For the first time in five decades, Sweden is to build new nuclear power plants, undoubtedly a milestone in the nation’s energy transition.
Back in the 1980s, Sweden voted to phase out nuclear power in a referendum. Now, the Swedish parliament has approved a plan to build several small modular reactors (SMRs).
Sweden’s U-turn on nuclear energy is symbolic of the worldwide debate on the energy transition — how to balance ideals with reality, and to juggle between environmental aspirations, industrial demands, energy self-sufficiency and international security.
There are two main reasons behind Sweden’s reversal on nuclear policy. Power demand is nearly certain to double in the next two decades, with green steel, biofuel, mass-produced hydrogen energy and other emerging industries on the rise.
These industries are key to Sweden’s economic competitiveness and Europe’s path to a net zero economy. Without a stable, low-carbon and sustainable power source, Sweden would fail to attract business and jobs might go to other nations.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has uprooted the European conception of energy security. As Russian gas supplies ceased overnight, European nations painfully learned that energy self-sufficiency is not an abstract concept, but a security guarantee on which a nation’s survival hinges.
Sweden’s investment in nuclear energy is no betrayal of its green promises, but a practical decision to stabilize the energy system.
There are strategic concerns as to why Sweden prefers SMRs over traditional large nuclear power plants. SMRs take up less space, and they can be built quickly and expanded gradually. In addition, managing and maintaining SMRs is relatively simple.
Since Sweden has a low population and limited land, SMRs reduce the risk of investing in nuclear energy. To some extent, SMRs are the compromise between achieving distributed generation and base-load power.
The Swedish parliament in May passed legislation empowering the government to finance nuclear developers and alleviate the financial burden energy companies would incur building new power plants.
Sweden plans to have half of the new reactors on the grid by 2035 and to finish all 10 SMRs by 2045. This is a textbook example of a policy shift, wherein the state outlines the framework and businesses profess willingness to invest based on the expected stable growth.
The latest nuclear renaissance is not without resistance. Multiple issues remain without a genuine solution and there would be more difficulties that need to be overcome. Nevertheless, Sweden’s nuclear policies are about to be implemented.
Nuclear waste disposal remains contentious within Swedish society. The lack of standardized international regulations for the design of SMRs could create oversight and safety risks. Green industries are concerned about the diversion of resources, leading to weakened momentum for investments in renewable energy. Without proper supervision, renewed legislation and conversations with the public, Sweden’s nuclear turnover could be reduced to an unfinished project.
Sweden’s nuclear U-turn is a compromise between energy realism and environmental ideals. It shows that energy transition requires coordination between multiple solutions.
Faced with emerging energy-intensive industries, geopolitical tensions and climate goals, nuclear power is considered part of the solution.
All decisions are informed by a range of options, each with their own thorny issues. Sweden has made its choice and all nations should formulate their own plans, which would be a crucial test for policymakers.
When green energy cannot satisfy the short-term needs of industry, could nuclear energy provide them with stable low-carbon power?
Europeans are looking to Sweden’s policies as an example. With successful execution, Sweden could become a paradigm for unilateral energy transition, not to mention a positive case for Europe’s low-carbon economy and energy resilience.
Sweden’s challenge is shared by all nations pursuing a net zero transition.
Edwin Yang is an associate professor at National Taiwan Normal University and chairman of the Central Taiwan Association of University Professors.
Translated by Cayce Pan
The cancelation this week of President William Lai’s (賴清德) state visit to Eswatini, after the Seychelles, Madagascar and Mauritius revoked overflight permits under Chinese pressure, is one more measure of Taiwan’s shrinking executive diplomatic space. Another channel that deserves attention keeps growing while the first contracts. For several years now, Taipei has been one of Europe’s busiest legislative destinations. Where presidents and foreign ministers cannot land, parliamentarians do — and they do it in rising numbers. The Italian parliament opened the year with its largest bipartisan delegation to Taiwan to date: six Italian deputies and one senator, drawn from six
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taiwan and India are important partners, yet this reality is increasingly being overshadowed in current debates. At a time when Taiwan-India relations are at a crossroads, with clear potential for deeper engagement and cooperation, the labor agreement signed in February 2024 has become a source of friction. The proposal to bring in 1,000 migrant workers from India is already facing significant resistance, with a petition calling for its “indefinite suspension” garnering more than 40,000 signatures. What should have been a straightforward and practical step forward has instead become controversial. The agreement had the potential to serve as a milestone in
China has long given assurances that it would not interfere in free access to the global commons. As one Ministry of Defense spokesperson put it in 2024, “the Chinese side always respects the freedom of navigation and overflight entitled to countries under international law.” Although these reassurances have always been disingenuous, China’s recent actions display a blatant disregard for these principles. Countries that care about civilian air safety should take note. In April, President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) canceled a planned trip to Eswatini for the 40th anniversary of King Mswati III’s coronation and the 58th anniversary of bilateral diplomatic
RSS