“As previous events have shown, there are also wider safety implications for people working and living in or near nuclear power plants. There is work to be done, therefore, to improve these elements of nuclear power generation and a long way to go before we can consider it a sustainable industry.
“We recognise that the level of investment and research that will go into nuclear power will help solve some of these issues, but given progress to date this will take a considerable amount of time and resource.”
Richard Lum, co-chief investment officer at Victory Hill Capital Partners, which advises VH Global Sustainable Energy Opportunities plc, expresses less support.
He argues it is “imperative that the government should move away from [nuclear] technology if it is serious about decarbonising”, citing carbon emissions that occur during the extraction and disposal of the fuel source for nuclear energy and in the materials used in the construction of plants.
Like Argent and Quiroz, Lum says Victory Hill’s position on nuclear energy has not changed, and disagrees with it being ‘environmentally sustainable’.
“Fundamentally, nuclear is not environmentally sustainable given, at the very least, the waste from nuclear power stations is highly toxic and needs a permanent form of containment, which prevents any potential forms of leakage into the biosphere,” he says.
“On this basis alone, it is difficult to characterise nuclear power as environmentally sustainable.”
Globally, nuclear projects have also tended to overrun in cost and time, according to a report by the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (Post). Developers suggest new designs could address historical issues, the report states, but these will require further development and not be available until at least the next decade.
Jon Wallace, manager of Jupiter Green Investment Trust, which counts clean energy as an investment theme, likewise distinguishes between ‘old’ and ‘new’ nuclear energy.
Although the classification of nuclear energy as environmentally sustainable is not yet confirmed, Wallace says: “We don’t see this move changing the bigger picture for the ‘old’ nuclear sector – plagued by delays, cost overruns and without a long-term waste solution.
“However, support is growing in the UK and US for ‘new’ nuclear energy, which includes small modular reactors and fusion with the potential to overcome these issues.”
But in its report, Post cites the 2030s as the indicative timeframe for commercial deployment of small modular reactors; while fusion, an alternative form of nuclear energy, is unlikely to contribute to emission reduction targets before 2050 at the earliest.
Indeed, Wallace adds: “While the debate will continue on whether nuclear is, or can ever be, environmentally sustainable, our take is to focus on the parts of the energy ecosystem such as grid infrastructure, and certain elements within renewables where the combinations of policy and technology risks make a more attractive investment.”
