The Power of Nuclear

8 May

Marco and Amy talking on stage at Octopus

May 2025

Featuring: Marco Visscher, author of The Power of Nuclear

Fission in the Age of Renewables

On 6th May, Earth Set hosted Dutch environmental journalist Marco Visscher at Octopus HQ for a conversation on one of the most fraught—and fascinating—questions in the energy transition: what role should nuclear fission play in the 21st-century energy mix?

Marco is the author of The Power of Nuclear, a myth-busting and deeply human account of how nuclear power fell from grace and why it might deserve a second look. Once a nuclear sceptic himself, Marco began researching the topic when he noticed a strange gap: no other low-carbon technology was treated with quite as much suspicion or hostility.

“I wasn’t interested in nuclear,” he admitted. “But I was interested in the contradiction. Why does this technology, which offers clean, abundant energy, generate such a visceral response?”

His book—and our conversation—ranged widely: from the Cold War psychology of radiation fear, to regulatory inertia, to the curious role of environmental NGOs in cementing opposition. Along the way, we heard insights that challenged many long-held assumptions.

⚛️ Nuclear’s Image Problem

Much of the public debate around nuclear, Marco argued, still draws on mental models shaped by Chernobyl, Fukushima, and the atomic bomb. Radiation, unlike other pollutants, is invisible—and that gives it an outsized emotional power.

But the data tells a different story. According to UNSCEAR, the UN's scientific body on radiation, the number of deaths directly attributable to Chernobyl is in the low hundreds, with long-term cancer impacts in the thousands—not the tens or hundreds of thousands often assumed. Fukushima, meanwhile, caused zero deaths from radiation exposure, but thousands of lives were disrupted by fear, evacuation, and loss of community.

“There’s no other energy source,” Marco said, “that sparks both standing ovations and furious shouting on panel discussions.”

🔋 How Nuclear Compares

To put things in context:

A typical nuclear reactor produces 1.6 GW of power continuously—about the same as 500 large onshore wind turbines or 7,000 acres of solar panels.
Unlike wind or solar, nuclear can run 24/7, without weather dependency—providing what’s known as baseload power.
Across its lifecycle, nuclear has one of the lowest death rates per kilowatt hour, comparable to wind and solar—and far below coal or oil.

And yet, as Marco noted, nuclear’s rollout has stalled. In the 21st century, as many plants have shut down as have come online. Meanwhile, fossil fuels still supply around 80% of the world’s energy.

🇬🇧 What About the UK?

The UK government wants 25% of electricity from nuclear by 2050, up from around 14% today. But delivery is slow. Hinkley Point C won’t be online until late this decade, and the new Great British Nuclear initiative is still in the early stages of selecting a small modular reactor (SMR) design.

Marco urged caution on the SMR front. “It’s a great story on a PowerPoint slide,” he said. “But we don’t know yet whether they’ll scale—or whether regulators are ready to deal with them.”

What could help? A standardised design, repeated builds, and more courage on cost and communication. “The Chinese are doing this—building the same plant again and again. That’s how you get learning curves.”

🧠 What Needs to Shift?

Communication: “If you keep talking about safety, people hear danger.” Instead, Marco argued, the industry should focus on what nuclear actually delivers: clean, reliable, zero-carbon power.
Public trust: Local communities near nuclear plants often support them; it's those further away, with less information, who object.
Political courage: “We need to build not one, but many plants. If we think nuclear has a role, we need to act like we believe it.”

🌍 Why It Matters

As climate deadlines tighten, the question isn't just whether nuclear is safe—but whether we can afford to leave it out of the mix. Marco’s final reflections were sobering: we may be running out of time for elegant solutions. If we continue to hesitate, we may end up relying on geoengineering and carbon capture as emergency stopgaps—far riskier bets, in his view.

For those working in climate tech, policy, investment, or infrastructure, this conversation was a reminder that energy transitions are as much about psychology, politics, and trust as they are about technology.

We’re grateful to Marco for joining us, and to the Earth Set community for another evening of thoughtful, high-quality dialogue.