Summary
In 2024, major European energy firms like BP, Shell, and Equinor scaled back investments in renewables, prioritizing oil and gas for short-term profits amidst high energy costs and geopolitical instability following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
BP spun off most offshore wind projects, Shell exited major power markets, and all three reduced low-carbon spending by 8%.
This retrenchment worsens climate concerns as global carbon emissions hit record highs.
The sector faces further uncertainty in 2025, with rising U.S. oil production, Chinese demand shifts, and the potential rollback of green policies under Trump’s presidency.
What’s wrong with nuclear energy?
It’s not commercially viable. Oil is very profitable.
The waste. There are currently no operational longterm storage facilities much less permanent ones. It’s too expensive, so companies just go bankrupt or governments like the US just stop funding them and the waste sits in pools waiting for a natural disaster, terrorist, or war to damage them and poison the soil and water tables for generations. The Pacific Ocean already got a taste with Fukushima, but it’s enormous and could absorb it…mostly, but what if a tornado hit a facility in the landlocked Midwest US?
The waste can be reprocessed, but that’s more experience of course.
“Can be”. Not “is” or even “will be”
Making it somebody else’s problem is always the cheapest option.
It’s not the cost that stops reprocessing; it’s the paranoia over proliferation of weapons-grade materials.
No it’s the cost. Reprocessing wouldn’t create weapons grade materials in most cases. Not anymore than the enrichment for the existing reactors anyway. Problem is that it requires expensive equipment, lots of security, and doesn’t produce nearly as much energy as the existing reactors, at least not in the short term, and companies (especially publicly traded ones) only really have incentive to care about short term profit.
Then you have the problem of limited supply in a given area, and if you need to get it from all over the world, the transportation is definitely a security issue and major expense. And once you reprocess all of the existing waste, it takes time for more to be produced. Then you aren’t making profit.
It’s just not a profitable undertaking, so it will never happen. The general conceptual technology has existed at least as long as nuclear reactors. But hasn’t been developed at all. That’s the reality and will remain the reality. Especially considering that other, truly renewable energy sources are cheaper to build, and don’t require as much security and maintenance to produce as much energy.
The biggest thing that would solve a lot of problems in renewables would be investing in battery and other efficient energy storage. But the fossil companies own most of that tech now, have traditionally shelved it after buying it, and with the current political atmosphere, are being incentivized to more aggressively dig for more fossil fuels rather than plan for the future. Especially in the US with the next administration planning to increase oil and coal production and eliminate the environmental restrictions that make it more expensive to dig up, process, and use what little remains.
The first step would be not to build them in disaster prone areas with hurricanes or earthquakes, and the next would be store the waste in areas with little value like the vast deserts.