How Biden Can Help Europe
Secure a Clean Energy Future
Biden pledged
to continue the Trump administration’s efforts to counter Chinese and Russian
nuclear promotion efforts in Europe. He must turn this vow into action.
by Kevin Brown
President Joe Biden campaigned on speeding up the American energy transition
away from fossil fuels towards “clean” renewable sources like wind and solar.
During his short time in office, the Biden administration has moved to put
green rhetoric into action by his energy team picks, rejoining the Paris
Climate Accord and signing executive orders to end fossil fuel finance. Despite
these significant initiatives towards decarbonization, nuclear power has
been absent from
recent policy discussions, despite its domestic backers’ high hopes. Even though atomic energy is proven to be an efficient and emissions-free source of
power, American public attitudes towards nuclear energy have seen its
utilization as a power source lag compared to other countries, with the U.S. reactor system aging.
The need to modernize nuclear
reactors is also proving to be a challenge in Europe. From the United Kingdom to Ukraine,
aging nuclear power reactors have become a significant source of contention in national energy
debates. It’s also an issue that is starting to pose a severe transatlantic
security consideration for the United States. Throughout Europe, Russian and Chinese contractors are aggressively bidding to build atomic power plants. This
development is a broader strategy by Washington’s key competitors to
become global infrastructure players.
In Britain, the state-owned China
General Nuclear Power Group (CGN) is still under consideration to replace nuclear reactor
sites in Somerset, Essex,
and Suffolk, among other atomic infrastructure sites amid a
Covid-19 driven downturn in British-Chinese relations. This fact is seriously
alarming observers on both sides of the Atlantic, considering Beijing’s
potential input into a vital part of Britain’s power supply. Like
Huawei before it, the CGN episode illustrates the risk of questionable overseas investment created by nearly forty
years of infrastructure privatization under both Conservative and Labour
governments. Chinese-linked companies have become a significant benefactor
in infrastructure investment through buying shares in
everything from utilities to rail lines and London’s Heathrow Airport.
An inverse technological transfer
danger also exists with European engineering companies’ work to upgrade China’s
nuclear infrastructure. French firms such as Areva have exported European designed reactors to the People’s
Republic of China (PRC). Beijing-based China National Nuclear Corporation
(CNNC) recently purchased Spanish Nusim, which specializes in
handling radioactive waste to diversify its atomic energy profile. These
acquisitions are enhancing Beijing’s position by inadvertently transferring
European technologies to Chinese customers. European Union regulators
should continue to be concerned about these proliferation
trends, given the PRC’s history of reverse engineer-sensitive technologies and intellectual
property theft.
Whom to choose for nuclear
modernization has also become a highly contentious issue in the Czech Republic. Chinese and
Russian suppliers are among the top contenders to implement the country’s
energy transition. The Czech Republic is a crucial target of China’s strategy to increase its
fledging influence in central Europe, with energy forming a vital component of this initiative. The
ceremonial President Miloš Zeman’s anti-Western viewpoints and the
throwback Communist Party also serve as lobbying assets for Moscow
and Beijing’s bids.
Even though the Czech parliament
is slow-walking the issue, should either the PRC or Russia
win the power plant replacement contract, it would represent a U.S. setback.
The same risks also exist in Slovakia and Slovenia, where Russian nuclear engineering consortiums seek
contracts.
Demonstrated by the Czech
example, Russia is still a significant player in the European nuclear power
circuit. The outdated atomic power infrastructure in the former Eastern Bloc is
based on Soviet designs, making Russia a natural candidate to upgrade
existing reactors. As is the case with Hungary and Bulgaria, both are pursuing Russian-led updating projects.
Italy and Finland also have
longstanding historical ties to Russia and are currently pursuing Russian
assistance to rebuild their atomic energy sector. Italian companies have
expressed interest in joint projects with Russian energy providers. Finland
has selected the U.S.-sanctioned
State Atomic Energy Corporation (ROSATOM) to build a new
Hanhikivi peninsula plant. Experts have raised concerns that the Finnish government’s choice to
give ROSATOM such a vital contract will allow Moscow
to manipulate Nordic energy prices.
Chinese and Russian atomic
evangelicalism poses proliferation risks given that these two governments are
less likely to adhere to multilateral safeguards than their Western
competitors. Companies from both countries have propositioned states that pose
security risks, such as Ethiopia, Turkey, Venezuela,
and Pakistan. These countries could use these projects to further
their own strategic weapons aims or expose sensitive materials to terrorists.
Demonstrating the security risks associated with Russian and Chinese civilian
nuclear influence carries over to the broader world, which has been noted for
a long time.
One of the Trump administration’s
foreign policy successes was that the executive branch had a coherent strategy
to counter Russian and Chinese nuclear energy influence in Europe. Trump’s efforts to
export American natural gas to European countries currently dependent on
Russian sources received extensive press attention. However, Trump’s administration also worked
to steer former Communist states like Romania away from potential Chinese nuclear technology. American nuclear engineering
entities managed to outmaneuver their Chinese counterparts to win upgrade
contracts in Poland with executive branch help.
President-Elect Biden pledged to continue the outgoing administration’s efforts
to counter Chinese and Russian nuclear promotion efforts in Europe. Biden’s
presidency must turn this vow into action by promoting American atomic power, a
higher profile component of his engagement with the continent, by stressing its
benefits in his leadership engagement. Doing so would demonstrate to Europe
that the United States is serious about fostering a reliable, clean energy future. By promoting
American atomic energy in Europe, the Biden administration could create domestic political acceptance of nuclear power given
its resilient, zero-emissions nature.
President Biden’s administration
should be consistent in utilizing sanctions against Chinese and Russian nuclear
power providers. The Trump administration, in a departure from its “maximum
pressure” policy on Iran, often waived sanctions on ROSATOM or the China National Nuclear
Corporation. Given that these entities pose a security risk through their work
with Tehran and their projects in Europe and worldwide, it’s critical for the
Biden administration to enforce sanctions on civilian nuclear proliferators
consistently.
Only adding to the growing
authoritarian influence over the European Union’s energy supply chain is
Germany’s poorly thought-out commitment to eliminate atomic power by 2022 after the 2011 Fukushima
Daiichi disaster. Signaling poor confidence in European nuclear power
capabilities, the Merkel government is still pressing ahead with the Nord-Stream II natural gas
pipeline, which gives Putin’s Moscow a window to inflict pain on the EU’s
leading member state. Berlin’s stance on energy issues, especially on a clean
energy source like nuclear power, sets a bad example for the rest of the
continental bloc.
Tying into the
counter-proliferation of competitor energy technology in Europe, President
Biden needs to bring Germany back into the nuclear fold. If Germany embraced American
(or European) atomic power, that would obviously reduce Berlin’s dependence on
Russian natural gas via the Nord Stream project while also setting a positive
example for the rest of the EU member states given how much Germany influences
the agenda in Brussels and in other European capitals. All of this demonstrates
that U.S.-European energy engagement needs to be an all-encompassing strategy
if Biden’s nuclear strategy is to be successful. Given that, anti-nuclear
attitudes in Berlin and elsewhere on the continent illustrate themselves as a
long-term liability to international security.
Kevin Brown has
written for the American Conservative, the Diplomat, and the
National Interest. He has previously worked at the intersection of public
affairs and energy. He tweets @KevinBrown778.
Image: Reuters.
No comments:
Post a Comment