Bouchez brings nuclear energy into the election campaign. Fine.

Georges-Louis Bouchez will not join the next government if it does not build a new nuclear power plant. That may be a political choice, but the liberal should point out that only a state-owned company with taxpayer money can still build it.

Today at 03:00

MR chairman Georges-Louis Bouchez wants a parliamentary committee of inquiry into the nuclear phase-out. He accuses Minister of Energy Tinne Van der Straeten (Green) of lying and accuses grid operator Elia of allowing his reports to be politically instrumentalized to needlessly delay the lifespan extension of nuclear power plants. Only after the Russian invasion of Ukraine did the government decide to extend Doel 4 and Tihange 3 by ten years. Also with that ‘black swan‘ the government and Elia should have taken this into account, according to Bouchez.

With his frontal attack, Bouchez is now also bringing nuclear energy into the election campaign. Fine. Voters should speak out about energy. The war and climate change make it a topic of the highest importance. Bouchez rightly points out that our electricity consumption will continue to increase. Any savings from efficiency gains are offset by the extra electricity needed to run artificial intelligence servers or electrify blast furnaces and cement kilns. But at the same time, CO₂ emissions must be drastically reduced. Where do we get all that additional green energy?

The CEO of the International Energy Agency, Fatih Birol, called the phasing out of nuclear energy in Europe a strategic mistake. A consensus is therefore emerging among almost all parties to keep Doel 4 and Tihange 3 open for twenty years longer. Bouchez continues. He will not join a new government that does not immediately start the process towards a new nuclear power plant. N-VA and Vlaams-Belang also want new power stations.

Of course, such a statement comes with not unimportant small letters. Today, no European country manages to build a new power station for less than 15 billion euros and in less than 15 years. Only China and Russia do things faster and cheaper, but we obviously prefer not to bring them on board for that.

There is also no longer a single private company willing to bear the financial and insurance risk for a new power station. Even Engie would rather lose the last power stations, and only agreed to keep them open longer after paying off the disposal costs for the nuclear waste and negotiating a guaranteed price. Today, only a (new) government company can build a nuclear power plant. Risk and financing then de facto end up with the taxpayer, for a return that will only be felt in a few decades and is highly uncertain.

That could be a political choice. But for a liberal party that wants to lower taxes and downsize the government, it is something to explicitly mention.