Juan Pedro Sánchez
President of AMAC"The population lives very much at ease near a nuclear power plant"
Juan Pedro Sánchez, Mayor of Yebra (in the province of Guadalajara), was re-elected in September 2023 as president of the Association of Municipalities in Areas with Nuclear Power Plants (AMAC). In this interview with Foro Nuclear, he stresses the importance of safety in nuclear facilities and states that the nuclear industry generates tremendous economic development, which also helps to stabilize the population. "In areas where nuclear power plants have been shut down, if you ask the residents what other industry they would like to see established there, they will tell you to build another nuclear power plant", he says.
What is AMAC, and who comprises it?
AMAC is an association comprised of 60 municipalities across Spain, representing the entire political spectrum, and located near nuclear facilities, be it nuclear power plants or waste storage sites such as the centralized facilities for very low, low and intermediate-level waste at El Cabril in the province of Córdoba.
What common goal do you pursue?
We are clear about our common goal, which is to uphold the foundational principles of the association. AMAC was founded in 1988 in Mont Roig del Camp (Tarragona, Catalonia), with three very specific goals: the main one is to ensure that the sites operate with safety guarantees, both for the workers and the general public, and specifically so that the residents of the nearest municipalities can perceive that there is real safety. The second goal is to promote information and transparency regarding the activities carried out at nuclear power plants and waste storage sites. We believe this is vital and essential to gaining the acceptance of the population in the vicinity. Lastly, but not less importantly, we aim to work on developing the economic and social aspects of these areas, encouraging alternatives to the nuclear industry.
We are also part of a European association, of which we were founding members, the Group of European Municipalities with Nuclear Facilities (GMF). In this group, we exchange a great deal of operation information with counterparts from other countries. This has proven to be quite useful and interesting.
What are your concerns regarding the nuclear shutdown planned for the coming years in Spain?
What we want is for technical experts to speak. We are logically concerned about the future of our areas because it is an industry that generates tremendous economic development, which also helps stabilize the population in our generally small municipalities. This is very important to us. However, we do not wish to prioritize any of these concerns over safety, given that we live in our small villages next to the nuclear power plant and everything that matters to us is there: our children, families and homes. For this reason, our most important demand is that the sites be safe.
And who can determine whether they are safe or not? We have one single point of reference, the Spanish Nuclear Safety Council (CSN), which offers us all kind of assurances regarding nuclear safety and radiological protection. As long as these facilities are safe, as long as the experts say it is safe, we see no objective reasons to bring forward the shutdown.
"As long as technical experts say they are safe, we see no reason to bring forward the nuclear shutdown"
Do people live at ease near nuclear power plants?
People live very much at ease. In my case, for example, I have been seen the nuclear power plant since I was born and I have noticed that it has always operated with an extremely high level of safety. There were never any accidents that affected the population. Over the years, we have received much more information than we initially did. This has helped us understand the plant internally, including the safety protocols and procedures they use in their operations. Ultimately, this provides peace of mind to the surrounding areas. In fact, there is practically unanimous agreement in the regions where nuclear power plants are located. When they are shut down, if you ask residents "what industry do you think should be established here?" most respond that the best alternative would be another nuclear power plant, preferably larger. I believe they live without worries. Of course, absolute safety does not exist, not in this nor any other activity no matter how harmless it may seem, but the data when compared to other industries is quite clear.
You live in the province of Guadalajara, precisely where the José Cabrera (Zorita) nuclear power plant, now dismantled, was located. In what condition do these areas end up??
The truth is that they are left in a very, very bad state. We must consider that all nuclear power plants, except for the one in Vandellós in Tarragona, are located in sparsely populated rural areas with few alternatives. It is an industry that generates a great deal of employment, not only directly but also indirectly.
"Nuclear power plants generate a great deal of direct and indirect employment, and a lot of economic activity"
When the sites close, these areas are left severely impacted. When you speak to the communities and say "we are going to offer you alternatives," they do not even wish to discuss this "just transition" because they will not accept it or embrace it. This happened in Zorita and Garoña, and now it is happening in Almaraz, which is next in line to be shut down according to the decommissioning schedule on the table. The disappearance of these sites is very hard on the population, and they do not want to come to terms with it. I completely understand, because it is their livelihood, the company that made it possible for them to live near their homes for many years. I would even go as far as to say that in many cases it is also a sentimental matter.
Does this just transition you mention come with sufficient support?
We are happy with the Institute for a Just Transition and the Ministry for the Ecological Transition and the Demographic Challenge (MITECO), but the aid provided is insufficient. There needs to be a significant combination of support and commitment from all government levels. Ultimately, realistically speaking, any industry will go where conditions are favourable for profitability, and this is normal. You cannot force a company to establish itself in a location if it does not find it attractive. In many regions, we have offered free land to encourage some type of industry to settle, but most of the time it is not worth it for them. It is much more advantageous to set up a factory or industry in well-connected areas close to large populations, to avoid longer commutes and have access to a larger pool of human resources.
What solution do you propose?
I believe there needs to be significant financial aid and positive fiscal discrimination if we truly want to combat the depopulation of rural areas in Spain. There must be support to ensure that small village businesses can continue to survive. For example, if a baker in my hometown Yebra pays the same taxes as one in a larger town or city where the potential customer base is much bigger, we are effectively condemning many services to disappear and, in doing so, contributing to the irreversible acceleration of depopulation The same applies on an individual level —if there is no support for those who live in and keep these small communities alive, they will soon become history and disappear much sooner than we expect.
Yebra was one of the candidate municipalities to host the Centralized Temporary Storage (ATC) facility, whih has now been ruled out. Is that correct?
If Yebra had been chosen, I am convinced that today the ATC would either be operational or at a point of no return. The situation was ideal; geologically it was the best site and it was also a nuclear zone, which carried its own advantages. However, a political decision was made that did not take technical criteria into account, and we all know what happened: a lot of money was invested and lost, and most importantly, the failed project makes locating future nuclear project sites even more challenging.
When this process began in 2004, AMAC had a clear opinion regarding the ATC: instead of having waste dispersed across all nuclear facilities, we preferred a single storage facility to manage it better, more efficiently and safely, while giving the scientific community the necessary time to research, progress and work on the best possible solutions. However, 20 years later, circumstances have changed. All nuclear power plants now have individual storage facilities and their pools are no longer saturated, which eliminates the risk of their operation. Considering that the ATC was a temporary solution, we are now advocating for the definitive solution, a Deep Geological Repository (DGR). Moreover, we think the initially proposed timelines can be significantly shortened. While the goal is to have it operational by 2073, we firmly believe it could be ready by the late 2040s or early 2050s.
"With the ATC ruled out, efforst must now focus on finding a site for the Deep Geological Repository, which is the definitive solution for nuclear waste"
We know that technically there are no problems. The issue is social acceptance, and that is why we need to start working on it right now with sufficient time, prudence, common sense and political willingness. Together we could find the definitive solution for the management of high-level radioactive waste.
Recently you met in Extremadura with the president of the regional government to collaborate on the continuity of Almaraz
That is correct. We believe that those of us who think the Almaraz nuclear power plant can extend its operation need to come together and work toward this common goal. Currently, this position is shared by the Junta of Extremadura, the provincial councils of Cáceres and Badajoz, AMAC and countless groups who do not understand why the Almaraz nuclear power plant is set to close in 2027. Why should we shut down a site after 40 years when it could operate for 60 or even 80 years with favourable reports from the CSN? If tomorrow the Nuclear Safety Council were to issue a technical report stating that the site is not safe, we would not grant even three or seven years of extension. AMAC would immediately advocate for the closure to happen the very next day. I repeat, safety is a non-negotiable issue for the association with zero compromises.
However, if, as we are currently seeing, Almaraz’s performance indicators suggest it is one of the safest nuclear power plants in the world, I find it neither logical nor reasonable to close it within the planned timeframe. It strikes me as a lack of common sense to shut down Almaraz when it is among the safest internationally.
"It strikes me as a lack of common sense to shut down Almaraz when it is among the safest internationally"
Would you like to add anything?
I would like to point out that nuclear energy should not be used politically; it should not have an ideology, it is neither right-wing nor left-wing, and there is no sensible argument to justify the closure of the Spanish nuclear plants within the established timeframes. Nuclear energy does not pollute, it does not emit CO2 into the atmosphere, and it must be part of the energy mix to ensure a reliable electricity supply for the system. Closing nuclear power plants in Spain's current situation is a luxury we cannot afford.
