Nuclear Energy in the Netherlands: History and Current Debates

Nuclear energy is once again a hot topic in the Netherlands. With ambitions to build four large nuclear power plants, the government seems focused on large-scale energy production. However, while attention is centered on these giants, international interest is growing in a more innovative, compact form of nuclear energy: Small Modular Reactors (SMRs). Nuclear energy has been part of the Dutch energy supply for decades, with the Borssele nuclear power plant as the most notable example. Although this plant provides a stable source of CO2-free energy, nuclear energy is often surrounded by debates about safety, costs, and waste management. Against this backdrop, the question arises: what are these SMRs, how do they work, and why is the debate about their potential relevant for the Netherlands?

What are Small Modular Reactors (SMRs)?

SMRs are small nuclear reactors with a capacity ranging from a few dozen to a maximum of 300 megawatts, a fraction of the 1,500 megawatts of traditional nuclear power plants. A prime example is the Linglong One, an SMR currently under construction in China. This reactor, with a capacity of 125 megawatts, is designed to support regional energy needs and marks a significant step in the practical application of SMR technology. What sets them apart is their modular design. SMRs are factory-built and assembled on-site, much like a “Lego set.” This makes construction faster, cheaper, and less dependent on complex infrastructure.

Another important feature of SMRs is their scalability. Instead of building one large reactor, multiple small reactors can be placed side by side to deliver comparable or even greater capacity. This flexibility makes SMRs attractive for specific applications, such as industrial processes or energy supply in remote areas where traditional energy infrastructure is unfeasible.

The Advantages: Fast, Flexible, and Affordable

Proponents highlight the speed and flexibility with which SMRs can be deployed. Unlike the lengthy construction times of traditional nuclear power plants, SMRs can be operational within a few years. Moreover, they are suitable for diverse locations: from industrial sites to data centers and even residential areas. Their scale makes them appealing to companies looking to manage their own energy supply. An example is Google, which has signed a memorandum of understanding with an American SMR developer to power its data centers.

Additionally, SMRs offer significant benefits in CO2 reduction. Compared to solar and wind energy, which are weather-dependent, SMRs provide a constant energy supply without CO2 emissions. This makes them particularly suitable as a baseload energy source, complementing the intermittency of renewable energy. Countries such as Canada and the United Kingdom already have concrete plans to build SMRs, aiming to have the first operational reactors by the end of this decade. Their smaller size and modular design also make them cheaper to build, which is crucial at a time when the energy transition demands massive capital investments.

Another advantage is the potential for localized energy production, reducing reliance on large power plants and long transmission lines. This can not only save costs but also increase the resilience of the energy grid.

Criticism and Challenges

Critics, however, raise concerns about safety and the storage of radioactive waste, issues that also affect traditional nuclear power plants. While SMRs are considered inherently safer due to their smaller size, challenges such as licensing and public acceptance remain significant hurdles. The nuclear sector has historically struggled to gain public trust, and SMRs are no exception.

Moreover, commercial initiatives often face financing challenges. Subsidies for research and development, tax incentives for investors, or government guarantees to mitigate financial risks could help overcome these barriers. Such measures have been successful in other countries in getting new technologies off the ground. SMR projects require substantial investments, while potential customers are hesitant to commit to long-term contracts with fixed electricity prices. This uncertainty makes it difficult for both companies and governments to take the first steps. The lack of a clear international standard for SMR regulation adds another layer of complexity.

Another frequently mentioned concern is the risk of proliferation, as some SMR designs use fuel that could also be employed for military purposes. While these risks appear manageable, they remain a key consideration, particularly in a geopolitical context.

The Netherlands: Potential and Barriers

Interest in SMRs is growing in the Netherlands. Several companies are attempting to gain a foothold. The Groningen-based Orange Hills Energy, for example, is working on plans to build SMRs from GE Hitachi. These reactors have a capacity of 300 megawatts, sufficient to power 300,000 households. Other companies, such as ULC-Energy in collaboration with Rolls-Royce, are focusing on larger reactors with a capacity of 470 megawatts.

Despite these initiatives, the Netherlands lags behind countries like Canada and Poland, where licensing processes are more advanced. Dutch companies face administrative and political obstacles, as well as a lack of clear policy frameworks. The government appears cautious, leaving the development of SMRs to the market without active support such as subsidies or tax incentives.

Nevertheless, there are clear indications that the Netherlands could benefit from a more proactive approach. With a strong focus on sustainability and maintaining a competitive industrial position, nuclear energy, and specifically SMRs, could play an important role in the energy mix. The potential to deploy SMRs in locations such as industrial areas or ports also offers unique opportunities to meet regional energy needs.

International Perspective: Lessons for the Netherlands

Internationally, we see a trend of public-private partnerships to bring SMR projects to fruition. Canada’s Darlington project, where Ontario Power Generation collaborates with GE Hitachi, is an example of how this can be successful. Similarly, in the United Kingdom, the government has set up a competition to accelerate the construction of SMRs, with multiple parties competing to realize the first project. Canada’s Darlington project demonstrates that success depends on strong collaboration between government and industry. Another example is the UK, where the government’s competitive approach has spurred innovation. These models could serve as inspiration for the Netherlands.

A key lesson is that government support is crucial to realizing the first projects. This can range from subsidies to reducing administrative hurdles. International collaboration can also help reduce costs and accelerate technological progress. The Netherlands could, for instance, align itself with European initiatives, such as the “SMR industry alliance” of the European Commission.

Conclusion: An Opportunity for the Energy Transition

SMRs offer promising opportunities for the Netherlands, especially in a time when the energy transition is urgent. Their scale, flexibility, and relatively low costs make them suitable for a wide range of applications. However, realizing this potential requires a more proactive stance from the government. This includes removing administrative barriers, establishing clear regulations, and potentially providing financial support to kickstart the first projects.

If the Netherlands is serious about pursuing nuclear energy as part of a sustainable energy mix, SMRs should not be overlooked. They are not a replacement for large nuclear power plants but a valuable addition that can transform the energy landscape. By investing in innovation and international collaboration, the Netherlands can not only benefit from cleaner energy but also take a leading role in the development of this promising technology.