The nuclear fuel chain – uranium mining to radioactive waste problem- European Commission to decide if it is ”green” and”sustainable”
The European Commission is preparing to settle whether nuclear and natural gas are “green” investments in an update to the EU’s sustainable finance taxonomy expected next week, according to several sources. The list will clarify whether nuclear energy generation, waste disposal or fuel supply can be classified as sustainable activities for investors, EU energy commissioner Kadri Simson told a nuclear conference in Paris on Tuesday. French economy minister Bruno Le Maire told the same conference he was convinced France could persuade Germany – which is phasing out its nuclear generation — to agree to including nuclear in the list. Montel 30th Nov 2021 https://www.montelnews.com/news/1277923/ec-set-to-clarify-nuclear-gas-green-status-next-week |
Global heating brings easier Arctic passage for Russia’s floating nuclear power plant to open up Arctic for more fossil fuel mining, more global heating.
World’s first floating nuclear power plant fuels Russia’s Arctic ambitions Ft.com Remote Siberian port lies at centre of plans to open up shipping and reach valuable resources © Nastassia Astrasheuskaya/FT | The Akademik Lomonosov nuclear power plant Share on twitter (opens new window) Share on facebook (opens new window) Share on linkedin (opens new window) Save Nastassia Astrasheuskaya in Pevek YESTERDAY
Moored off the small Arctic town of Pevek is the Akademik Lomonosov — the world’s first floating nuclear power plant and a sign of how President Vladimir Putin’s ambitions for Russia’s far east are taking shape. This port on the northern coast of Siberia was once notorious as a Soviet gulag. These days it is part of Moscow’s plan to open up a major shipping lane through the Arctic and bring natural resources within easier reach. Pevek’s harbour is only ice-free for four months a year but is intended to become a hub for commercial shipping on the so-called Northern Sea Route as climate change gradually eases the passage through the Arctic. And the power provided by the Akademik Lomonosov is intended to help Pevek become a gateway to Chukotka, a region close to Alaska and rich in gold, silver, copper, lithium and other metals…………
Few in Pevek seem concerned by the nuclear reactor in the harbour. “Fear? We have none. Perhaps Russians are not afraid of anything any more. We have seen and lived through everything. We have to be optimistic,” said Igor Ranav, a locally born businessman. “We were told the plant is made with the latest technology and it is safe, and I hope so.”
Development of the NSR is in the hands of Rosatom, the state nuclear corporation. As well as commissioning the Akademik Lomonosov, Rosatom is also in charge of nuclear-powered icebreakers that the company expects will help to open up year-round Arctic navigation by the middle of the decade. …………
Developing Chukotka along with the rest of the Arctic has long been a goal for Putin and Russia, which this week is hosting a plenary meeting of the Arctic Council, where the eight countries of the region are represented. “Russia should expand through the Arctic, as this is where it has its main mineral resources,” Putin said in 2017, when Russia first produced liquefied natural gas in the Arctic and exported it via the NSR. ……………
By mid-century, the Arctic and Antarctic Research Institut expects ice levels to lose another two-thirds in the summer, and to halve in winter. The warming ocean is expected to help cut shipment cost. Less ice means fewer icebreakers and faster journeys.
The warming ocean is expected to help cut shipment cost. Less ice means fewer icebreakers and faster journeys…………….. https://www.ft.com/content/f5d25126-94fc-41fc-bc35-341df0560f4d
Fact check: Is nuclear energy good for the climate?
proponents of nuclear energy “fail to take into account many factors,” including those sources of emissions outlined. All the studies reviewed by DW said the same thing: Nuclear power is not emissions-free.
“Every dollar invested in nuclear energy is therefore a dollar diverted from true urgent climate action. In that sense, nuclear power is not climate-friendly”
Fact check: Is nuclear energy good for the climate? DW 29 Nov 21, Supporters of nuclear energy say it can help us wean our economies off polluting fossil fuels. No surprise, it’s a heated issue. But what about the facts? Can nuclear power really help save the climate?
………….. In recent weeks, particularly during the COP26 climate summit, advocates have been creating a stir online with statements like “if you’re against nuclear energy, you’re against climate protection” and “nuclear energy is about to make a comeback.” But is there anything to it?
Is nuclear power a zero-emissions energy source?
No. Nuclear energy is also responsible for greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, no energy source is completely free of emissions, but more on that later.
When it comes to nuclear, uranium extraction, transport and processing produces emissions. The long and complex construction process of nuclear power plants also releases CO2, as does the demolition of decommissioned sites. And, last but not least, nuclear waste also has to be transported and stored under strict conditions — here, too, emissions must be taken into account.
And yet, interest groups claim nuclear energy is emission-free. Among them is Austrian consulting firm ENCO. In late 2020, it released a study prepared for the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy that looked favorably at the possible future role of nuclear in the Netherlands.
“The main factors for its choice were reliability and security of supply, with no CO2 emission,” it read. ENCO was founded by experts from the International Atomic Energy Agency, and it regularly works with stakeholders in the nuclear sector, so it’s not entirely free of vested interests.
At COP26, environmental initiative Scientists for Future (S4F) presented a paper on nuclear energy and the climate. The group came to a very different conclusion. “Taking into account the current overall energy system, nuclear energy is by no means CO2 neutral,” they said.
Ben Wealer of the Technical University of Berlin, one of the report’s authors, told DW that proponents of nuclear energy “fail to take into account many factors,” including those sources of emissions outlined above. All the studies reviewed by DW said the same thing: Nuclear power is not emissions-free.
How much CO2 does nuclear power produce?
Results vary significantly, depending on whether we only consider the process of electricity generation, or take into account the entire life cycle of a nuclear power plant. A report released in 2014 by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), for example, estimated a range of 3.7 to 110 grams of CO2 equivalent per kilowatt-hour (kWh).
It’s long been assumed that nuclear plants generate an average of 66 grams of CO2/kWh — though Wealer believes the actual figure is much higher. New power plants, for example, generate more CO2 during construction than those built in previous decades, due to stricter safety regulations.
Studies that include the entire life cycle of nuclear power plants, from uranium extraction to nuclear waste storage, are rare, with some researchers pointing out that data is still lacking. In one life cycle study, the Netherlands-based World Information Service on Energy (WISE) calculated that nuclear plants produce 117 grams of CO2 emissions per kilowatt-hour. It should be noted, however, that WISE is an anti-nuclear group, so is not entirely unbiased.
However, other studies have come up with similar results when considering entire life cycles. Mark Z. Jacobson, director of the Atmosphere / Energy Program at California’s Stanford University, calculated a climate cost of 68 to 180 grams of CO2/kWh, depending on the electricity mix used in uranium production and other variables.
How climate-friendly is nuclear compared to other energies?
If the entire life cycle of a nuclear plant is included in the calculation, nuclear energy certainly comes out ahead of fossil fuels like coal or natural gas. But the picture is drastically different when compared with renewable energy.
According to new but still unpublished data from the state-run German Environment Agency (UBA) as well as the WISE figures, nuclear power releases 3.5 times more CO2 per kilowatt-hour than photovoltaic solar panel systems. Compared with onshore wind power, that figure jumps to 13 times more CO2. When up against electricity from hydropower installations, nuclear generates 29 times more carbon.
Could we rely on nuclear energy to help stop global warming?
………….. “The contribution of nuclear energy is viewed too optimistically,” Wealer from Berlin’s Technical University said. “In reality, [power plant] construction times are too long and the costs too high to have a noticeable effect on climate change. It takes too long for nuclear energy to become available.”
Mycle Schneider, author of the World Nuclear Industry Status Report, agrees.
Nuclear power plants are about four times as expensive as wind or solar, and take five times as long to build,” he said. “When you factor it all in, you’re looking at 15-to-20 years of lead time for a new nuclear plant.”
He pointed out that the world needed to get greenhouse gases under control within a decade. “And in the next 10 years, nuclear power won’t be able to make a significant contribution,” added Schneider.
Nuclear power is not being considered at the current time as one of the key global solutions to climate change,” said Antony Froggatt, deputy director of the environment and society program at the international affairs think tank Chatham House in London.
He said a combination of excessive costs, environmental consequences and lack of public support were all arguments against nuclear power.
Nuclear funding could go toward renewables
Due to the high costs associated with nuclear energy, it also blocks important financial resources that could instead be used to develop renewable energy, said Jan Haverkamp, a nuclear expert and activist with environment NGO Greenpeace in the Netherlands. Those renewables would provide more energy that is both faster and cheaper than nuclear, he said.
“Every dollar invested in nuclear energy is therefore a dollar diverted from true urgent climate action. In that sense, nuclear power is not climate-friendly,” he said.
In addition, nuclear energy itself has been affected by climate change. During the world’s increasingly hot summers, several nuclear power plants have already had to be temporarily shut down or taken off the grid. Power plants depend on nearby water sources to cool their reactors, and with many rivers drying up, those sources of water are no longer guaranteed.
The much vaunted “renaissance of nuclear power” is anything but when all the facts are taken into consideration, Mycle Schneider told DW. He said the nuclear industry has been shrinking for years.
“In the last 20 years, 95 nuclear power plants have gone online and 98 have been shut down. If you take China out of the equation, the number of nuclear power plants has shrunk by 50 reactors in the last two decades,” Schneider added. “The nuclear industry is not thriving.” https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-is-nuclear-energy-good-for-the-climate/a-59853315
Melting Arctic sea ice linked to ”worsening fire hazards” in Weatern USA
Arctic sea ice melt has driven an increase in “fire-favourable
weather” across the western US over the past four decades, according to
new research.
The study, published in Nature Communications, finds that low
Arctic sea ice levels during July to October have knock-on impacts in the
atmosphere that push the jet stream northwards. This tends to bring hotter
and drier conditions in the western US over the following autumn, resulting
in more frequent and intense fires in the region, the authors find.
They add that this mechanism may strengthen over the coming decades as the
Arctic melts further, making the western US “even more susceptible to
destructive fire hazards”.
Carbon Brief 25th Nov 2021
CSIRO study proves climate change driving Australia’s 800% boom in bushfires.
CSIRO study proves climate change driving Australia’s 800% boom in bushfires, The Age, By Mike Foley, November 26, 2021 Climate change is the dominant factor causing the increased size of bushfires in Australia’s forests, according to a landmark study that found the average annual area burned had grown by 800 per cent in the past 32 years.
The peer-reviewed research by the national science agency, CSIRO — published in the prestigious science journal, Nature — reveals evidence showing changes in weather due to global warming were the driving force behind the boom in Australia’s bushfires.
Lead author and CSIRO chief climate research scientist Pep Canadell said the study established the correlation between the Forest Fire Danger Index – which measures weather-related vegetation dryness, air temperature, wind speed and humidity – and the rise in area of forest burned since the 1930s.
“It’s so tight, it’s so strong that clearly when we have these big fire events, they’re run by the climate and the weather,” Dr Canadell said.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison went to the COP26 climate talks in Glasgow to commit Australia to reach net zero emissions by 2050, and to upgrade his expectations for Australia’s 2030 carbon cuts, but he defied a global push to commit to phasing out fossil-fuel use. Instead, the Coalition government is backing a significant expansion of the gas industry, which it predicts will be 13 per cent larger in 2050 than it is now.
Under the federal government’s gas industry strategy, taxpayers will support the private sector to develop viable new gas fields and develop an extensive network of new pipelines and related infrastructure.
The bushfire royal commission identified climate change as a key risk to ongoing bushfire catastrophe but did not make recommendations about reducing greenhouse emissions to curb the threat.
The CSIRO report found other factors have an impact on the extent and intensity of bushfires such as the amount of vegetation or fuel load in a forest, the time elapsed since the last fire, and hazard reduction burning. But Dr Canadell said the study showed the link between weather and climate conditions and the size of bushfires was so tight, it was clear these factors far outweighed all other fire drivers…………….
oyal c
Mega-fires, which burn more than 1 million hectares, have “markedly” increased with three of the four recorded from 1930 occurring since 2000, while the gap between big blazes has had a “rapid decrease”, the study says.
Last year, the bushfire royal commission reported fuel-load management through hazard reduction burning “may have no appreciable effect under extreme conditions” that typically cause loss of life and property. https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/csiro-study-proves-climate-change-driving-australia-s-800-percent-boom-in-bushfires-20211126-p59cgr.html
Bellona signs open letter to prevent nuclear energy and fossil gas from being labelled as green
(Signed by 129 reputable European and international organisations)
Granting nuclear and fossil gas the label of sustainability would undermine the EU’s climate targets, divert much-needed investments in the green transition and jeopardize the credibility of the entire European Green Deal. Olaf ScholzFederal Minister of Finance
and Vice Chancellor
11016 Berlin
Germany
Dear Federal Minister,
We are extremely concerned by the announcement of the European Commission’s President, Ursula von der Leyen, to likely label both nuclear energy and fossil gas as sustainable in the context of the EU’s taxonomy. According to media coverage, it was the absence of a strong German voice against nuclear in the European Council on 21/22 October that directly contributed to this decision. In your role as current finance minister and future Chancellor, we call on you to swiftly and decisively confirm the German veto against labelling nuclear as a sustainable form of energy and highlight that the Commission’s attempt to shape this discussion during the sensitive time of a new government being formed in Germany is not acceptable.
The EU taxonomy regulation is meant to provide guidelines for the necessary future-oriented investments for Europe’s economic transition. Nuclear energy, however, is unsustainable due to severe safety risks, environmental pollution and the unsolved waste problem. Fossil gas emits large quantities of climate-damaging greenhouse gases, especially methane, along its extraction and transport chain. Granting nuclear and fossil gas the label of sustainability would undermine the EU’s climate targets, divert much-needed investments in the green transition and jeopardize the credibility of the entire European Green Deal.
Dear Federal Minister, Germany has embarked upon a clear path to phase out nuclear power by the end of next year. NGOs from across Europe count on you to take an equally clear stance against nuclear energy but also fossil gas at the European level. more https://bellona.org/news/climate-change/2021-11-bellona-signs-open-letter-to-take-action-to-prevent-nuclear-energy-and-fossil-gas-from-being-labelled-as-green
These 129 reputable European and international organisations have signed up to letter opposing inclusion of nuclear and gas as being ”sustainable” and ”green”.
| France Nature Environnement, France CEE Bankwatch Network European Environmental Bureau (EEB) The Green Tank, Greece Umanotera – Slovenian Foundation for Sustainable Development, Slovenia Umweltinstitut München e.V., Germany Socio-ecological union international Climate Strategy Group Andy Gheorghiu Consulting, Germany Green Liberty, Latvia 10 BürgerBegehren Klimaschutz Bürgerbewegung Finanzwende, Germany AnsvarligFremtid, Denmark Klimabevægelsen i Danmark (350 Denmark), Denmark Naturschutzbund Deutschland e.V., Germany BirdLife Europe uranium-network.org, Germany eco-union, Spain Mouvement Ecologique (FoE-Luxembourg), Luxemburg urgewald, Germany 20 .ausgestrahlt, Germany 350.org Europe Deutscher Naturschutzring, Germany Stowarzyszenie Pracownia na rzecz Wszystkich Istot, Poland Legambiente, Italy Carbon Market Watch Health and Environment Justice Support (HEJSupport) Counter Balance ZERO – Association for the Sustainability of the Earth System, Portugal Clean Air Action Group, Hungary 30 Alofa Tuvalu, Tuvalu Réseau pour la transition énergétique CLER, France Creatura Think & Do Tank, Finland Women Against Nuclear Power, Finland Women for Peace, Finland The Alliance of the Associations Polish Green Network, Poland FMKK – The Swedish Anti Nuclear Movement, Sweden Polish Ecological Club Mazovian Branch, Poland Stowarzyszenie Ekologiczne EKO-UNIA, Poland Stowarzyszenie Ekologiczno-Kulturalne “Wspólna Ziemia”, Poland 40 Arbeitskreis Indianer Nordamerikas, Austria EuroNatur Stiftung, Germany Our Fish E3G – Third Generation Environmentalism Bioland e.V., Germany Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V., Germany Germanwatch e.V., Germany Fair Finance International National Society of Conservationists – Friends of the Earth Hungary, Hungary Nucléaire Stop Kernenergie – Belgium 50 Tegengas/Dégaze – Belgium IPPNW (International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War), German affiliate, Germany Urgenda Foundation, The Netherlands Focus Association for Sustainable Development, Slovenia Milieudefensie, The Netherlands Za Zemiata/Friends of the Earth Bulgaria, Bulgaria Fair Finance Guide, Sweden Corporate Europe Observatory Jihočeské matky, z.s., Czech Republic | WEED e.V. – World Economy, Ecology and Development, Germany 60ShareAction Global Witness Reclaim Finance, FranceFossielvrij NL, The Netherlands Bürgerinitiative “Kein Atommüll in Ahaus” e.V., GermanyThe Peace Movement of Orust, Sweden Global Nature Fund, Germany Climate Action Network International Transport & Environment NewClimate Institute gGmbH, Germany 70 Miljöringen lovisa Finland Réaction en chaîne humaine pour l’arrêt du nucléaire France Calla – Association for Preservation of the Environment, Czech republic Réseau “Sortir du nucléaire”, France BI “Stoppt Temelin”, Germany GLOBAL 2000 – Friends of the Earth Austria, Austria Suomen luonnonsuojeluliitto (Finnish Association for Nature Conservation), Finland Forum Ökologie & Papier, Germany Plattform gegen Atomgefahren Salzburg (PLAGE), Austria Gas Free Pensions, Europe 80 Réseau Action Climat France PSR / IPPNW Switzerland (Physicians for Social Respon sibility /International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War) Greenpeace Begegnungszentrum für Aktive Gewaltlosigkeit, Austria Hiilivapaa Suomi, Finland Food & Water Action Europe, Europe International Network for Sustainable Energy – Europe ReCommon, Italy Inter-Environnement Wallonie, Belgique 90 Campagna “Per il Clima Fuori dal Fossile”, Italy Movimento No TAP/SNAM Brindisi, Italy Redazione emergenzaclimatica.it, Italy BankTrack, the Netherlands TerraBlu, Italy Bellona Europa, Belgium Bellona Deutschland, Germany Forum Ambientalista O.d.V., Italy Climate Action Network, Europe Associazione Tarantola Rubra, Italy 100 Friends of the Earth, Europe Trivelle Zero Molise, Italy Environmental Coalition on Standards, Belgium Collettivo No al Fossile Civitavecchia, Italy WWF Forlì-Cesena, Italy Coordinamento ravennate Fuori dal Fossile, Italy The Swedish Anti-Nuclear Movement, Branch Gävle, Sweden NOAH Friends of the Earth Denmark Wiener Plattform Atomkraftfrei, Austria Parents For Future Vienna, Austria 110 Trivelle Zero Marche, Italy Parents for Future Gütersloh, Germany A Sud, Italy European Alliance for the Self-determination of Indigenous Peoples, Austria/France/Germany/Switzerland Mom Loves Taiwan Forum Ökologisch-Soziale Marktwirtschaft e.V., Germany WISE Netherlands atomstopp_atomkraftfrei leben!, Austria Freistädter Mütter gegen Atomgefahr, Austria Grandparents For Future Austria 120 Parents For Future Oberösterreich, Austria Frauen für den Frieden Schweiz Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz Deutschland (BUND) e.V – Friends of the Earth Germany, Germany nternational Commission for the Protection of the Alps (CIPRA International), Liechtenstein Rete “Legalità per il clima”, Europe Collectif anti-nucléaire Ouest, France Fédération anti-nucléaire Bretagne, France GasExit Greenpeace, Russia 129 |
Powerful greenhouse gases emitted from Hunterston A nuclear station
| THE release of a refrigerant gas during the ongoing decommissioning of Hunterston A has been revealed at a recent nuclear summit. Hunterston ‘A’ bosses reported two environmental incidents at the station during its decommissioning phase linked to their air conditioning units. Earlier this year, the release of fluorinated gases was noticed. These are powerful man-made gases that can stay in the atmosphere for centuries and contribute to a global greenhouse effect. The incidents formed part of a report to the recent Hunterston site stakeholders meeting. Largs & Millport News 22nd Nov 2021 https://www.largsandmillportnews.com/news/19720653.gas-leak-hunterston-reported-sepa/ |
Latest COP 26 pledges will lead to 16% increase in carbon emissions, NOT the necessary 45% decrease
Let us be clear – Cop26 utterly failed on the only issue that counts:
cutting global carbon emissions. The latest IPCC report stated that we
needed a 45 per cent cut in carbon emissions by 2030. UN analysis of the
latest Cop26 pledges suggests that they will lead to a 16 per cent
increase.
Independent 22nd Nov 2021
IEA: Rate of energy efficiency improvements needs to double to put world on track for net-zero
The IEA is urging other nations to follow in Europe’s footsteps and implement stricter standards and regulations for energy-using products; consider tax incentives for energy efficiency; increase public spending on building and industrial retrofitting and streamlining planning procedures to make efficiency projects more attractive to private finance. Private spending on energy efficiency between 2021 and 2023 is forecast to be more than twice as high as spending by governments.
19 November 2021, source edie newsroom, Sarah George
Globally, energy efficiency has improved in 2021 after a rocky 2020, according to a new analysis from the International Energy Agency (IEA). But the rate of progress will need to at least double to put the world on track for net-zero by 2050, the Agency is warning.
19 November), the 2021 edition of the Agency’s annual Energy Efficiency Report reveals that progress is now back on track as the world emerges from the worst of the Covid-19 pandemic.
2020 saw only a minor (0.5%) improvement to global energy intensity, amid falling energy demands and prices, slowed investment in the energy sector and many energy-using sectors and logistical issues with supply chain and solutions installation.
Global energy intensity is on track to fall 1.9% in 2021, the analysis forecasts. This is a promising yet expected figure – the year-on-year fall was 2% in 2019.
“It is still unclear whether this year’s improved energy intensity will signal the start of a sustained recovery,” the IEA said in a statement.
However, increased investment trends, rising government spending on efficiency – in large part related to recovery plans enacted in response to Covid-19 crisis – new announcements of higher climate ambition and other policy measures offer some encouraging signals.”
To this point, the report forecasts that, by the end of the year, national policies will have helped to generate $30bn of investment in energy efficiency – around 10% of the total set to be allocated between 2015 and 2021.
In recent months, much growth in energy efficiency investment has been concentrated in Europe. Policy supports have included the European Commission’s Renovation Wave and overarching Energy Efficiency Directive, and the UK’s updated Industrial Strategy and Heat and Buildings Strategy.
A long road ahead
Nonetheless, the report emphasises the fact that there is still much more to be done. It highlights the fact that, in the IEA’s scenario for net-zero by 2050, global energy intensity falls by at least 4% each year in the 2020s.
The IEA is urging other nations to follow in Europe’s footsteps and implement stricter standards and regulations for energy-using products; consider tax incentives for energy efficiency; increase public spending on building and industrial retrofitting and streamlining planning procedures to make efficiency projects more attractive to private finance. Private spending on energy efficiency between 2021 and 2023 is forecast to be more than twice as high as spending by governments.
The report emphasises the fact that, while wealthy nations are currently accounting for the majority of global investment in energy efficiency, developing and emerging nations also stand to reap benefits in terms of rapid job creation and economic growth, as well as future-proofing infrastructure and industry. Delivering the 4% annual improvement to global energy intensity, the IEA has forecast, would create four million additional jobs in energy efficiency by 2030, in sectors including construction and retrofitting.
As well as addressing low-hanging fruit using mature technologies, the IEA’s report outlines the potential for implementing the next generation of digital technologies. It states that, by the end of the year, there will be more ‘smart’ connected appliances and sensors in the world than people for the first time. This presents a major opportunity to accelerate energy efficiency improvements.
At COP26, the IEA and the UK Government launched a Product Efficiency Call to Action, which aims to double the energy efficiency of air conditioning, refrigeration, industrial motor systems and lighting by 2030. These four activities account for more than 40% of global electricity demand every year. In total, 14 countries have now signed onto the initiative, which is the largest of its kind. Read edie’s full story here.
Financial hypocrisy in Canada – the pretence that nuclear power is green and cheap
A Global First: BMO Supports Bruce Power with World’s First Nuclear Green Financing Framework, Yahoo Finance TORONTO, Nov. 22, 2021 /PRNewswire/ – Bruce Power, Ontario’s leading private sector power provider, has taken another industry-leading step in its environmental [?], social and governance strategy by launching the world’s first green [?] finance framework with nuclear use of proceeds.
Acting as Co-Lead Green Structuring Agent, BMO Financial Group (TSX:BMO) (NYSE:BMO), today announced the successful issuance of CAD $500 Million in green [?] bonds under the framework, which is designed to guide future issues of green bonds with a focus on Bruce Power’s Life-Extension Program and investments related to increasing the output of nuclear units and extending the plant’s life beyond 2060.
The framework sets out the guidelines in accordance with the Green Bond Principles issued by the International Capital Markets Association (ICMA) and the Green Loan Principles issued by the Loan Market Association (LMA) and Loan Syndications and Trading Association (LSTA) – ensuring the proceeds are exclusively allocated to green projects and activities that promote environmental sustainability and deliver clear environmental benefits.
CICERO Shades of Green, an internationally-recognized leading provider of independent review and second-party opinions on green financing frameworks, [REALLY?} has given Bruce Power’s Green Finance Framework the highest possible governance score of Excellent, and an overall designation of CICERO Medium Green, acknowledging the role of nuclear power in mitigating climate change and recognizing Bruce Power’s strong risk management processes.
Clean nuclear power is crucial to fighting climate change, and today’s announcement marks another industry-leading step in the company’s environmental, social and governance strategy,” said Mike Rencheck, Bruce Power’s President and CEO…..
“We’re proud to partner with Bruce Power to build a green framework that facilitates the alignment of the company’s business and financing activities to support nuclear power’s critical role in mitigating climate change,” said Jonathan Hackett, Head, Sustainable Finance, BMO Capital Markets. ………. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/global-first-bmo-supports-bruce-143800875.html
Climate and biodiversity: mapping the irrecoverable carbon in Earth’s ecosystems
Avoiding catastrophic climate change requires rapid decarbonization and improved ecosystem stewardship at a planetary scale. The carbon released through the burning of fossil fuels would take millennia to regenerate on Earth.
Though the timeframe of carbon recovery for ecosystems such as peatlands, mangroves and old-growth forests is shorter (centuries), this timeframe still exceeds the time we have remaining to avoid the worst
impacts of global warming. There are some natural places that we cannot afford to lose due to their irreplaceable carbon reserves. Here we map ‘irrecoverable carbon’ globally to identify ecosystem carbon that remains within human purview to manage and, if lost, could not be recovered by mid-century, by when we need to reach net-zero emissions to avoid the worst climate impacts. Since 2010, agriculture, logging and wildfire have caused emissions of at least 4.0 Gt of irrecoverable carbon.
Nature Sustainability 18th Nov 2021
Austria prepared to sue European Union if it includes nuclear in green finance taxonomy
Austria ready to sue EU over nuclear’s inclusion in green finance taxonomy, By Nikolaus J. Kurmayer | EURACTIV.com, 18 Nov 2021
Austria’s energy and climate minister Leonore Gewessler told EURACTIV in an exclusive interview that her country was ready to go to court if the EU decides to include nuclear power into the bloc’s taxonomy on sustainable finance.
In October, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced that the EU executive would soon table proposals on gas and nuclear as part of the bloc’s sustainable finance taxonomy, a set of rules designed to provide investors with a common definition of what is green and what is not.
A group of twelve EU countries, led by France and Finland, want nuclear energy included, arguing it is a low-carbon energy source and that radioactive waste can be handled safely if appropriate measures are taken.
But Austria would be ready to challenge that decision in front of the European Court of Justice said Leonore Gewessler, the Austrian minister for climate protection and energy.
“There is no legal basis for including nuclear power in the EU taxonomy,” Gewessler said adding that, “Yes, if the EU taxonomy includes nuclear energy, we are ready to challenge that in court.”
Austria is at the centre of a five-country alliance bringing together Denmark, Germany, Luxembourg and Portugal, which seeks to prevent the inclusion of nuclear energy in the EU’s green finance rules. The alliance was launched during the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow.
Legal analysis
For Gewessler, “the credibility of the taxonomy is at stake” when deciding how to classify nuclear under the EU’s green finance rules.
The Austrian energy and climate ministry commissioned a legal analysis earlier this year, which found that “that the inclusion of nuclear energy is not compatible with the legal basis of Article 10 of the Taxonomy Regulation,” she said.
“We have a great responsibility here, in terms of taxonomy, to remain consistent and coherent” with the ambitions of the European Green Deal and maintain trust in the financial markets, she argued.
“The considerable damage caused by nuclear energy is well documented historically,” she explained, citing “the dangers of nuclear power itself” as evidenced by the Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters.
The safe disposal of spent radioactive fuel is also a matter of concern. “We have not yet found a global solution for…the question of final storage,” she said.
Besides, nuclear power “is much too expensive and much too slow to make a contribution” to the bloc’s climate goals, Gewessler continued.
The next-generation French reactor currently being built at Flamanville, whose construction started in 2007, has been massively delayed, with completion now scheduled in 2023 while costs have increased fivefold, she remarked.
Earlier this month, leading French EU lawmaker Pascal Canfin proposed letting nuclear energy and gas in the taxonomy as “transition” energy sources while the bloc pursues its long-term switch to renewable energy sources.
Canfin’s suggestion is to label gas a “transition” investment when it replaces coal and provided strict emission thresholds are met.
But Gewessler rejected that proposal too. “Just because something is less bad than coal doesn’t make it good or sustainable. It is still fossil energy,” she said………..
Austria’s neighbour Germany can always be counted on in the fight against nuclear power.
“Nuclear power cannot be a solution in the climate crisis, it is too risky, it is too slow, it is too expensive,” explained her German counterpart Svenja Schulze, caretaker minister of the environment, on 11 November.
“No climate activist should rely on nuclear power,” she added.
2021
Heritage Foundation – murky think tank funded by the nuclear weapons industry, wants weapons-makers to be exempt from climate and pandemic regulations
“Defense industrial base” is a buzzword that has picked up steam during the pandemic: It sends the message that, whatever happens with the economy and pandemic, we need to make sure we are in “fighting shape” — by keeping military contractors afloat. This concept was invoked to explain why, at the beginning of the pandemic, factories that produce bombs and tankers should be allowed to stay open, even amid the outbreak risk to workers. And it was also used to justify subsidies to contractors during the hardship of the pandemic.
Lockheed Martin is just one of numerous weapons manufacturers that has directly funded the Heritage Foundation. According to a report by the think tank Center for International Policy (CIP), the Heritage Foundation ranks ninth among the top think tanks that received funding from military contractors and the U.S. government from 2014 to 2019. Lockheed Martin and Raytheon were two of those major funders, both of which are among the largest weapons companies in the world and would be impacted by the new regulation.
This case provides a window into the murky world of think tanks, which are often viewed as academic and above-the-fray institutions but operate more as lobbying outfits.
Think Tank Funded by the Weapons Industry Pressures Biden Not to Regulate Military Contractors’ Emissions https://www.rsn.org/001/think-tank-funded-by-the-weapons-industry-pressures-biden-not-to-regulate-military-contractors-emissions.html
Sarah Lazare/In These Times 19 November 21The Heritage Foundation has received considerable donations from the arms industry. And now it’s trying to shield that industry from climate regulations targeting military contractors.
The Heritage Foundation, a prominent conservative think tank, is publicly opposing a new Biden administration regulation that would force the weapons industry to report its greenhouse gas emissions related to federal contracts. It turns out the Heritage Foundation also receives significant funding from the weapons industry, which makes the case worth examining — because it reveals how the arms industry pays supposedly respectable institutions to do its policy bidding at the expense of a planet careening toward large-scale climate disaster.
The regulation in question was first proposed in an executive order in May. It would require federal contractors to disclose their greenhouse gas emissions and their “climate-related financial risk,” and to set “science-based reduction targets.” In other words, companies like Lockheed Martin would have to disclose how much carbon pollution its F‑35 aircraft and cluster bombs actually cause.
In October, the Biden administration started the process to amend federal procurement rules to reflect these changes. “Today’s action sends a strong signal that in order to do business with the federal government, companies must protect consumers by beginning to mitigate the impact of climate change on their operations and supply chains,” Shalanda Young, acting director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, said at the time.The Department of Defense is the world’s biggest institutional consumer of fossil fuels and a bigger carbon polluter than 140 countries. Yet its emissions (and those of other armed forces) are excluded from UN climate negotiations, including the recent COP26 talks. The Biden administration itself supports a massive military budget, initially requesting $753 billion for the 2022 National Defense Authorization Act, a number that has since ballooned, with the Senate set to vote on a $778 billion plan. Organizers and researchers argue that, to curb the climate crisis, it is necessary to roll back U.S. militarism and dismantle the military budget.
But according to the Heritage Foundation, even this modest proposal is a bridge too far.
Continue readingNo greenwashing in Europe to save the nuclear industry!
No “greenwashing” to save nuclear power! While several states of the
European Union support atomic energy, a collective of associations
dismantles clichés on nuclear power and reminds us that in 2020, renewable
energies (excluding hydraulic) have exceeded the nuclear energy production.
Liberation 19th Nov 2021
1 This Month
19 February – VIRTUAL EVENT-Decision Time: AI and Our Nuclear Arsenal
12:45 p.m. Central / 1:45 p.m. Eastern
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- February 2026 (170)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 