The nuclear debate is entering a decisive phase that will shape Spain's energy future for the coming decades.

Almost nothing that happens in the world and in Spain can be explained without the influence of nuclear energy. Especially since the end of World War II and the scientific contributions of Albert Einstein. Geopolitical conflicts and the power of major world powers such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia, Iran, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and North Korea cannot be understood without the deterrent power of the nuclear programs of those nations that possess the atomic bomb, a weapon of mass destruction that, paradoxically, has acted in recent decades as a key element for achieving a minimum understanding within the international community.

But its civilian use for supplying electricity is also a key element in relations between countries and in the internal functioning of states. For decades, nuclear energy has been a critical element at multiple levels in the major powers. The influence of France, the great atomic power within Europe; the influence of the United States, which plans to operate plants for up to 80 years; the United Kingdom's plan for new nuclear construction; the impact of mini-reactors that companies like Amazon plan to use for data centers; the strong presence of nuclear power in Finland, a country admired for its educational level and the welfare state of the Nordic countries; Germany's nuclear dismantling and its dependence on Russian gas promoted by its former chancellor, Gerhard Schröder; or the near indifference shown to nuclear power by China, destined to be the dominant empire in this century. All of these are elements that must always be taken into account when deciding where Spain should go, in a debate that never ends. Even the visit that Henry Kissinger, the most powerful Secretary of State of the 20th century, made to late Franco Spain, presided over by Luis Carrero Blanco, could also have had reasons related to the supposed Spanish development of a nuclear program that never came to fruition.

In times of democracy, nuclear energy has occupied a prominent place in public debate. From the social distancing generated by disasters such as Chernobyl in the former USSR and later Fukhushima (Japan), to a resurgence following Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which has highlighted the weakness of relying on third-party gas. Not only for economic reasons but also for strategic autonomy, the flag now being raised by Brussels. Even for environmental reasons, as it is a technology that emits no CO2. Its weak point is waste. After a difficult agreement between the companies owning the plants and the government to agree on a closure schedule from 2027 to 2035, now that the moment of truth is approaching, doubts are emerging , and the question of whether or not it is advisable to extend the plants' useful life has already been raised. The closure of José Cabrera y Garoña should be followed in two years by Almaraz, but the possible closure is generating social, political, territorial, and economic debate. Several experts are speaking out on this strategic decision.

One of the most influential voices in the energy sector is Joaquín Coronado, who, despite never having been pro-nuclear and even having once welcomed the closure schedule agreed in 2019, believes that "the context has changed." "Today, the priority is to strengthen energy autonomy, which requires reducing gas consumption (which would increase with the closure), containing the price of electricity, and continuing to eliminate CO₂ emissions."

The underlying debate is no longer so much whether to close or not, but at what cost. For the government, current taxation is adequate; for businesses, it makes their situation unviable. Coronado believes it is necessary to alleviate some taxes. Former minister and former president of Red Eléctrica, Jordi Sevilla, shares a similar view. He believes that once the electricity system deficit is nearing its end, it is possible to signal tax cuts for businesses without incurring additional costs for taxpayers or consumers.

For another former president of the electricity system operator, Luis Atienza, there are more doubts about the numbers. These three experts are clear that closing nuclear plants will mean using other gas-fired power plants, and if CO2 and hydrocarbon prices rise sharply, closing the nuclear plants could be a mistake. None of them contemplates the construction of new reactors. Atienza urges careful calculations, since, with more expensive gas, it could be a good decision to extend the life of nuclear plants for a few more years.

For Natalia Fabra, an energy expert and university professor, the issue isn't so binary, and the consequences go beyond what nuclear expansion apparently implies. "The simple announcement that the life of nuclear plants will be extended could slow down investment decisions in renewable energy that are currently being considered."

The issue is not trivial: the contribution of renewables in Spain is proving to be strategic. One of the latest OECD reports calls on energy-intensive European industries to relocate to Spain due to the competitive energy prices offered by green energy. Europe, heavily influenced by France, has classified nuclear energy as green, as it produces no CO2 emissions.

At the political level, after the April 28 blackout, Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez opened the door to negotiations for an extension, but left a message for the leaders of the electricity companies and the opposition, which has already expressed its desire to maintain nuclear energy. Sánchez said that if nuclear power continues, it won't be so that the ultra-rich in the companies can earn more. At the other extreme, the companies (primarily Iberdrola and Endesa) have launched a crusade in the courts , asserting that the current tax situation makes nuclear power plants unviable.

Some experts corroborate this impracticality. Óscar Barrero, a partner at PwC and head of energy, asserts that in his studies, all closure scenarios will result in higher electricity prices for consumers, even in the most favorable scenarios. In his opinion, the government is aware that the tax burden on nuclear plants is excessive, and if it hasn't lowered it yet, it's due to public opinion, to the government's refusal to appear to give in to the electricity companies.

At Barrero's opposite pole is Fernando Ferrando, president of the Renewable Foundation, who is openly opposed to any nuclear extension. He refers to the preamble to Law 15/2012 on fiscal measures for the energy sector, approved by the PP government. It states that society must assume responsibility for radioactive waste. The issue is not minor for Ferrando, who believes that producing with nuclear power would leave a burden on Spanish society for many decades.

His conclusion is that nuclear energy is currently marked by opacity (in reference to safety issues) and uncertainty. He believes costs are not adequately internalized: "How can the cost of nuclear energy be calculated when the French Enresa (Andra) claims that nuclear waste requires 150 years of management?" "Such a long timeframe means assuming uncertainty that is impossible to manage," he concludes.

Nuclear power in Spain has a significant impact on various levels. It currently generates regional tensions. Almost all political parties in Extremadura and Catalonia oppose any closure, given the extensive activity generated by nuclear power plants in their territories. However, so far, only the president of the Valencian Community, Carlos Mazón, has eliminated regional taxes on nuclear power (the eco-tax), while the rest are resisting the loss of revenue. Even union leaders have expressed support for maintaining these plants, as they are a source of employment in areas suffering the consequences of depopulation.

Given all these conditions, the government and businesses will have to make decisions that will shape Spain's future. This scenario will be greatly influenced by the resurgence of atomic energy in various countries around the world. This resurgence could also affect the Spanish situation. The nuclear debate, which has been going on for decades, will continue for many years to come.