Feb 18, 2026
3 min read
Two experts close to the government admit that in energy prices in 2028, 2029 and 2030 with an operational plant, but they ask ...
The anti-nuclear report of the Moncloa strategist admits that beyond Almaraz will reduce the price of electricity
Although two of the actions of experts close to the government have accepted that the plant will work in 2028, 2029 and 2030, it will be closed because it will harm new energy.
Extending the useful life of the Almaraz nuclear power plant will be one of the major energy battles of 2026. Waiting for the report of the Nuclear Safety Council (CSN), which examines the modification of the operating license of the Extremadura power plant, two reports prepared by well-known experts close to the government in recent weeks also recognize that the proposed law of the owner will help to energyextending.in the following years.
Both reports defend the need to not extend the life of power plants, because continued operation would mean incurring a penalty for building new renewable energy installations, which is an inexpensive technology.However, their estimates suggest energy prices will be lower in 2028, 2029 and 2030, when Almaraz becomes operational, if planned investments in renewable technology are also maintained.
Importantly, the plant, currently Spain's largest power plant with two reactors, can rely on gas imports for fuel from Russia, the United States and Algeria.CO2 emissions will also be lower while the Extremaduran plant is operational.
This was stated by Natalia Fabra in a recently published study titled "Cost and Emissions Impact of Extending Nuclear Power Plant Operating Periods."Made in Spain.Fabra, director of Redeia and former director of Enagas, is considered very close to the government's energy ideology Teresa Ribera.
In its report, it admits that postponing the shutdown of Almaraz from 2027 - the reactor 2 shutdown date - to 2030 would reduce energy prices by 8.44% in 2028, 14.52% in 2029 and 12.65% in 2030% of the 1. maintenance.Emissions, on the other hand, would decrease by between 14 and 23% because nuclear energy would replace gas production.
But Fabra's main thesis is that investments in renewable energy sources will be cut, which will make the bill more expensive in the long run, as a negative signal will be sent to investors in wind and photovoltaic parks, as well as storage technologies.If they fall by 25% in relation to expectations, the price will rise to 7.10 in those years;2.88% and 10.29% respectively.
Another report by the University of Rey Juan Carlos and the Polytechnic of Catalonia, commissioned by Greenpeace, also admits that keeping Elmerez active until 2030 means a "temporary" relief on electricity bills between 2028 and 2030, although prices will return from 2031. Environment director Eloy Sándroez Sandroez is also responsible for the report.
People in the energy sector are surprised that both positions, even while acknowledging that Almaraz is reducing electricity bills, are concluding that it is better to close the plant as soon as possible rather than extend its life.
And once Fabra and Sanz both "connect" Almaraz to the grid, the price of renewable energy will drop, emissions will be generated, and new investment will be discouraged. Solar power is expected to reduce acquisition costs by 12-23%. Wind power is 5-13%. They estimate investment losses of up to $26.13 billion.
But other sources deny this point."This reading ignores a basic economic principle: If the expectation is that future prices will rise, as both studies show for 2031 and beyond, the incentive to invest in low-cost technologies such as renewables does not decrease, but rather increases," they explain.
"Simultaneously saying that 'prices will rise' and 'you will not invest in the cheapest' requires the assumption of a static market, without adaptive regulation and without rational investor response," they add.
The same sources also looked at the assessment made in the two reports on the impact of renewable surplus."In the real world, renewable deployment doesn't just depend on the price of the area in two or three years," they said.This is due to the existence of tools such as contracts for difference, payment for capacity, storage and network planning mechanisms.All this can support the investment even if the captured prices are temporary will go down.
Another important aspect of both studies is that they rely on the "stepping effect" of delaying the closure of Almaraz, as its closure will coincide with that of Asco I and other Cofrentes reactors in 2030, and of Asco II at the end of 2031. 2031 and emissions of 24% according to Natalia.
"However, the risk now is not to extend the life of the plant, but to close it without lowering the tariff, in line with other plans, or without grid installation and the necessary flexibility," said other sources, who also blame the output of renewable energy not on Almaraz, but on grid congestion."The solution is more demand, more networks and flexibility, not artificially extinguishing strong capacity to free up space."
