Sweden’s pivot towards nuclear power is a seismic shift in its energy landscape, driven by urgent decarbonisation goals and energy security concerns. The government’s ambitious plan to install at least 2,500 MW of nuclear capacity by 2035, with an eye on 10,000-12,000 MW by 2045, signals a dramatic departure from decades of nuclear phase-out policies. This revival, however, is fraught with complications and complexities that demand careful navigation.
The Swedish nuclear sector is grappling with a multitude of challenges. The first is the need to re-engage and expand the actor network. This includes traditional utilities like Vattenfall and Fortum, innovative startups such as Blykalla, municipalities, consultancy firms, and academia. Managing this diverse network requires robust mechanisms for co-ordination, knowledge sharing, and conflict resolution. The second challenge is institutional realignment. The removal of restrictive phase-out legislation and the introduction of new legislative initiatives and financial mechanisms mark a significant policy shift. However, governmental agencies need to develop the skills and resilience to handle the institutional complexities that come with this realignment. The third challenge is technological innovation and integration. The revival encompasses the optimisation of existing reactors, construction of new large-scale reactors, and the introduction of innovative solutions like SMRs and Generation IV technologies. These technologies require integration into existing energy systems, adaptation of regulations, mobilisation of finances and workforce, and many other components of a large socio-technical system.
The complexity of Sweden’s nuclear revival reflects the natural intricacies of large socio-technical systems. It arises from the interdependence of numerous variables – technological, social, institutional, and political – that cannot be separated or resolved in isolation. For example, for new nuclear projects, complexity stems from poorly articulated agendas of diverse actors, regulatory inertia and financial risks, lagging behind institutional frameworks, all compounded by the need to co-ordinate these in an unprecedented energy transition for decarbonisation. Regulatory inertia, in particular, poses a significant hurdle. Decades of nuclear phase-out policies have left regulatory frameworks ill-equipped to handle the complexities of new nuclear technologies or new-build projects, particularly SMRs. Governmental agencies tasked with adapting these frameworks face a lack of expertise due to the absence of new nuclear construction since the 1980s. Multiple agendas and varying routines of engaged regulatory stakeholders further complicate the process. The delay in establishing clear licensing processes and technology standards creates uncertainty for investors and developers, slowing progress.
The availability of expertise in nuclear energy, construction, and related fields represents a critical grey area in Sweden’s emerging new nuclear sector. The lack of new nuclear construction since the 1980s has led to a significant gap in expertise, ranging from nuclear engineering to concrete pouring at construction sites and managerial competencies at municipalities. This expertise gap poses a significant challenge to the successful implementation of Sweden’s nuclear revival.
The Swedish nuclear revival is a complex socio-technical task that requires careful navigation. The government’s ambitious plan to increase nuclear capacity is a significant shift in energy policy, but it is fraught with complications and complexities. The success of this plan will depend on the ability of stakeholders to co-ordinate and address issues such as public acceptance, workforce readiness, and the economic viability of new nuclear projects. The interplay between complication and complexity in Sweden’s new nuclear initiative provides critical perspectives on whether pursuing new nuclear is the right path for Sweden or if the risks of encountering insurmountable complexity outweigh the potential benefits of realising the government’s plans.
