Among all energy sources, both renewable and non-renewable, some enjoy greater acceptance among the public, while others are the subject of widespread debate and rejection. In this article we will explore in depth the technologies and energies that generate the most controversy, with a particular focus on those that, due to their relationship with the environment, have been categorized as less accepted by public opinion.
Nuclear energy has historically been one of the most debated, along with others such as fracking, cloning and genetically modified plant cultivation. However, it is nuclear energy that probably arouses the greatest reluctance in society. What are the reasons behind this considerable rejection by public opinion?
Results of a study on the acceptance of energy and technologies
A recent study revealed the following figures regarding the social acceptance of various technologies and energies in Spain:
- 33,4% of the population shows disapproval towards the cultivation of genetically modified plants, partly due to fear of possible unknown health effects, in addition to the lack of scientific information accessible to the general public.
- 31,3% of respondents oppose cloning for ethical reasons, assuming that these practices interfere with nature and “play God.”
- Fracking, the hydraulic fracturing method for extracting natural gas, has a 27% rejection rate. Although this technique creates jobs in countries such as the United States, there are notable concerns about its environmental impact.
- However, nuclear energy tops the list of rejections, with 43% disapproval. This rejection is mainly associated with the fear of catastrophic accidents such as Chernobyl (1986) and Fukushima (2011), events that continue to mark the collective imagination.
This study was carried out within the framework of the VIII Survey of Social Perception of Science, organized by the Spanish Foundation for Science and Technology (Fecyt). The data show that, despite the rejection, there is a growth in interest in nuclear energy, which increased by 5% in the last two years. Greater availability of scientific information seems to have awakened curiosity about this type of energy.
Evaluating technologies and their benefits
The survey covered a total of 6.357 interviews, carried out in all the autonomous communities, and reflects a greater inclination among young people towards science and technology. Surprisingly, 4 out of 10 Spaniards show considerable interest in scientific advances, including new technologies related to energy.
It is noteworthy that 54,4% of respondents believe that advances in science and technology contribute positively to the well-being of society. However, a segment of 5,8% continues to maintain the opposite.
As for the most valued technologies, the Internet and mobile telephony continue to top the list, although stem cell research and the growth of the drone sector are also highly valued. In contrast, nuclear energy is perceived as dangerous and of little benefit to society, especially among adults over 45.
Nuclear energy in the Spanish energy debate
In the Spanish context, nuclear energy has been experiencing a difficult path. Recently, the rethinking of the role of nuclear energy in the global energy mix has gained relevance, driven by the events of the conflict in Ukraine and the subsequent energy crisis. Faced with the need for energy sources that ensure supply, some countries have begun to reconsider their withdrawal from the nuclear sector.
In Spain, however, the path of gradual closure of nuclear plants has been reaffirmed, to be carried out between 2027 and 2035, as part of the National Integrated Energy and Climate Plan (Pniec). This plan is based on the progressive replacement by renewable energies and supporting technologies such as combined cycles that, despite using gas, emit less CO2 than their predecessors such as coal.
In contrast to other European countries, such as France, which is banking on nuclear energy as one of its main energy sources, or Germany, which continues to rely on gas, the Spanish government has opted to divest from nuclear infrastructure. All of this, under the argument of a transition to 100% renewable energy in the coming decades.
Advantages and disadvantages of nuclear energy
Although nuclear power does not emit greenhouse gases during operation, it has significant disadvantages that contribute to its rejection. Mainly, the environmental challenge of radioactive waste management and the inherent safety risks in case of accidents have been the main arguments against it. These problems not only have a high economic cost, but also create an environmental debt for future generations.
Despite these reservations, some advocates point out that the ability to generate large amounts of electricity without direct CO2 emissions makes it a solid alternative to reduce the impact of climate change, particularly in those countries that still rely heavily on fossil fuels.
On the other hand, one criticism is the high cost of building new reactors. Recent projects have suffered cost overruns and long delays, such as the Olkiluoto-3 reactor in Finland, which took 20 years to complete and quadrupled its initial cost, raising questions about the economic viability of expanding this type of energy.
The role of nuclear energy in the ecological transition
While Spain's plan strongly supports renewable energy, some experts believe that nuclear energy could complement the transition process, due to its reliability and ability to generate constant energy, especially at times when renewables, such as solar and wind, may not be available due to climatic factors.
Consulting firms such as Capgemini have stated that complete decarbonisation by 2050 will be very difficult without an expansion of nuclear capacity. In their recent report, they point out that global nuclear capacity would need to triple to achieve zero-emissions targets.
Despite these forecasts, Spain remains firm in its decision to phase out this type of energy, although it recognises that in some sectors of the energy transition, such as combined cycle power plants, the use of natural gas will continue to be necessary to avoid blackouts, especially while renewable energies are not fully developed.
The debate over whether to include nuclear and gas energy in the EU's green taxonomy has also been a matter of discussion. While countries such as Germany have opted for gas and France continues to strongly support nuclear energy, Spain has stated that these energies have a transitional role, but cannot be considered *green*. This approach seeks to avoid sending wrong signals to the financial markets that would divert investments from their true objective: the creation of clean, sustainable and renewable energy sources.
Spanish society, in particular, continues to express its concern about radioactive waste, which has not yet found a viable solution. The fact that Spain depends largely on other countries for the storage and management of this waste creates an international dependency that generates energy insecurity.
The international context continues to change, but what seems clear is that, while the energy debate continues to evolve, nuclear energy in Spain continues to be rejected by a large part of society. In the future, it will be seen whether the plans for the transition to clean energy will be able to meet the expectations set without generating new dependencies or energy conflicts.