Majority of Dutch favor more nuclear energy as costs rise during Iran war
Rising energy prices linked to the war in Iran are pushing a majority of Dutch residents to support a larger role for nuclear power, even as memories of Chernobyl and Fukushima continue to shape public concern, according to a new national poll.
The survey, conducted by research firm Panel Inzicht for AD and affiliated regional newspapers, found that 56% of respondents want nuclear energy to play a greater role in electricity production in the Netherlands.
The shift comes nearly 40 years after the Chernobyl disaster in the former Soviet Union, where radiation exposure killed thousands of people and left a long-lasting public fear of nuclear energy. Despite that history, support for expansion has grown alongside economic pressures. About 21% of respondents said higher energy prices have made them more positive toward nuclear power.
Concerns remain widespread. The poll found that 57% of respondents still view Chernobyl as a source of worry. Yet an equally large share now supports the construction of new nuclear power plants, preferably smaller facilities spread across the country.
Support is highly dependent on location. If a nuclear plant were built within about 10 kilometers (6.2 miles) of a person’s home, only roughly one-third of respondents said they would support it. Support increases if plants are placed near national borders or at existing nuclear sites, such as Borssele.
Journalist and nuclear energy advocate Marco Visscher said the shift reflects growing skepticism about renewables alone. “There is an increasing awareness that we cannot manage with wind and solar energy alone,” he said. “The invasion of Ukraine and now the war in Iran also make clear that we are highly dependent on others when it comes to fossil fuels. That brings nuclear energy into view as an alternative. Uranium is needed for this. We also have to import it from abroad, but the price of uranium is much less sensitive to fluctuations in the energy market.”
Energy expert Martien Visser emphasized the strategic advantages of uranium supply. “Uranium has a much smaller volume,” he said. “It is very easy to stockpile enough to last for years. That makes you much less sensitive to what happens on the world stage.”
Experts also say modern nuclear technology is significantly safer than in the past. Emeritus professor and nuclear physicist Wim Turkenburg said the likelihood of a disaster like Chernobyl is now extremely low.
“Nuclear power plants have become up to a factor of a thousand safer since then, but even if something goes wrong, the consequences are not as severe,” he said.
He pointed to the 2011 Fukushima accident in Japan, when a major seaquake caused serious problems at a nuclear plant. The incident led to large-scale evacuations and disruption, but did not produce the catastrophic radiation effects once feared. Only one worker received a radiation dose high enough to potentially increase the risk of developing cancer later in life.
Turkenburg also cautioned that the small nuclear reactors preferred by many respondents are unlikely to be deployed soon. He said the technology is still under development and that licensing procedures could push implementation to around 2045.
