South Korea has decided to move ahead with new nuclear power plants after months of uncertainty, underscoring how surging electricity demand is forcing industrial economies to confront the limits of renewable energy and rethink earlier policy assumptions.
The government said it will proceed with nuclear construction projects laid out in its 11th Basic Plan for Electricity Supply and Demand, confirming that two large reactors with a combined capacity of 2.8 gigawatts are scheduled for completion in 2037 and 2038. The decision ends a period of policy drift that followed a change in administration and reopened debate over whether the projects would be carried out.
The reversal reflects mounting strain on South Korea’s power system as electricity consumption accelerates alongside the expansion of artificial intelligence, data centers and semiconductor manufacturing. With an isolated grid and little capacity for cross-border power balancing, the country faces growing pressure to secure stable, round-the-clock electricity—something renewables alone have struggled to guarantee.
Climate, Energy and Environment Minister Kim Sung-hwan said the nuclear projects would move forward as originally designed. Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power is expected to begin soliciting candidate sites and pursuing construction permits in the early 2030s. The plan also calls for the development of a small modular reactor by 2035, signaling interest in nuclear technologies that promise shorter construction timelines and greater operational flexibility.
The future of the nuclear plan had appeared uncertain after the new administration suggested it might reconsider the projects following broader public discussion. President Lee Jae-myung questioned the practicality of building new reactors, noting that even if approved, they would not begin supplying electricity for more than a decade.
That skepticism eased as concerns grew that renewable energy alone would be insufficient to support South Korea’s energy-intensive industrial base. Mr. Kim later criticized the previous administration’s nuclear phaseout, arguing that it had become increasingly difficult to justify exporting nuclear technology abroad while declining to build reactors at home. He also pointed to structural limits on renewables in a power system that must deliver uninterrupted supply.
Public sentiment has shifted as well. Recent surveys show more than 60% of respondents support proceeding with new nuclear construction. Critics, however, say the debate has focused heavily on technical feasibility and near-term supply needs, while longer-term issues such as radioactive waste disposal and safety have received less attention.
Time remains the most binding constraint. Large nuclear plants typically take close to 14 years from approval to operation, leaving little room for delay if South Korea hopes to meet its late-2030s targets. The extended period of indecision has already compressed that timeline, fueling criticism that valuable time was lost without resolving fundamental questions.
South Korea’s return to nuclear power is less a full-throated endorsement than a concession to economic and energy realities. As electricity demand grows faster than alternative systems can scale, policymakers have concluded that ambition alone cannot close the gap—and that nuclear energy, despite its political and social costs, remains the most reliable option available.
