Quietly and behind the scenes, Israel is examining the possibility of a nuclear power plant that will serve it after its gas runs out. The move comes against the background of the "nuclear renaissance", the renewed interest by the world’s largest economies (and not just them) in the combination of energy security and low environmental cost that nuclear energy offers.
Israel will have to get around the elephant in the room: the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which Israel has not signed in order to keep its nuclear capabilities vague, but without which it will be difficult for it to obtain approval for a nuclear power plant. Experts nevertheless believe that the proposals for a nuclear energy program in Saudi Arabia could represent an opening for one in Israel as well.
Since planning and constructing nuclear power plant is a long and expensive program, in order for it to be completed by the day after the gas, serious discussions have to start now. Israel is therefore starting to put out feelers in that direction. "Work is currently being done on constructing a nuclear power plant in Israel for electricity production. The work will be presented to the government in the second half of the year," the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure said. The reference is apparently to work by Dr. Tamir Reisin, head of the Nuclear Energy Division in the Office of the Chief Scientist in the ministry, to produce the regulation required for a nuclear power plant in Israel.
The report of the Inter-Ministerial Committee for the Review of Natural Gas Policy and Enhancement of Energy Security, chaired by director general of the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure Yossi Dayan, also contains certain hints. "The committee recommends setting up a team to examine the issue of energy security with a comprehensive view of the energy industry, including the possibility of using nuclear energy and other forms of renewable and low-emissions energy," the report states.
Minister of Energy and Infrastructure Eli Cohen said, "Nuclear energy is the future of the energy economy. It can help in diversifying sources of energy and providing a response to the needs of future generations. In the coming months, I will work towards presenting the government with a professional study that will decide on the question of constructing a nuclear energy installation."
Lior Gallo, a researcher at the Bank of Israel and a doctoral student in the field of environmental and energy policy at Tel Aviv University, says, "Given Israel’s commitments on climate, it’s important to start formulating the planning infrastructure, since we’re talking about a long, complex process. In 20-25 years’ time, the availability of the existing gas reservoirs will decline substantially, which will create a need for additional sources of energy. Unless a satisfactory solution is found to the main challenges of solar energy, Israel will have to examine a stable energy source that can serve as a continuous basis for the electricity supply. In many Western countries, nuclear energy is part of the energy mix, and there’s room to consider whether it can be similarly feasible and worthwhile in Israel."
Safe, but expensive
Dr. Ori Nissim Levy, a nuclear defense expert and chairman of the World Nuclear Forum 193, says, "The advantages of nuclear energy are enormous. It has no summer and winter, day and night. It only needs to be shut down once every two years to change fuel, and there are technologies today that make it possible to avoid even that," and adds, "It’s surprising, but nuclear energy is one of the safest forms of energy that there are today. Power plants based on fossil fuels are much more dangerous than nuclear energy, because of the mortality caused by the pollution."
"Contrary to popular perception," says Gallo, "according to the research literature, nuclear energy is one of the cleanest and safest forms of production." He says that studies have found that the number of fatalities caused by accidents and air pollution in producing electricity from natural gas is 2.82 per terawatt-hour, which compares with just 0.03 for nuclear energy, a statistic similar to that for solar energy (0.02).
The radiation from a nuclear power plant is also very low. "There are places with much higher natural radiation, such as underground railway stations," says Dr. Levy. "If we were to register similar levels of radiation in a nuclear power plant, it would be shut down. Commercial flights are also exposed to more radiation, and pilots are restricted in the number of trans-Atlantic flights they make so as not to be exposed to too much radiation. In comparison with these things, the radiation from nuclear power plants is considered pretty low."
In fact, the main problem with nuclear energy is not safety, but price: while routine production from nuclear sources is fairly cheap, the capital investment is very high, and the cost is necessarily passed on to the consumer. Furthermore, according to a study reported by Bloomberg, the costs shoot up during construction, particularly in the US and France, two nuclear energy production powers.
The nuclear reactors in South Korea actually do manage to stay more within budget and on schedule, which is apparently one of the reasons that the UAE chose the Korea Electric Power Corporation to build its Barakah nuclear power plant, which provides about a quarter of the UAE’s average power consumption.
At any rate, nuclear energy will find it hard to compete with the low gas prices currently prevailing in Israel, but in the future, when we will have to import liquid natural gas (LNG) at a much higher price, nuclear energy will be competitive. "The construction time for a nuclear power plant is very long, ten years minimum, and when safety standards and other problems are factored in, it can reach twenty years or more. The costs of construction are in the many billions," says Dr. Levy.
Danny Grossman, co-founder of NuClarity, agrees that "the economic challenge in nuclear energy is greater than safety, waste, or public opinion." Together with Dr. Ami Nagler, formerly a member of Israel’s Atomic Energy Commission, he is developing a new type of nuclear reactor that they say will be capable of producing energy much more cheaply than today.
Circumventing the Non Proliferation Treaty
To return to that elephant in the room, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, signed in 1968 to close the nuclear club to new entrants and maintain international stability: most countries are signatories to it, the three main exceptions being Israel (which according to foreign sources has nuclear weapons), India, and Pakistan. Unless Israel signs the treaty, the International Atomic Energy Agency will find it hard to approve the construction of a civilian nuclear energy plant in the country, and without its approval international companies will be reluctant to work on such a project.
Because of Israel’s policy of vagueness on nuclear matters, it’s hard to see how it can sign the treaty, but that doesn’t mean that there is no solution. One way, according to Grossman, is to build a nuclear power plant using the resources of Israeli industry only. "Israel has a basic infrastructure in this field, and the State of Israel has demonstrated that it is capable of developing strategic technologies such as satellites and tanks if it decides to do so, and energy security is certainly strategic. But if we want to produce energy at scale, we need to expand dramatically the number of nuclear engineers, regulation experts, and other professionals. It’s possible, but it requires a decision right now. The costs involved in developing from scratch are high, and the risk is great. But the success of such a program could spur economic growth."
Another way is to enter via the back door, as did India and Pakistan, by signing agreements with existing nuclear states. "India found a solution vis-à-vis the US," says Grossman, "in which the Americans amended legislation in Congress to exempt India only from the condition that commercial ties in nuclear energy required signature on the NPT, thus enabling American companies to supply nuclear equipment and know-how to India."
A third way is the "black box" method. This method was proposed by David Nusbaum, Israel's Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the IAEA until July 2024, actually in the context of other Middle Eastern countries interested in producing nuclear energy. Under this method, Dr. Levy explains, "A long-term contract is signed with the supplier company, which transfers the nuclear fuel in its final form and installs it in the reactor itself, so that there is no way of using it for any other purpose. That would enable us to circumvent the NPT, because it’s impossible to convert the plant to technology for making nuclear weapons," he says.
Grossman suggests solutions that have been proposed in the past, such as the extra territorial method whereby the land on which the nuclear power plant stands will be American. "The disadvantage is high dependence on the US, which can turn off the switch at any moment, and in addition this is a limited solution with no real potential for growth. Another possibility is to construct a power plant at sea, or on the borders of the country in collaboration with Egypt or Jordan." Grossman also mentions Saudi Arabia’s desire to obtain nuclear energy, ostensibly for the day after the oil runs out.
Perhaps US President Donald Trump’s push for approval for nuclear energy for Saudi Arabia could pave the way for American approval for Israel as well, and even supply of the materials, equipment, and know-how for construction of a nuclear reactor in Israel too.
Published by Globes, Israel business news - en.globes.co.il - on May 18, 2025.
© Copyright of Globes Publisher Itonut (1983) Ltd., 2025.