Strategic Implications of Nuclear Life-Extension Cooperation Between Hungary and Romania

Hungary and Romania have recently reached a bilateral understanding to deepen cooperation on the long-term operation of their nuclear power plants. This initiative, covering both technical coordination and policy alignment, represents a significant development within the broader context of Central and Eastern Europe’s energy security strategy.

Against the backdrop of geopolitical instability, volatile electricity markets, and tightening climate targets, the decision to prioritize nuclear life extension reflects a pragmatic 

reassessment of nuclear energy’s role in Europe’s energy transition.

I. Structural Rationale: Energy Security and Power System Stability

1. Hungary: Paks as a Cornerstone of National Power Supply

Hungary’s Paks Nuclear Power Plant operates four VVER-440 reactors commissioned between 1982 and 1987. The plant has already undergone one 20-year lifetime extension and is now being prepared for operation up to the 70-year timeframe. It currently supplies roughly 50% of Hungary’s total electricity demand.

In an environment of elevated gas import dependency and increasing regional energy competition, the long-term reliability of Paks remains central to Hungary’s macro-level objectives of power security, industrial competitiveness, and inflation control.

2. Romania: Systematic Refurbishment of Cernavodă

Romania’s Cernavodă Nuclear Power Plant operates two CANDU-6 reactors commissioned in 1996 and 2007. A comprehensive refurbishment programme for Unit 1 began in 2017 and is currently progressing through its second phase (2022–2026), with final shutdown and recommissioning planned for 2027–2029.

In parallel, Romania is advancing construction of Units 3 and 4, targeting commercial operation around 2030–2031. This dual-track approach—lifetime extension coupled with new-build capacity—reduces systemic transition risk and enhances long-term supply stability.

II. Nature of the Bilateral Cooperation: Technical and Policy Alignment

Hungary has explicitly characterized the cooperation as both “professional and political” in nature. This suggests coordinated efforts in:

• Mutual exchange of nuclear safety and refurbishment expertise

• Alignment of regulatory review procedures

• Coordinated positioning within the EU energy policy framework

Beyond nuclear energy, both sides are also discussing broader cooperation in infrastructure, transportation, and cross-border connectivity, indicating that nuclear collaboration is being embedded into a broader strategic partnership.

Such an integrated “energy-infrastructure” cooperation model is increasingly characteristic of Central and Eastern Europe’s pursuit of greater strategic autonomy.

III. Implications for Europe’s Energy Transition and Climate Policy

At the European level, the Hungary–Romania initiative reflects three structural trends:

1. Repositioning of nuclear as a stabilizing pillar of the energy transition
   Until large-scale energy storage reaches full maturity, nuclear remains one of the few reliable low-carbon baseload options.

2. Superior cost-efficiency of life-extension compared with new-build
   For fiscally constrained economies, lifetime extension offers a significantly lower capital burden per MWh of secure electricity.

3. Energy security increasingly outweighs ideological divisions
   The prolonged uncertainty surrounding gas supply and regional security has shifted policy priorities toward resilience and controllability.

Nevertheless, life-extension places elevated demands on nuclear safety governance, spent-fuel management, and public trust, while cross-border cooperation introduces additional layers of regulatory coordination and risk-sharing.

A “Stability-Oriented” Nuclear Policy Path for Central and Eastern Europe

The Hungary–Romania nuclear life-extension partnership reflects a broader regional policy trajectory:
anchoring energy security in existing nuclear assets, extending their operational lifetimes for stability, while incrementally expanding both new nuclear capacity and renewables.

This “stability-oriented pathway” avoids the systemic risks of rapid nuclear phase-out as well as the vulnerability of exclusive dependence on intermittent renewables. Under the current constraints of security, affordability, and decarbonization, it represents one of the most realistic strategic configurations for Europe’s evolving energy system.