Public support for climate action is conditional on governments finding least-cost pathways through the transition. Populist political parties will court voter support through demanding costless solutions which are not available.

Opposition to higher carbon taxes, accompanied by loud protestations of concern about global warming, are a staple among populists of both left and right.

Since the EU emissions targets for 2030 are national totals, every sector has an interest in ensuring that all other sectors get close to target.

Should key sectors like transport and electricity, where low-cost emissions reductions may be possible, succeed in curbing emissions, there will be reduced pressure for impositions on sectors where reductions will have higher economic costs.

In Ireland, one of these is dairy farming – if transport and electricity can deliver cheaper emissions cuts, dairy farmers should cheer them on.

The European Commission has just provided an opportunity to do so. On New Year’s Eve, the Commission released an invitation for member states, and the European Parliament, to respond to draft proposals relating to the financing of the transition to a new power generation system for Europe.

There is to be a list of power generation technologies which will qualify for preferential status under assorted EU directives

The details, shorn of the dreadful Euro-speak jargon, are as follows. There is to be a list of power generation technologies which will qualify for preferential status under assorted EU directives. These will, under the Commission’s proposals, include both nuclear and gas-fired plants, at the discretion of member states. No state will be told what powergen technology to endorse but can add gas and nuclear to the list if they wish.

The governments will be consulted later in January and the European Parliament a few months later. A supermajority of governments at the European Council, or a simple majority of MEPs, would force the Commission to think again.

Under the Commission’s proposal, the list of power generation technologies classified as “green” would be expanded beyond wind and solar to include nuclear and some low-carbon gas-fired units.

The German government, a coalition including the Green party, has come out against the scheme even though it would not be mandatory – each member state would retain the prerogative of choosing its own power generation strategy. This is a divisive issue in Germany, where nuclear units in perfect working order have been closed before the end of their useful lives and where coal-fired generation is scheduled to be phased out more slowly than elsewhere.

The Irish Government has conceded, after some hesitation, that there will have to be long-term reliance on gas

France has a substantial nuclear industry and intends to build more.

The Irish Government has conceded, after some hesitation, that there will have to be long-term reliance on gas. A national power system cannot run entirely on intermittent renewables. Gas is, of course, a fossil fuel and gas-fired generation entails carbon emissions, but the newer gas plants are improving in fuel efficiency and per-unit emissions are well below coal, oil, or turf. There can be no logical Irish objection to the enhanced classification of gas – the Government’s climate plan is to expand renewables but with adequate gas-fired backup.

The Green party and the environmental lobby groups will be tempted to decline the Commission’s invitation to endorse nuclear.

Some European countries will choose to continue retiring older nuclear plants and will not build new ones

While there are no current plans to build nuclear units here, there would be no need to adopt any if the Commission’s proposal survives – it is no more than an enabling measure, permitting member states to choose nuclear and to classify it favourably alongside renewables as a powergen technology with very low lifecycle emissions.

Some European countries will choose to continue retiring older nuclear plants and will not build new ones. That is the policy stance in Germany, at least for now. But the nuclear option has been revived as climate policies are prioritised and both France and the United Kingdom have recently signalled that they see a long-term future for the industry.

In Ireland, the construction of the Moneypoint coal station, commissioned in 1985 and, at 900 megawatts, roughly the size of the nuclear designs then on offer, effectively took nuclear off the table.

If they deliver as promised, it is possible that a replacement baseload technology will become available

Moneypoint will close and new nuclear designs could become available early in the 2030s, including smaller units better suited to the Irish market.

The companies developing these next-generation nuclear designs are expressing confidence that they will be less costly.

If they deliver as promised, it is possible that a replacement baseload technology will become available as some of the older combined-cycle gas stations approach retirement.

The no-nuclear-here policy of recent decades has been rather academic, since the economics made no sense given the adequacy of conventional capacity and sluggish demand.

Decarbonisation must now be accomplished, alongside a planned and sizeable expansion of electricity usage in transport and space heating. The Government has accepted that some new gas stations will be needed to supplement the high reliance on interruptible wind. They should also opt for a wait-and-see stance on nuclear power.