The nuclear power outage debate is inching its way back into the political arena in Spain. For months, the People’s Party, Vox, and Ciudadanos have pressed to reevaluate the planned shutdown schedule for all Spanish nuclear facilities, slated to begin in 2027 and culminate in a total blackout by 2035. Amid an ongoing energy crisis, these right‑wing parties argue that extending reactor lifespans could strengthen Spain’s energy independence and signal to neighboring European nations that the bloc is reconsidering nuclear closures.
The government remains adamant about sticking to the agreed closure dates, saying revisiting the schedule would not help address the country’s current energy emergency. The first outage, they note, is already projected within the next five years. These closures are framed as the result of a 3‑year accord between the state and the electricity companies that own the plants, a claim echoed by officials at the time.
From Enresa, the public entity charged with managing nuclear waste and dismantling reactors, there was no hint of a desire to delay the closures in discussions with utilities.
“No electricity company has shown any intention to alter the protocol for the plant shutdown timeline. No direct or indirect communication has been made in our meetings, nor has it been stated publicly,” declared the president of Enresa during an appearance before the Ecological Transition Commission of the Congress. “A joint decision by the Government and the companies is needed to change the plan. The government does not want it, and the companies, as far as I know, do not either.”
In 2019, the government reached a general agreement with major power providers to phase out all Spanish reactors, laying the groundwork for a national nuclear halt. The plan, involving Endesa, Iberdrola, Naturgy, and EDP, envisioned a gradual shutdown of plants between 2027 and 2035.
As noted by Enresa, since signing that agreement, six of Spain’s seven active reactors (excluding Trillo) have sought license renewals, aiming to extend their operation under the corporate pact. They pursued extensions beyond the strictly defined terms, and some argued that the protocols should be renewed. The author of the critique observed that the authorities could not extend, yet one or two attempted to do so.
Profitability Questions
Enresa’s chair highlighted that there is little appetite among utility boards for major new investments to extend current plants or to build new ones. The debate is not merely about technical viability; plants can operate longer from a technical standpoint, but substantial refurbishment costs would be required.
Company boards must assess whether operating for additional years would be profitable. Projected generation costs for nuclear plants, once taxes are included, tend to surpass medium‑term futures market electricity prices, raising questions about long‑term profitability.
The nuclear industry has argued that taxes add to generation costs, which are estimated around 60 euros per MWh today and about 45 euros per MWh without taxes, excluding the Enresa charge; future prices in 2030–2035 are expected to be lower, yet they do not account for new investments needed to extend plant lifetimes. The “polluter pays” principle funds waste management and eventual dismantling through a specific Enresa mechanism, ensuring the costs of disposal are matched to production.
Facing pressure from right‑wing groups to revisit the shutdown timetable, large energy firms opted for cautious public engagement. Iberdrola’s president noted that nuclear plants are prepared to operate longer if costs can be adequately covered, while Endesa’s chief executive suggested modest delays of four or five years could help meet emissions targets if needed. These remarks reflect a cautious stance rather than a full agreement to slow closures.
Autonomous Regions and the Waste Dilemma
The government initiated the update process for the General Radioactive Waste Plan, a long‑term roadmap detailing waste management, plant decommissioning, and associated costs. The plan presents two paths for the next six decades: building a single central nuclear repository or establishing seven regional facilities, one at each plant site.
Recently, Enresa has publicly advocated for a single centralized repository as the most economical and environmentally sound option. The challenge lies in achieving social, political, and institutional consensus and overcoming resident concerns about hosting a nuclear facility. At present, no regional government has agreed to host a central temporary facility on its soil.
“No autonomous community wants to host a central repository,” Navarro stated, noting that no region has stepped forward to host a national facility under the new plan. “Can it be done? Can it be achieved without broad social support?”
The administration of Pedro Sánchez, newly installed in Moncloa, has paused the central repository project, with Cuenca’s Villar de Canas mentioned as a potential site and then viewed as unlikely to restart. If the option shifts to a single, nationwide facility, the search for a suitable location would intensify.