1.1 What should the government do to encourage the construction of new nuclear power stations?

1. Offer guarantees against political fluctuations.
   Energy companies and suppliers from megawatt to gigawatt-scale power plants are reluctant to embark on large and long-term projects, as governments have shown themselves to be unreliable in the past. Examples are the Atomausstieg in Germany, the nuclear exit in Belgium and the biomass failure as well as the situation around the Eemshaven power plant in the Netherlands. Recent nuclear power plant projects in France, Finland and Britain have been hampered by a stacking of government-enforced changes in preparation and construction. The government itself thus poses an unacceptable high risk to these commercial ventures. By designing a long-term vision including a state  guarantee or state participation, the government can become a reliable partner again.
     
2. Create new forms of government funding mechanisms to ensure low-interest loans for new nuclear builds.
   An overstretched electricity market with unplanned overproduction leads to marginal and even negative electricity prices. It is therefore important that new medium to large-scale power plants which do not receive price guarantees or which do not have quotas are financed in a new way. Interest rates are to a significant extent decisive for the cost of electricity production of new plants. These low interest rates are possible if the government is the financing provider (i.e. issues guarantees), or if a form of financing is chosen such as RAB (Regulated Asset Based financing model). We propose that EZK, I&W, ANVS, energy companies and potential reactor partners work together to mitigate these costs as much as possible.
     
3. Perform a macroeconomic cost-benefit analysis of nuclear energy.
   We believe that the Dutch government can make a commitment at a relatively low cost by financing a large part of the initially needed capital. Since the government is 'in the same boat' as the private operator, the latter can be sure that the government does not change its mind halfway through. From a social point of view, such a commitment is desirable because of the CO₂ reduction that, especially in later years will bring a great deal of prosperity.
     
4. Work together with energy companies and vendors to achieve a more balanced cost structure.
   Research for the UK government by LucidCatalyst shows large differences in capex (capital expenditure) for identical power stations in Western and non-Western countries. An important difference is the interest rate which we discussed under point 2. Other cost aspects also show major discrepancies between Western and non-Western reactors. The research establishes a relationship between a negative government influence and higher costs. We propose that EZK, I&W, ANVS, energy companies and potential reactor partners work together to mitigate these costs as much as possible.
    
5. Identify national and international opportunities for cooperation, leading to serial production in reactor technology.
   As with wind turbines and solar panels, nuclear reactors can be progressively cheaper through serial production. To stimulate this process, promising reactor designs must be identified. To this end, cooperation can be carried out with countries and energy companies. The willingness to use the same reactor designs can be a strong lever in the rapid decarbonisation of our economies.
    
6. Enable provinces and RES regions to jointly develop nuclear power plants to achieve their RES objectives.
   Nuclear power plants can produce large amounts of heat and electricity, more than enough for one RES region. That is why we propose that RES regions should be able to jointly implement nuclear power stations to achieve their common carbon reduction and clean energy production objectives.
    
7. Encourage energy companies to replace their fossil and/or biomass plants with nuclear power plants.
   Existing power plants have a connection to the high-voltage grid and the provision of cooling facilities. This infrastructure is valuable and can be redeployed. We propose encouraging energy companies to convert existing fossil and biomass plants into nuclear power plants.
    
8. Encourage research into the use of nuclear energy for non-electrical processes.
   Nuclear energy can play a significant role in decarbonising the chemical industry and steel production. Utilization of nuclear heat can help in the transition to a fossil-free future. It is also ideally suited to produce hydrogen and clean drinking water.
    
9. Leverage compatibility of the Dutch licensing framework with efficient commissioning of innovative reactor systems
   Internationally and within the Netherlands, concerns have often been expressed as to whether the 'admission framework', i.e. the regulations and the supervisory authorities, are designed to allow innovative reactor systems. Research shows that, especially in the Netherlands, it is not the regulation that hinders innovation.
    
10. Raise the level of nuclear knowledge in the government.
    In the last 10 years, radiation and education institutes such as the Dutch Association for Radiation Protection (NVS), the Reactor Institute in Delft (RID), the Health Council, the ANVS and the RIVM have signaled that nuclear education and research have been seriously underperforming. Just recently, the Advisory Council for Science, Technology, and Innovation (AWTI) wrote an urgent letter about this.
     
11. Bring peace of mind to radiation-protection policy.
    In the nuclear sector, two issues play a major role: radiation protection and continuous improvement. Underlying these issues is a third principle: LNT, which stands for Linear No Threshold. In this section we briefly explain how these issues are related and affect the nuclear industry.
     
12. Bring peace of mind to society – proactively take up the discussion about waste storage.
    As the broader social conversation about nuclear energy becomes serious, politicians should start talking about the usefulness and necessity of achieving a long-term storage solution for radioactive waste. Such a conversation is already being discussed by the Rathenau Institute; they are preparing a report on which several authors of this white paper have given input.
     
13. Ensure that nuclear energy is considered sustainable in the EU Taxonomy.
    One of the barriers for nuclear energy is financing. One factor that determines this within the EU is the way in which nuclear energy will be included in the European Taxonomy. We call for nuclear power stations of the current generation, which show that they recycle their waste, to also be eligible for sustainable financing. As a result, although their fuel costs ill increase slightly, their financing costs will decrease.