Is nuclear energy the answer to a sustainable future? Experts are divided
Nuclear power has been touted as a proven, safe way of producing clean energy, but why isn’t it more widely adopted?
Sean Gallup | Getty Images News | Getty Images
As the world pushes toward its goal of net-zero emissions by 2050, nuclear power has been touted as the way to bridge the energy gap — but some, like Greenpeace, have expressed skepticism, warning that it has “no place in a safe, clean, sustainable future.”
Nuclear energy is not only clean. It is reliable and overcomes the intermittent nature of renewables like wind, hydro and solar power.
“How do you provide cheap, reliable and pollution-free energy for a world of 8 billion people? Nuclear energy is really the only scalable version of that, renewables are not reliable,” Michael Shellenberger, founder of environmental organization Environmental Progress, told CNBC.
Governments have started to pour money into the sector after years of “treading water,” according to a report by Schroders on Aug. 8.
According to the report, there are 486 nuclear reactors either planned, proposed or under construction as of July, amounting to 65.9 billion watts of electric capacity – the highest amount of electric capacity under construction the industry has seen since 2015.
Only a few years ago, the International Energy Agency had warned that nuclear power was “at risk of future decline.” The report in 2019 said then that “nuclear power has begun to fade, with plants closing and little new investment made, just when the world requires more low-carbon electricity.”
Schroders noted that nuclear power is not only scalable, but much cleaner — emitting just 10-15 grams of CO2 equivalent per kilowatt hour. That’s competitive with both wind and solar energy and substantially better than coal and natural gas.
Nuclear power is also the second largest source of low carbon energy after hydro power, more than wind and solar combined, Schroders said.
Shellenberger’s view is that renewable energy is reaching the limits of what it can achieve in many countries. For example, hydroelectric power is not viable in all countries, and those that have them are “tapped out,” which means they cannot exploit any more land or water resources for that purpose.
Nuclear power is a great alternative, with “very small amounts of waste, easy to manage, never hurt anybody, very low cost when you build the same kind of plants over and over again,” he added.
That’s the reason why nations are having a second look at nuclear power, Shellenberger said. “It’s because renewables aren’t able to take us where we need to go. And countries want to be free of fossil fuels.”
Nuclear safety
Twelve years after Fukushima, we’re just getting better at operating these plants. They’re more efficient, they’re safer, we have better training.
Michael Shellenberger
Environmental Progress
In an interview with CNBC’s “Street Signs Asia” last week, Adam Fleck, director of research, ratings and ESG at Morningstar, said the social concern around nuclear power is “somewhat misunderstood.”
While the tragedies in Chernobyl and Fukushima cannot be forgotten, using nuclear is one of the safest ways to produce energy, even taking into consideration the need to store the nuclear waste.
“Many of those [storage facilities] are highly protected. They’re protected against earthquakes, tornadoes, you name it. But there’s a reason why there hasn’t been a significant tragedy or concern related to storage of nuclear waste.”
Shellenberger said: “Twelve years after Fukushima, we’re just getting better at operating these plants. They’re more efficient, they’re safer, we have better training.”
There have been new designs for nuclear power plants that have also enhanced safety, “but really what’s made nuclear safe has been the kind of the boring stuff, the stuff of the trainings and the routines and the best practices,” he told CNBC.
Too expensive, too slow
So, if nuclear has been a tested, proven and safe way of generating power, why isn’t it more widely adopted?
Fleck said it boils down to one main factor: cost.
The extra time that nuclear plants take to build has major implications for climate goals, as existing fossil-fueled plants continue to emit carbon dioxide while awaiting substitution.
Greenpeace
“I think the biggest issue of nuclear has actually been cost economics. It’s very costly to build a nuclear plant up front. There’s a lot of overruns, a lot of delays. And I think, for investors looking to put money to work in this space, they need to find players that have a strong track record of being able to build out that capacity.”
But not everyone is convinced.
A report by global campaigning network Greenpeace in March 2022 was of the position that besides the commonly held concern of nuclear safety, nuclear energy is too expensive and too slow to deploy compared to other renewables.
Greenpeace noted that a nuclear power plant takes about 10 years to build, adding “the extra time that nuclear plants take to build has major implications for climate goals, as existing fossil-fueled plants continue to emit carbon dioxide while awaiting substitution.”
Furthermore, it points out that uranium extraction, transport and processing are not free of greenhouse gas emissions either.
Greenpeace acknowledged that “all in all, nuclear power stations score comparable with wind and solar energy.” However, wind and solar can be implemented much faster and on a much bigger scale, making a faster impact on carbon emissions and the clean energy transition.
Nuclear power is a “distraction” from the “answer we need” — such as renewables and energy storage solutions to mitigate the unreliability from renewables, said Dave Sweeney, a nuclear analyst and nuclear-free campaigner with the Australian Conservation Foundation.
“That’s the way that we need to go, to keep the lights on and the Geiger counters down,” he told CNBC’s “Street Signs Asia” on Friday.
It seems like the writing was already on the wall last week when Volvo moved to make its Luminar-supplied LiDAR system an option – there are now reports that the Swedish car brand is set to ditch LiDAR tech entirely in 2026.
In a recent SEC filing following a missed interest payment on its 2L notes, Luminar confirmed that Volvo’s new ES90 and EX90 flagship models (along with the new Polestar 3) would no longer be offered with LiDAR from Luminar. The move signals a full reversal on the safety tech that had started as standard equipment, then became an option, and is now (according to reports from CarScoops) gone altogether.
In a statement, a Volvo Cars USA spokesperson added the decision was reportedly made, “to limit the company’s supply chain risk exposure, and it is a direct result of Luminar’s failure to meet its contractual obligations to Volvo Cars.”
This is what Luminar had to say about the current, icy state of the two companies’ relationship as of the 31OCT filing:
The Company’s largest customer, Volvo Cars (“Volvo”), has informed us that, beginning in April 2026, Volvo will no longer make our Iris LiDAR standard on its EX90 and ES90 vehicles (although Iris will remain an option). Volvo also informed the Company that it has deferred the decision as to whether to include LiDAR, including Halo (Luminar’s next generation LiDAR under development), in its next generation of vehicles from 2027 to 2029 at the earliest. As a result of these actions, the Company has made a claim against Volvo for significant damages and has suspended further commitments of Iris LiDAR products for Volvo pending resolution of the dispute. The Company is in discussions with Volvo concerning the dispute; however, there can be no assurance that the dispute will be resolved favorably or at all. Furthermore, there can be no guarantee that any claim or litigation against Volvo will be successful or that the Company will be able to recover damages from Volvo.
As a result of the foregoing, the Company is suspending its guidance for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2025.
On November 14, Luminar confirmed that Volvo had terminated its contract altogether, in a blow that could leave Luminar rethinking its long-term future and planning litigation against its biggest ex-customer.
The news follows a host of significant upgrades to the EX90 that include a new, more dependable electronic control module (ECM) and 800V system architecture for faster charging and upgraded ADAS that improves the automatic emergency steering functions and Park Pilot assistant.
Electrek’s Take
You can’t spend years telling everyone you’re miles ahead because you have LiDAR, then ditch LiDAR, and pretend no one is going to call you out on it. They had better hope they don’t up on Mark Rober’s YouTube channel doing a Wile E. Coyote impression (above).
That said, it’ll be interesting to see if ditching the LiDAR has a negative impact there. Or, frankly, whether ditching the LiDAR and its heavy compute loads will actually help mitigate some of the EX90’s niggling software issues. It could go either way, really – and I’m not quite sure which it will be. Let us know which way you think it’ll go in the comments.
SOURCE: Luminar, via SEC filing; featured image by Volvo.
If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
The new John Deere Z370RS Electric ZTrak zero turn electric riding mower promises all the power and performance Deere’s customers have come to expect from its quiet, maintenance-free electric offerings – but with an all new twist: removable batteries.
The latest residential ZT electric mower from John Deere features a 42″ AccelDeep mower deck for broad, capable cuts through up to 1.25 acres of lawn per charge, which is about what you’d expect from the current generation of battery-powered Deeres – but this is where the new Z370RS Electric ZTrak comes into its own.
Flip the lid behind the comfortably padded yellow seat and you’ll be greeted by six (6!) 56V ARC Lithium batteries from electric outdoor brand EGO. Those removable batteries can be swapped out of the Z370RS for fresh ones in seconds, getting you back to work in less time than it takes to gravity pour a tank of gas.
And, because they’re EGO batteries, they can be used in any 56V-powered EGO-brand tools and minibikes for unprecedented cross-brand interoperability. Tools and minibikes that, it should be noted, can be purchased at John Deere dealers across the country.
The upsell scripts write themselves, kids. And when you start your dialing, tell your prospective customers their new Z370RS Electric ZTrak electric mower lists for $6,499, and if you order now we can bundle it with EGO minibike for the kiddos – just in time for the holidays!
Electrek’s Take
When John Deere launched the first Z370R, Peter Johnson wrote that electrifying lawn equipment needs to be a priority, citing EPA data that showed gas-powered lawnmowers making up five percent of the total air pollution in the US (despite covering far less than 5% of the total miles driven on that gas). “Moreover,” he writes, “it takes about 800 million gallons of gasoline each year (with an additional 17 million gallons spilled) to fuel this equipment.”
It should go without saying, then, that states like California, which are banning small off-road combustion engines, have the right idea.
SOURCE | IMAGES: John Deere.
If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
![Daimler CEO just dropped some pretty WILD pro-hydrogen claims [update]](https://i0.wp.com/electrek.co/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/09/hydrogen_semi.jpg?resize=1200,628&quality=82&strip=all&ssl=1)
Daimler Truck AG CEO Karin Rådström hopped on LinkedIn today and dropped some absolutely wild pro-hydrogen talking points, using words like “emotional” and “inspiring” while making some pretty heady claims about the viability and economics of hydrogen. The rant is doubly embarrassing for another reason: the company’s hydrogen trucks are more than 100 million miles behind Volvo’s electric semis.
UPDATE 22NOV2025: Daimler just delivered five new hydrogen semis for trials.
While it might be hard to imagine why a company as seemingly smart as Daimler Truck AG continues to invest in hydrogen when study after study has shut down its viability as a transport fuel, it makes sense when you consider that the Kuwait Investment Authority (KIA) holds approximately 5% of Daimler and parent company Mercedes’ shares.
That’s not a trivial stake. Indeed, 5% is enough to make KIA one of the few actors with both the access and the motivation to shape conversations about Daimler’s long-term technology bets, and as a major oil-producing country whose economy would undoubtedly take a hit if oil demand plummeted, any future fuel that’s measured molecules instead of electrons isn’t just a concept for the Kuwaiti economy: it’s a lifeline.
What’s more, Kuwait’s “Oil Strategy 2040” includes plans to nearly double crude oil production and invest billions of dollars in new oil extraction projects and downstream refining facilities, even as the rest of the world rushes to decarbonize.
In that context, the push to make hydrogen seem like an attractive decarbonization option makes more sense. So, instead of giving Daimler’s hydrogen propaganda team yet another platform to try and convince people that hydrogen might make for a viable transport fuel eventually by giving five Mercedes-Benz GenH2 semi trucks to its customers at Hornbach, Reber Logistik, Teva Germany with its brand ratiopharm, Rhenus, and DHL Supply Chain, I’m just going to re-post Daimler CEO Karin Rådström’s comments from Hydrogen Week.
Earlier this month, Daimler Truck AG issued a press release entitled, “Five and a Half Times Around the World: Daimler Truck Fuel Cell Trucks Successfully Complete More Than 225,000 km (~139,000 miles) in Real-World Customer Operations.” Don’t bother looking for it on Electrek, though. I didn’t run it. And I didn’t run it because, frankly, a fleet of over-the-road semi trucks managing to cover a little over half the number of miles that David Blenkle put on his single Ford Mustang Mach-E isn’t particularly impressive.
In the meantime, Daimler competitors like Volvo, Renault, and even tiny Motiv are racking up millions and millions of all-electric miles and MAN Truck CEO Alexander Vlaskamp is saying that it’s impossible for hydrogen to compete with batteries. Heck, even Daimler’s own eActros BEV semi trucks are putting up better numbers than those hydrogen deals.
So, why then is Rådström pouring on the hydrogen love over at LinkedIn?
For some reason – posts about hydrogen always stir up emotions. I think hydrogen (not “instead of” but “in parallel to” electric) plays a role in the decarbonization of heavy duty transport in Europe for three reasons:
- If we would go “electric only” we need to get the electric grid to a level where we can build enough charging stations for the 6 million trucks in Europe. It will take many years and be incredibly expensive. A hydrogen infrastructure in parallel will be less expensive and you don’t need a grid connection to build it, putting 2000 H2 stations in Europe is relatively easy.
- Europe will rely on import of energy, and it could be transported into Europe from North Africa and Middle East as liquid hydrogen. Better to use that directly as fuel than to make electricity out of it.
- Some use cases of our customers are better suited for fuel cells than electric trucks – the fuel cell truck will allow higher payload and longer ranges.
At European Hydrogen Week, I saw firsthand the energy and ambition behind Europe’s net-zero goals. It’s inspiring—but also a wake-up call. We’re not moving fast enough.
What we need:
- Large-scale hydrogen production and transport to Europe
- A robust refueling network that goes beyond AFIR
- And real political support to make it happen – we need smart, efficient regulation that clears the path instead of adding hurdles.
To show what’s possible, we brought our Mercedes-Benz GenH2 to Brussels. From the end of 2026, we’ll deploy a small series of 100 fuel cell trucks to customers.
Let’s build the infrastructure, the momentum, and the partnerships to make zero-emission transport a reality. 🚛 and let’s try to avoid some of the mistakes that we see now while scaling up electric. And let’s stop the debate about “either or”. We need both.
Commenters were quick to point out that Daimler recently received €226M in grants from German federal and state governments to build 100 fuel cell trucks – but, while Daimler for sure doesn’t want to give back the money, it’s also pretty difficult to believe that Rådström’s pro-hydrogen posturing is sincere.
Especially since most of it seems like nonsense.
We’re not doing any of that
At the risk of sounding “emotional,” Rådström’s claims that building a hydrogen infrastructure in parallel will be less expensive than building an electrical infrastructure, and that “you don’t need a grid connection to build it,” are objectively false.
Further, if her claim that “putting 2,000 H2 stations in Europe is relatively easy” isn’t outright laughable, it’s worth noting that Europe had just 265 hydrogen filling stations in operation in 2024 (and only 40% of those, or about 100, were capable of serving HD trucks). At the same time, the IEA reported that there are nearly five million public charging ports already in service on the continent.
Next, the claim that, “Europe will rely on import of energy, and it could be transported into Europe from North Africa and Middle East as liquid hydrogen” (emphasis mine), is similarly dubious – especially when faced with the fact that, in 2023, wind and solar already supplied about 27–30% of EU electricity.
I will agree, however, with one of Rådström’s claims. She notes that, “some use cases of our customers are better suited for fuel cells than electric trucks – the fuel cell truck will allow higher payload and longer ranges.” That’s debatable, but widely accepted as true … for now. Daimler’s own research into lighter, more energy-dense, and lower-cost solid-state battery technology, however, may mean that it won’t be true for long, however.
Unless, of course, Mercedes’ solid-state batteries don’t work (and she would know more about that than I would, as a mere blogger).
Electrek’s Take
As you can imagine, the Karin Rådström post generated quite a few comments at the Electrek watercooler. “Insane to claim that building hydrogen stations would be cheaper than building chargers,” said one fellow writer. “I’m fine with hydrogen for long haul heavy duty, but lying to get us there is idiotic.”
Another comment I liked said, “(Rådström) says that chargers need to be on the grid – you already have a grid, and it’s everywhere!”
At the end of the day, I have to echo the words of one of Mercedes’ storied engineering partners and OEM suppliers, Mahle, whose Chairman, Arnd Franz, who that building out a hydrogen infrastructure won’t be possible without “blue” H made from fossil fuels as recently as last April, and maybe that’s what this is all about: fossil fuel vehicles are where Daimler makes its biggest profits (for now), and muddying the waters and playing up this idea that we’re in some sort of “messy middle” transition makes it just easy enough for a reluctant fleet manager to say, “maybe next time” when it comes to EVs.
We, and the planet, will suffer for such cowardice – but maybe that’s too much malicious intent to ascribe to Ms. Rådström. Maybe this is just a simple “Hanlon’s razor” scenario and there’s nothing much else to read into it.
Let us know what you think of Rådström’s pro-hydrogen comments, and whether or not Daimler’s shareholders should be concerned about the quality of the research behind their CEO’s public posts, in the comments section at the bottom of the page.
SOURCE | IMAGES: Karin Rådström, via LinkedIn.
If you drive an electric vehicle, make charging at home fast, safe, and convenient with a Level 2 charger installed by Qmerit. As the nation’s most trusted EV charger installation network, Qmerit connects you with licensed, background-checked electricians who specialize in EV charging. You’ll get a quick online estimate, upfront pricing, and installation backed by Qmerit’s nationwide quality guarantee. Their pros follow the highest safety standards so you can plug in at home with total peace of mind.
Ready to charge smarter? Get started today with Qmerit. (trusted affiliate link)
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment3 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024