depopulation in the region.
However, against this position stands a solid wall of detractors who see the extension as an imminent danger for the green transition. A joint investigation by the Rey Juan Carlos University (URJC) and the Polytechnic University of Catalonia (UPC), prepared on behalf of Greenpeaceconcludes that extending Almaraz for just three years would mean “momentary relief, structural damage.” Researchers calculate that this decision would cost consumers a cumulative extra cost of 3,831 million euros between now and 2033 and would stop up to 26,129 million euros in investments destined for new clean energies.
From Greenpeace they also point to the so-called “plug effect”: since nuclear is an inflexible technology that produces fixed gear regardless of demand, it often forces us to disconnect or waste renewable energy—free and clean—in times of high sun or wind. This situation generates a climate of enormous concern in the green sector. In an interview with InfoLibrePedro Fresco, general director of the Valencian renewable employer association Avaesen, warns that granting a “mini-extension” of three years would be the worst possible scenario. In his opinion, this movement would send a message of total uncertainty to investors, threatening to stop the development of future renewable projects in its tracks.
The “Domino Effect”: rewriting the energy map
The true background of this battle is that Almaraz is not an isolated piece. As several experts warn he Vigo Lighthouse and andl Newspaper of Extremaduradelaying the closure of the Cáceres plant would unleash an unstoppable “domino effect” throughout the national territory.
If Almaraz is delayed to 2030, its closure would coincide in time with that of Ascó I (Tarragona) and Cofrentes (Valencia). The electricity companies assume that the Government would also have to postpone these closures to avoid overlapping the gigantic and complex work of dismantling four reactors simultaneously. This would also force the closures of Ascó II, Vandellós II and Trillo to be pushed well beyond 2035, blowing up the current National Integrated Energy and Climate Plan (PNIEC).
The final decision is in the hands of the Executive, which for the moment maintains its position. The Government has marked three non-negotiable red lines to accept any change: that it guarantees radiological safety, security of supply and, above all, that it does not cost consumers an extra euro or imply tax reductions for electricity companies.
And this is where the circle closes. As Galán insists on Vozpópulithe plants bear an enormous tax burden of “30-35 euros per megawatt hour.” Without a tax reduction, electricity companies threaten economic viability; but without profitability, it is the market itself that, as happened in the early hours of March 3, expels the reactors by turning them off naturally.
Image | Nuclear Forum
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings