Nuclear Energy in the Baltic-3: Dilemmas and Determination

by Amelia Hadfield Nuclear energy is back on the agenda. Both the force majeure of environmental degradation from CO2 emissions and the political and economic dangers associated with rising import dependence have forced EU member states to reevaluate their energy portfolio. The European Commission – a reliably tacit opponent of nuclear power – may also be reconsidering its position. This short expose provides a snapshot of the nuclear profile of Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and Finland within the context of recent European energy dynamics. The Baltic Sea region is a critical area in a number of ways. Materially, the region is characterised by strong mutual dependence in both foreign investment and foreign trade, which has buoyed regional economies and contributed to the transport system. The Baltic Sea itself is becoming an increasingly important conduit for Russian oil and gas, whilst the territory of the three Baltic states promises potential for enhanced electricity transport frameworks. While only Lithuania and Finland are key nuclear producers, the region may in the future be capable of launching an indigenous nuclear industry. Politically, the region is the site of much activity within the Northern Dimension, an EU-Russia project launched and led by Finland since 1997. Its 10 year anniversary should reinvigorate the programme with new regional priorities, such as enhanced foreign investment to fortify national and commercial energy industries, ecological measures to protect the increasingly busy Baltic Sea, and a more robust agreement with Russia in which both security of supply and demand are addressed. As the latter issue continues to defy the EU’s ability to summon the necessary political will to act collectively vis-a-vis Russia, and as environmental degradation shows no sign of slowing, the ‘nuclear option’ now needs to be addressed. The issue of security of supply is a tricky one for Baltic states. Whilst each country relies increasingly upon Russian oil and gas imports, the Nord Stream gas pipeline project (running under the Baltic Sea connecting Russian natural gas exports to Germany) is viewed by many in the region as a project that could actually strengthen the position of Baltic as a key EU transport route. While increasing the percentage of Russian gas imports (and arguably increasing European dependence), the pipeline could also be of serious benefit to the Balkan-3, making them something of a lynchpin in future EURussia cooperation. The strategic importance of the Baltic region is undeniable. Yet import dependence is an equally potent concern, one which could easily see the Baltic states on the wrong side of the security of supply dilemma should relations with the national and commercial energy entities of Russia (or indeed any other major exporter) deteriorate. For these and other reasons, the idea of indigenous energy generation via nuclear power must therefore be considered. Finland continues to act as regional patron of the Baltic. While the Northern Dimension has been accused of a somewhat lacklustre performance, Finnish nuclear energy has seen a renaissance in the past decade. Indeed, Finland has to be energy-saavy: it is second in the world (after Canada) for the highest per capita consumption of kilowatt hours of energy. Like Canada, Finland must contend with a harsh climate, long distances and energy-intensive industries, all of which contribute to increased energy intensity. 36% of Finnish electricity is currently generated by nuclear power

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.