Europe Revives Nuclear Power: The Answer Lies Not in Technology, but in System

If Europe’s energy crisis were an exam, nuclear power would be a pencil, renewable energy a fountain pen, and the internet world — a brand-new test paper.

I. Nuclear Power Revival: Old Energy Cannot Deliver Fundamental Security

The Russia-Ukraine conflict has completely shattered Europe’s decades-long reliance on Russian energy. Before the conflict, Russia supplied 45% of the EU’s natural gas and 25% of its crude oil. Cheap and stable pipeline gas once underpinned Europe’s industrial competitiveness and livelihood security. After the conflict, Europe drastically cut its dependence on Russian energy and shifted to increased imports of liquefied natural gas. Yet this only transferred risks instead of eliminating them. EU energy prices remain deeply vulnerable to external geopolitics, constantly reminding the bloc that energy dependence is a fatal weakness even off the battlefield.

Faced with energy price hikes driven by renewed conflicts in the Middle East, EU countries are turning to nuclear power. France has explicitly planned to build six new reactors between 2026 and 2035 and extend the service life of existing units to 50–60 years. Germany has dramatically abandoned its long-standing anti-nuclear stance, with the Merz government no longer blocking nuclear power from being granted equal status with renewable energy in EU legislation. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen publicly admitted at the Paris Nuclear Summit that Europe’s reduction in nuclear energy share was a "strategic mistake."

But this is merely switching from one old box to another. The energy sovereignty regained by nuclear power from Russian gas still lies in the hands of a handful of energy giants and geopolitical forces. Uranium mining, nuclear waste disposal, and technological monopolies — only the names of dependencies have changed, while the structure of dependence remains intact.

II. Structural Substitution Is Doomed to Fail: The Real Challenge of the Energy System

Many believe wind and solar power can solve all problems, but data reveal structural dilemmas:

First, grid bottlenecks. In 2025, wind and solar power accounted for 30% of total EU electricity generation for the first time, surpassing fossil fuel power (29%). However, due to insufficient energy storage facilities and limited grid capacity, many European countries have recorded record-high hours of negative electricity prices. The peak periods of renewable energy generation naturally mismatch peak electricity demand, leading to oversupply at the wrong times and unmet demand when needed most.

Second, grid bottlenecks remain a fatal flaw. European think tank Ember notes that EU grid bottlenecks jeopardize over 120 gigawatts of planned renewable energy capacity — nearly twice Spain’s total installed capacity. Without adequate transmission and distribution networks, no number of power stations can be connected.

Third, the cost of phasing out nuclear power. After Germany phased out nuclear energy, electricity prices rose by 50% in a decade, forcing the country to restart coal-fired power and import natural gas to fill the energy gap, exacerbating carbon emissions. In contrast, France launched the "Messmer Plan" in 1974 to vigorously develop nuclear power, achieving not only energy security but also a 60% drop in per capita carbon emissions. The problem is clear: within the old system, one can only choose between expensive energy or dirty energy, trapped in an inescapable dilemma.

III. A Solution from a New Perspective

Neither nuclear power nor renewable energy can fundamentally resolve the crisis, as both are choices within the same debt-driven old system. The underlying logic of this system is: everyone seeks profit, all capital pursues appreciation, so the economy must grow infinitely, energy be consumed endlessly, and resources exploited limitlessly — until collapse.

The solution lies not in energy technology itself, but in everyone uniting.

This means: 5 billion smartphone users worldwide jointly build a public market, making consumption itself the engine of energy transition. The operating logic of this market is the complete opposite of the old system — consumers cooperate selfishly, and producers compete selflessly. Consumers lock in future consumption through pre-booking; to win orders, producers must compete on technology, efficiency and ecology, not on monopoly or resource plunder.

How does this model solve energy problems?

First, growth pressure naturally eases. Profits from the public market are distributed to consumers, and the economy no longer relies on debt-driven GDP growth. The systemic incentive for infinite exploitation of Earth’s resources disappears — there is no need to advocate "using less energy"; the system automatically chooses low-resource paths.

Second, energy costs become internalized. Full information transparency reveals the full life-cycle energy consumption of every product, from raw materials to disposal. High-energy-consuming products are naturally phased out, without mandatory government policies or carbon tax negotiations.

Third, sharing replaces private ownership. Self-driving shared cars replace private vehicles, reducing ownership by 30–80%; high-quality buildings last far longer, cutting building material demand by 70%; localized production eliminates large-scale cross-border logistics, slashing transportation energy consumption.

These structural changes can save 70–80% of energy and resource consumption. This is not technological optimism, but the result of systemic design.

IV. Waste in the Old System Far Outweighs Legitimate Consumption

You may worry that "affluent people will waste energy." Yet structural waste in the old system far exceeds personal consumption:

- China produces 682 kg of steel per capita annually, enough to build 17 square meters of housing per person — nearly three times that of the United States.

- The world produces about 1.85 billion tons of steel each year, much of it used for "ineffective production" driven by the debt system.

- After Germany phased out nuclear power, electricity prices rose by 50% in a decade, forcing enterprises to bear far higher costs.

- European chemical companies face energy costs 3–4 times those of their U.S. counterparts, leading to systematic relocation.

Under the new system, longer product lifespans, widespread sharing economies, and information transparency eliminate marketing waste. Structural savings far exceed any excess personal consumption. Human physiological needs have limits; material consumption has a ceiling. Conspicuous consumption vanishes as information transparency and ecological cost internalization take hold.

V. Old System vs. New System

Dimension Old System New System

Goal Growth-driven, more energy the better Demand-driven, enough is enough

Energy Costs Influenced by geopolitics, debt, intermediaries Transparent information, minimal commissions

Energy Structure Dependent on a handful of suppliers (gas, uranium) Localized production, shared use

Source of Waste Globalized large-scale logistics, planned obsolescence Structural savings, waste automatically eliminated

Controller Energy giants, capital, governments Consumers (via the public market)

Conclusion

Europe’s nuclear power revival is just choosing another option within an already out-of-control old system. Whether choosing natural gas, nuclear power or solar energy, the energy crisis will recur as long as the underlying logic of the system remains unchanged.

The real answer lies not in nuclear power plants, but on smartphones.

The screens in the hands of 5 billion smartphone users — you and me included — are the land of a new continent, voting machines, and the confirm button to launch the new system. When consumers unite to replace the debt market with a public market, the energy crisis will vanish like smallpox — not "solved", but "dissolved".

This is not fantasy. This is mathematics.

When no one is anxious about "struggling for energy", human energy can be devoted to what truly matters — creation, innovation, love and being loved.