Since the outbreak of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Ukraine’s energy system has undergone a dramatic transformation. Repeated Russian airstrikes have severely damaged thermal and hydropower infrastructure, forcing the country to depend increasingly on nuclear energy to meet its electricity needs.
Before the war, Ukraine operated four nuclear power plants with a total of 15 reactors. Nuclear energy already played a significant role, accounting for more than half of the country’s electricity generation. However, the war has elevated its importance to an unprecedented level.
Nuclear Power as the Backbone
State owned company Energoatom reports that nuclear generation now supplies around 70 percent of Ukraine’s electricity, with some estimates suggesting it has reached as high as 80 percent during peak periods.
This shift has not been driven by expansion in nuclear capacity, but rather by the collapse of other energy sources. Thermal generation, once responsible for up to 35 percent of electricity supply, has been heavily degraded due to shelling, fuel shortages, and infrastructure destruction.
As a result, nuclear power plants have become the backbone of Ukraine’s baseload energy supply, ensuring stability in a system under constant strain.
Loss of Zaporizhzhia Plant
A major setback for Ukraine’s nuclear sector has been the loss of control over the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, the largest nuclear power station in Europe.
Occupied by Russian forces in 2022 and later shut down, the plant accounted for approximately 43 percent of Ukraine’s installed nuclear capacity. Despite this loss, nuclear energy remains the dominant source of electricity due to the widespread destruction of alternative generation facilities.
Destruction of Energy Infrastructure
According to the DiXi Group think tank, Russian attacks have damaged all major thermal and hydropower plants in Ukraine. In 2024 alone, around 10 gigawatts of generating capacity was either destroyed or severely damaged, representing more than half of the country’s consumption needs.
This level of destruction has left nuclear power as the primary stabilizing force within the energy system. Without it, Ukraine would face severe and sustained electricity shortages.
Rising Vulnerability
While nuclear energy has provided resilience, it has also introduced new risks. Greater reliance on a single energy source increases the consequences of any disruption.
Experts warn that the vulnerability is not limited to nuclear plants themselves. The transmission grid, including substations critical for distributing electricity, has also been targeted in attacks. Damage to these systems can prevent nuclear plants from operating at full capacity or delivering power effectively.
Facilities such as the South Ukraine and Khmelnytskyi plants have already faced operational constraints due to damage to surrounding infrastructure.
Structural Shifts and Strategic Changes
The war has also accelerated structural changes in Ukraine’s energy sector. One significant development is the commissioning of a domestic spent nuclear fuel storage facility, reducing Ukraine’s reliance on Russia for nuclear fuel management.
These changes indicate a broader effort to strengthen energy independence and resilience in the face of ongoing conflict.
Analysis
Ukraine’s increasing dependence on nuclear power reflects both resilience and vulnerability. On one hand, the country has successfully relied on its nuclear infrastructure to maintain electricity supply under extreme conditions. On the other, this concentration of dependence creates systemic risk.
The destruction of thermal and hydropower capacity has effectively removed diversification from Ukraine’s energy mix. This makes the system highly sensitive to any disruption in nuclear generation or transmission networks. A single major failure could have nationwide consequences.
The loss of the Zaporizhzhia plant further underscores the geopolitical dimension of energy security. Control over energy infrastructure has become a strategic objective within the conflict, highlighting how energy systems can be weaponized in modern warfare.
At the same time, Ukraine’s shift toward greater nuclear reliance raises broader questions about long term sustainability. While nuclear energy provides stable baseload power, it requires secure infrastructure, effective regulation, and protection from military threats conditions that are difficult to guarantee in an active war zone.
Nevertheless, the crisis has also driven important reforms, particularly in reducing dependence on Russian systems. These changes may strengthen Ukraine’s energy sovereignty in the long run.
Ultimately, Ukraine’s experience illustrates a critical lesson for modern energy systems: resilience is not only about capacity, but also about diversification and security. In wartime conditions, even the most reliable energy sources can become points of vulnerability if they bear too much of the system’s burden.
With information from Reuters.
