Almaraz

The backdrop couldn’t be more tense. In the midst of a climate of urgency marked by the war between the United States, Israel and Iran and the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, Europe is staring into the energy abyss. As we already analyzed in XatakaEuropean Commission President Ursula von der Leyen recently broke a historic taboo in Paris by singing the continental mea culpa, admitting that the European Union “made a strategic mistake by walking away from a reliable and affordable source of low-emission energy.” That speech by the German president, who paradoxically was part of the government that promoted atomic dismantling in her country, has not taken long to materialize in political pressure. Today, this European turn lands directly in Cáceres, turning Brussels into the great ally of Iberdrola, Endesa and Naturgy in their race against time to avoid the closure of the Almaraz nuclear power plant. Brussels supports the electricity companies’ request. In the midst of an energy storm, the European Commission has embraced atomic energy. Von der Leyen has sent a letter to the leaders of the European Union ahead of the summit of presidents in which he emphasizes the need to “avoid the premature withdrawal of assets, such as existing nuclear facilities.” For the president of the Community Executive, these infrastructures are key because “they can continue to supply reliable, low-cost, low-emission electricity.” This positioning suggests that Member States delay the scheduled closures of their plants. In practice, it is a lifeline thrown to Spanish electricity companies. As they point out from RoamsIberdrola (53%), Endesa (36%) and Naturgy (11%) have formally requested to extend the useful life of Almaraz until 2030, with a view to reaching 60 or even 80 years of operation. A train wreck. The defense of nuclear power does not respond to a sudden environmental awakening, but rather to a question of economic and geopolitical survival. As explained The Pluralthe increase in energy prices due to the War in Iran is already having devastating effects: since the end of February, the EU has spent an additional 6 billion euros on fossil fuel imports. Europe believes that atomic energy is the economic salvation to stop this bleeding, but the Government of Spain believes the opposite. However, this recommendation from Brussels has raised blisters in Spain. As detailed eldiario.esVon der Leyen’s position represents interference in the energy policy of the Twenty-seven, unleashing a direct controversy with Teresa Ribera, European vice president for a Clean Transition. Ribera has reminded the president that, just as she could not tell France what to do with its energy when she was minister, Von der Leyen cannot dictate to countries their mix electric. “Each Member State is competent to decide according to its circumstances,” said Ribera. The two-speed crash plan. To prevent the shock energy will devastate the economy in the short term, the European Commission proposes an intervention package: direct tax reductions on the electricity bill, intervention in the CO2 market to curb volatility and a cap on the price of gas. Along these lines, Von der Leyen’s key complaint It’s about energy taxation which is stifling the transition, since in some cases electricity is taxed “up to fifteen times more than gas.” In the long term, the EU is not so much committed to building traditional macro-centrals, but has allocated 200 million euros to develop Small Modular Reactors (SMR) for the 2030s. But at the national level, the European guidelines hit a wall. According to Expansionthe Ministry for the Ecological Transition remains firm in its closure schedule (2027 for the first Almaraz reactor and 2028 for the second) betting on a 100% renewable model. In fact, the Executive recalls that it was the companies themselves that in 2019 opted to close due to the government’s refusal to grant them the tax reductions they demanded. The dreaded “domino effect.” The Almaraz debate has transcended the offices to hit the streets. As pointed out Article 14Von der Leyen’s turn has given wings to the “Women for Almaraz” platform, which brings together more than 2,000 residents of Campo Arañuelo. Its spokesperson, María Jesús Lapeira, warns that the dismantling would destroy 4,000 direct and indirect jobs. But the technical problem for Spain goes far beyond Cáceres. As we detailed in Xatakadelaying Almaraz to 2030 would unleash a logistical and regulatory “domino effect.” If its closure is postponed, it would coincide in time with the closure of Ascó I and Cofrentes. Given that dismantling four reactors at the same time is unfeasible, this would force the closures of Ascó II, Vandellós II and Trillo to also be pushed well beyond 2035, blowing up the current National Integrated Energy and Climate Plan (PNIEC). The great paradox of the market. In the end, the resolution of this geopolitical and social conflict could be dictated by the market itself. At the beginning of March the Almaraz II reactor had to be disconnected from the electrical grid; It was not because of a security problem, but because of the harsh financial reality: the full reservoirs and the strong wind sank the price of electricity to zero. This, added to a tax burden that represents 75% of its variable costs, made keeping the plant on economically unsustainable for its owners. We are facing the perfect storm. Europe desperately embraces nuclear energy due to fear of Iran and the loss of competitiveness against China. The electricity companies use this endorsement to pressure for tax cuts in Spain. The Government and environmentalism are reluctant to alter their green roadmap. And meanwhile, the unstoppable and cheap renewable generation from sun and wind threatens to drive out of the market the very nuclear plants that political leaders today are trying to save. Image | Frobles and European Parliament Xataka | The Almaraz “domino effect”: delaying the closure of a single plant forces us to redesign the entire energy map of Spain