Dec. 13, 2012
/PRNewswire/ -- The aftermath of Fukushima has raised two key questions in
. One: is nuclear power with its attendant waste and safety issues worth having? And, two: can
, in the absence of nuclear power generation, reduce its dependency on oil and gas imports and meet its climate targets?
New analysis from Frost & Sullivan (
European Nuclear Power Sector
, finds that nuclear energy is the answer to meeting aggressive EU targets on carbon dioxide emissions and fossil fuels. Despite the environmental risks, nuclear energy shows potential to reduce emissions and dependence on fossil fuels, and therefore, will be a major contributor to the European energy mix in 2020.
"It is difficult to envisage
phasing out nuclear power from its energy mix, despite the antagonistic stance of countries like
where there are likely to be embargoes on further nuclear power development," noted Frost & Sullivan Energy & Power Supplies Research Analyst,
. "Nuclear power will play an active role in
's energy generation and in meeting the region's environmental goals."
The number of nuclear new build projects, despite Fukushima, is still higher now than across the last two decades – although
is leading in numbers, the US has approved its first new build since 1970.
have all reaffirmed their commitment to nuclear power. In Central and
, and the
are also planning to push ahead with new units, following increased safety assessments.
"While there will be shutdowns, member states like the
will push through better safety standards and support new nuclear build over the next four to five years," remarked Vikash. "Apart from new builds, these states will also concentrate on increasing the share of electricity generation from renewables and decreasing their dependence on fossil fuels."
Nuclear energy will remain a prime candidate as
mulls its decarbonising options. Carbon capture and storage (CCS) could potentially reduce the dependence on coal and gas. However, this technology is still at a nascent stage with few demonstration projects having been implemented.
Renewables represent the best foreseeable option, but are cost-intensive. Moreover, it is not possible for renewables to compensate for the large-scale energy production currently supported by nuclear sources, until the next decade.