NATO chief advises UK to deal with climate change threat to its Trident nuclear weapons at Faslane
COP26: NATO chief says it is up to UK to address Trident climate change flooding threat. NATO’s secretary general has stressed that it is up to individual nation members of the alliance to take action to protect military resources from the impacts of climate change, amid warnings that Faslane, the home of the UK’s Trident nuclear deterrent, could be
impacted by flooding due to rising sea levels.
Scotsman 3rd Nov 2021
Is it green, or forever toxic? France’s radioactive waste crisis. Nuclear rift at climate talks
Is it green, or forever toxic? Nuclear rift at climate talks
By ANGELA CHARLTON, 4 Nov 21, SOULAINES-DHUYS, France (AP) — Deep in a French forest of oaks, birches and pines, a steady stream of trucks carries a silent reminder of nuclear energy’s often invisible cost: canisters of radioactive waste, heading into storage for the next 300 years.
As negotiators plot out how to fuel the world while also reducing carbon emissions at climate talks in Scotland, nuclear power is a central sticking point. Critics decry its mammoth price tag, the disproportionate damage caused by nuclear accidents, and radioactive leftovers that remain deadly for thousands of years.
……… Many governments are pushing to enshrine nuclear energy in climate plans being hashed out at the conference in Glasgow, known as COP26. The European Union, meanwhile, is debating whether to label nuclear energy as officially “green” — a decision that will steer billions of euros of investment for years to come. That has implications worldwide, as the EU policy could set a standard that other economies follow.
But what about all that waste? Reactors worldwide produce thousands of tons of highly radioactive detritus per year, on top of what has already been left by decades of harnessing the atom to electrify homes and factories around the world.
Germany is leading the pack of countries, mainly within the EU, standing firmly against labeling nuclear as “green.” …..
nowhere in the world is as reliant on nuclear reactors as France, which is at the forefront of the pro-nuclear push at the European and global level. And it’s among leading players in the nuclear waste industry, recycling or reprocessing material from around the world.
South of the World War I battlefields of Verdun, trucks bearing radioactivity warning stickers pull into a waste storage site near the village of Soulaines-Dhuys. They’re repeatedly checked, wiped and scanned for leaks. Their cargo — compacted waste stuffed into concrete or steel cylinders — is stacked by robotic cranes in warehouses that are then filled with gravel and sealed with more concrete.
……….. The storage units hold 90% of France’s low- to medium-activity radioactive waste, including tools, clothing and other material linked to reactor operation and maintenance. The site is designed to last at least 300 years after the last shipment arrives, when the radioactivity of its contents is forecast to be no higher than levels found in nature.
For longer-life waste — mainly used nuclear fuel, which remains potentially deadly for tens of thousands of years — France is laying the groundwork for a permanent, deep-earth repository beneath corn and wheat fields outside the nearby stone-house hamlet of Bure.
Some 500 meters (yards) below the surface, workers carry out tests on the clay and granite, carve tunnels and seek to prove that the long-term storage plan is the safest solution for future generations. Similar sites are under development or study in other countries, too.
If the repository wins French regulatory approval, it would hold some 85,000 metric tons (94,000 tons) of the most radioactive waste produced “from the beginning of the nuclear era until the end of existing nuclear facilities,” said Audrey Guillemenet, geologist and spokesperson for the underground lab.
“We can’t leave this waste in storage sites on the surface,” where it is now, she said. “That is secure, but not sustainable.”
The 25 billion euro ($29 billion) cost of the proposed repository is already built into budgeting by French utilities, Guillemenet said. But that’s just one piece of the staggering cost of building and operating nuclear plants, and one of the reasons that opposition abounds.
All around Bure, street signs are replaced with graffiti reading “Nuclear is Over,” and activists camp out at the town’s main intersection.
Greenpeace accuses the French nuclear industry of fobbing off waste on other countries and covering up problems at nuclear facilities, which industry officials deny. Activists staged a protest last week in the port of Dunkirk, as reprocessed uranium was being loaded onto a ship for St. Petersburg, demanding an end to nuclear energy and more research into solutions for existing waste.
…….. The current energy crunch is giving nuclear advocates another argument. With oil and gas costs driving an energy price crisis across Europe and beyond, French President Emmanuel Macron has trumpeted “European renewables and, of course, European nuclear.”
The waste, meanwhile, isn’t going away.
To make radioactive garbage dumps less worrying to local residents, Andra organizes school visits; one site even hosts an escape game. Waste storage researchers are readying for all kinds of potential future threats — revolution, extreme weather, even the next Ice Age, Guillemenet said.
Whatever happens in Glasgow, “whether we decide to go on with the nuclear energy or not,” she said, “we will need to find a solution for the management of that nuclear waste” that humankind has already produced. https://apnews.com/article/climate-science-business-environment-accidents-b334c5cddc50c620d53674a5b32518dd
A ”scientific disgrace” – a leaked document pushing nuclear and gas as sustainable will damage the EU’s credibilify on green finance.
”the EU Sustainable Taxonomy’s design is aimed at defining which economic activities are green – not which economic sectors are needed for the transition to a net-zero by 2050 economy.”
LEAKED: Paper on gas and nuclear’s inclusion in EU green finance rules https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/leaked-paper-on-gas-and-nuclears-inclusion-in-eu-green-finance-rules/
By Frédéric Simon | EURACTIV.com A proposal to bring both nuclear power and natural gas into the bloc’s green finance taxonomy is circulating in Brussels. The paper has been branded as a “scientific disgrace” by campaigners who warned it would damage the EU’s credibility on green finance.
The so-called “non-paper”, obtained by EURACTIV, lays out detailed technical criteria for gas to qualify as a transitional activity under the EU’s sustainable finance rules.
To qualify as a “sustainable” investment, gas power plants or cogeneration facilities must not emit more than 100 grams of CO2 equivalent per kilowatt-hour, according to the draft paper.
It comes in the wake of declarations by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, who said the EU executive would soon table proposals on gas and nuclear as part of the bloc’s green finance rulebook.
“We need more renewables. They are cheaper, carbon-free and homegrown,” von der Leyen wrote on Twitter after an EU summit meeting two weeks ago where leaders debated the bloc’s response to rising energy prices.
“We also need a stable source, nuclear, and during the transition, gas. This is why we will come forward with our taxonomy proposal,” she added.
Gas as a ‘transitional activity’
The 100gCO2 emissions criteria is the same as earlier proposals circulated last year, which were rejected as too stringent by a group of 10 pro-gas EU countries who threatened to veto the proposal.
To assuage critics concerns, the paper lays out additional criteria for gas plants to qualify as a “transitional activity”, accompanied by a sunset clause (until 31 December 2030) for the commissioning of new plants…………
Campaigners denounced those criteria as “radically weaker” than previous plans drafted by the European Commission.
“This proposal is a scientific disgrace that would deal a fatal blow to the taxonomy,” said Henry Eviston, spokesman on sustainable finance at WWF European Policy Office.
“It would severely damage the EU’s sustainable finance agenda and the EU Green Deal. It must be firmly rejected by the Commission and opposed by all member states,” he added in a statement.
Campaigners were unsure about the origin of the non-paper. But diplomats who spoke to EURACTIV at an EU summit two weeks ago said France has been working behind the scenes to forge a compromise on the taxonomy that would satisfy supporters of gas and nuclear power.
At the initiative of Paris, representatives from like-minded EU countries held a meeting on 18 October to debate nuclear and natural gas in the context of the taxonomy, the EU diplomat said. The meeting was attended by Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czechia, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia.
According to the same diplomatic source, participants discussed compromise proposals for technical criteria to assess the sustainability of gas and nuclear power plants.
Nuclear
On nuclear, the “non-paper” builds on the EU’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) recommendations, which concluded in a July report that nuclear power was safe and therefore eligible for a green label under the taxonomy.
The paper does not propose detailed sustainability criteria at this stage and merely divides nuclear power production activities into four categories:
- Nuclear plant operation: Production of electricity, including the construction, commissioning, operation and decommissioning of nuclear power plants.
- Storage or disposal of radioactive waste or spent nuclear fuel (enabling activity).
- Mining and processing of uranium (enabling activity).
- Reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel (enabling activity).
The “non-paper” comes in the wake of a meeting of EU energy ministers last week where twelve EU countries spoke in favour of nuclear’s inclusion in the taxonomy.
Prominent critics of gas and nuclear’s inclusion in the taxonomy include Elise Attal is Head of EU Policy at the Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI), a United Nations-supported international network of investors.
“Proponents of the inclusion of gas-fired electricity and nuclear energy in the EU Sustainable Taxonomy will argue that these economic activities have a role to play in the energy transition,” she wrote in a recent op-ed published on EURACTIV.
“This argument is beside the point: the EU Sustainable Taxonomy’s design is aimed at defining which economic activities are green – not which economic sectors are needed for the transition to a net-zero by 2050 economy.”
Read the full paper below or download here:
With “net zero 2050” and 1.5°C in same breath, Glasgow reeks of cognitive dissonance
Glasgow will not get close to pledges to halve emissions by 2030, and any reputable climate scientist will say that means warming will shoot past 2°C. The post With “net zero 2050” and 1.5°C in same breath, Glasgow reeks of cognitive dissonance appeared first on RenewEconomy.
With “net zero 2050” and 1.5°C in same breath, Glasgow reeks of cognitive dissonance — RenewEconomy So far most of the media coverage and advocacy at COP26 has been poor andseverely misinformed. One after another politicians, business leaders, journalists and NGO advocates talk about “net zero 2050” and the 1.5°C Paris goal in the same breath, and get away with it. This gross underestimation of the climate condition is utterly delusional, and very few seem to be calling it out.
“Net zero 2050” (NZ2050) is a con, as this blog has reported over and over again, as did this Breakthrough report. Central bankers have NZ2050 scenarios in which fossil fuels constitute 50% of primary energy use in 2050. When the Murdoch media endorses the NZ2050 climate goal, you know it is the problem and not the answer. 2050 is so far away it’s a reason for procrastination. Judging by the G20 outcome, even NZ2050 and a coal phase-out may not pass muster in Glasgow. China is on net zero by 2060 and India on net zero by 2070.Current climate models are not capturing all the risks, including the stalling of the Gulf Stream, polar ice melt and the uptick in extreme weather events.
Carbon dioxide and methane release from deep permafrost are not routinely included in climate models; Climate models do not account well for increased warming due to loss of Arctic sea-ice: “Losing the reflective power of Arctic sea ice will advance the 2ºC threshold by 25years”; and rhe IPCC 2021 report gives “a best estimate of equilibrium
climate sensitivity of 3°C” but including factors such as “slow”
feedbacks (carbon stores) and albedo changes (reflectivity), warming may be
as high as 5–6°C for a doubling of carbon dioxide for a range of climate
states between glacial conditions and ice-free Antarctica.
Renew Economy 3rd Nov 2021
Extreme weather events now the new normal – State of the Climate report 2021
Extreme weather events – including powerful heat waves and devastating floods – are now the new normal, says the World Meteorological Organisation. The State of the Climate report for 2021 highlights a world that is “changing before our eyes.” The 20-year temperature average from 2002 is on course to exceed 1C above pre-industrial levels for the first time. And global sea levels rose to a new high in 2021, according to the study. These latest figures for 2021 are being released early by the WMO to coincide with the start of the UN climate conference in Glasgow known as COP26.
BBC 31st Oct 2021
You don’t need nuclear to get to net zero,’ says climate professor Jeffrey Sachs
You don’t need nuclear to get to net zero,’ says climate professor Jeffrey Sachs, https://www.euronews.com/green/2021/11/01/most-scenarios-today-show-you-don-t-need-nuclear-to-get-to-net-zero-jeffrey-sachsBy Euronews • Updated: 01/11/2021
Jeffrey Sachs, the Director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, is known throughout the world for his effective strategies that address complex challenges.
He has dealt with debt crises, the control of AIDS, malaria and other diseases, the escape from extreme poverty and the battle against human-induced climate change.
Sachs is also a bestselling author, innovative educator, and global leader in sustainable development.
Euronews caught up with him to discuss the global climate crisis ahead of the COP26.
Whether nuclear energy is green or not is a hot debate in Europe. But can we actually afford to rely only on renewables?
Jeffrey Sachs, Director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University:
“Well, the sun isn’t always shining, and it’s expensive to store energy, but now we’re seeing that the cost of storage is coming down so sharply. Technologies are improving for the flexibility and the resilience of renewable-based energy systems. There’s a good line of sight to a non-nuclear all-green future by mid-century. By the way, in the second half of the 21st century, maybe fusion power, which is quite different from how we produce nuclear now with fission.
“Maybe that will come. Maybe we will have nuclear energy in a different and safer way that doesn’t lead to the risk of nuclear proliferation, for example, or accidents or long-lasting nuclear wastes. And of course, always, you say there may be particular places with special challenges. But by and large, most scenarios today show you don’t need nuclear to get to net-zero.”
What are the expectations from COP26? Is it too late?
Jeffrey Sachs, Director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University:
“We have already reached 1.2 degrees Celsius warming. Shocking. The studies show this is warmer than any time in the last 100,000 years. We are continuing to get warmer because Earth has not even caught up yet with the human emissions of greenhouse gases. In other words, the planet is still warming just to catch up with the emissions that we’ve made so far.
“We’re turning a corner. We need to do a lot better. COP26 is set up for the moment when we say sanity. We have leaders around the world that get it. They had better deliver.”
Greenpeace is set for a confrontation with security officials at COP26
Greenpeace is set for a confrontation with security officials at COP26
after revealing plans to dock a ship outside the venue without permission.
The climate group’s Rainbow Warrior yacht set sail from Liverpool on
Saturday night, seeking to sail up the Clyde and dock next to the COP26
venue in Glasgow. Port authorities declined the Rainbow Warrior’s request
to berth, with the area under a tight lockdown as world leaders arrive, but
Greenpeace said that the captain has “decided to ignore the warnings”
and will attempt to dock on Monday morning.
iNews 31st Oct 2021
Hidden agenda: Will COP26 let nuclear power in the door and, if so, why?
Hidden agenda — Beyond Nuclear International October 31, 2021 https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2021/10/31/hidden-agenda/
— The unspoken argument for more nuclear power, By Linda Pentz Gunter
Not that the two things are unconnected. The civilian nuclear power industry is desperately scrambling to find a way into the COP climate solutions. It has rebranded itself as “zero-carbon”, which is a lie. And this lie goes unchallenged by our willing politicians who blithely repeat it. Are they really that lazy and stupid? Possibly not. Read on.
Nuclear power isn’t a climate solution of course. It can make no plausible financial case, compared with renewables and energy efficiency, nor can it deliver nearly enough electricity in time to stay the inexorable onrush of climate catastrophe. It is too slow, too expensive, too dangerous, hasn’t solved its lethal waste problem and presents a potentially disastrous security and proliferation risk.
New, small, fast reactors will make plutonium, essential to the nuclear weapons industry as Henry Sokolski and Victor Gilinsky of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center continue to point out. Some of these so-called micro-reactors would be used to power the military battlefield. The Tennessee Valley Authority is already using two of its civilian nuclear reactors to produce tritium, another key “ingredient” for nuclear weapons and a dangerous blurring of the military and civil nuclear lines.
So here we are again at another COP (Conference of the Parties). Well, some of us are in Glasgow, Scotland at the COP itself, and some of us, this writer included, are sitting at a distance, trying to feel hopeful.
But this is COP 26. That means there have already been 25 tries at dealing with the once impending and now upon us climate crisis. Twenty five rounds of “blah, blah, blah” as youth climate activist, Greta Thunberg, so aptly put it.
So if some of us do not feel the blush of optimism on our cheeks, we can be forgiven. I mean, even the Queen of England has had enough of the all-talk-and-no-action of our world leaders, who have been, by and large, thoroughly useless. Even, this time, absent. Some of them have been worse than that.
Not doing anything radical on climate at this stage is fundamentally a crime against humanity. And everything else living on Earth. It should be grounds for an appearance at the International Criminal Court. In the dock.
But what are the world’s greatest greenhouse gas emitters consumed with right now? Upgrading and expanding their nuclear weapons arsenals. Another crime against humanity. It’s as if they haven’t even noticed that our planet is already going quite rapidly to hell in a handbasket. They’d just like to hasten things along a bit by inflicting a nuclear armageddon on us as well.
Not that the two things are unconnected. The civilian nuclear power industry is desperately scrambling to find a way into the COP climate solutions. It has rebranded itself as “zero-carbon”, which is a lie. And this lie goes unchallenged by our willing politicians who blithely repeat it. Are they really that lazy and stupid? Possibly not. Read on.
Nuclear power isn’t a climate solution of course. It can make no plausible financial case, compared with renewables and energy efficiency, nor can it deliver nearly enough electricity in time to stay the inexorable onrush of climate catastrophe. It is too slow, too expensive, too dangerous, hasn’t solved its lethal waste problem and presents a potentially disastrous security and proliferation risk.
Nuclear power is so slow and expensive that it doesn’t even matter whether or not it is ‘low-carbon’ (let alone ‘zero-carbon’). As the economist, Amory Lovins, says, “ Being carbon-free does not establish climate-effectiveness.” If an energy source is too slow and too costly, it will “reduce and retard achievable climate protection,” no matter how ‘low-carbon’ it is.
New, small, fast reactors will make plutonium, essential to the nuclear weapons industry as Henry Sokolski and Victor Gilinsky of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center continue to point out. Some of these so-called micro-reactors would be used to power the military battlefield. The Tennessee Valley Authority is already using two of its civilian nuclear reactors to produce tritium, another key “ingredient” for nuclear weapons and a dangerous blurring of the military and civil nuclear lines.
Keeping existing reactors going, and building new ones, maintains the lifeline of personnel and know-how needed by the nuclear weapons sector. Dire warnings are being sounded in the halls of power about the threat to national security should the civil nuclear sector fade away.
This is more than a hypothesis. It is all spelled out in numerous documents from bodies such as The Atlantic Council to The Energy Futures Initiative. It has been well researched by two stellar academics at the University of Sussex in the UK — Andy Stirling and Phil Johnstone. It’s just almost never talked about. Including by those of us in the anti-nuclear power movement, much to Stirling and Johnstone’s consternation.
But in a way it’s just glaringly obvious. As we in the anti-nuclear movement wrack our brains to understand why our perfectly empirical and compelling arguments against using nuclear power for climate fall perpetually on deaf ears, we are maybe missing the fact that the nuclear-is-essential-for-climate arguments we hear are just one big smokescreen.
At least, let’s hope so. Because the alternative means that our politicians really are that lazy and stupid, and also gullible, or in the pockets of the big polluters, whether nuclear or fossil fuel, or possibly all of the above. And if that’s the case, we must brace ourselves for more “blah, blah, blah” at COP 26 and a truly horrible outlook for present and future generations.
We are grateful, therefore, to our colleagues attending COP 26, who will be promoting— rather than tilting at —windmills as they make their case, one more time, that nuclear power has no place in, and in fact hinders, climate solutions.
And I hope they will also point out that expensive and obsolete nuclear power should never be promoted — under the false guise of a climate solution — as an excuse to perpetuate the nuclear weapons industry.
Linda Pentz Gunter is the International specialist at Beyond Nuclear and writes for and edits Beyond Nuclear International.
If COP26 fails, it could mean mass migrations and food shortages – Boris Johnson
A failure by world leaders to commit to tackling the climate emergency at
the Cop26 summit in Glasgow could prompt “very difficult geopolitical
events” including mass migration and global competition for food and
water, Boris Johnson has said. Speaking before the start of a gathering of
leaders from the G20 industrialised nations in Rome, where he will push for
countries to arrive in Glasgow with fixed plans to cut emissions, Johnson
said the chances of success hung in the balance.
Guardian 30th Oct 2021
Another example of climate change damaging the nuclear industry -jellyfish increase clogging up cooling systems of reactors
human-induced climate change has raised ocean water temperatures, setting conditions for larger-than-usual jellyfish populations. Further, the relatively warm water near nuclear power plant discharge outlets may attract jellyfish swarms, according to one study. Also, pollution has lowered oxygen levels in sea water, which jellyfish tolerate more than other marine animals, leading to their proliferation.
Jellyfish attack nuclear power plant. Again. Bulletin, By Susan D’Agostino | October 28, 2021Scotland’s only working nuclear power plant at Torness shut down in an emergency procedure when jellyfish clogged the sea water-cooling intake pipes at the plant, according to the Scotland Herald. Without access to cool water, a nuclear power plant risks overheating, with potentially disastrous results (see: Fukushima). The intake pipes can also be damaged, which disrupts power generation. And ocean life that gets sucked into a power plant’s intake pipes risks death.
The threat these gelatinous, pulsating, umbrella-shaped marine animals pose to nuclear power plants is neither new nor unknown. (Indeed, the Bulletin reported on this threat in 2015.) Nuclear power plant closures—even temporary ones—are expensive. To protect marine life and avert power plant closures, scientists are exploring early warning system options. …………
The clash between gelatinous jellyfish and hulking nuclear power plants has a long history. These spineless, brainless, bloodless creatures shut down the Torness nuclear power plant in 2011 at a cost of approximately $1.5 million per day, according to one estimate. Swarms of these invertebrates have also been responsible for nuclear power plant shutdowns in Israel, Japan, the United States, the Philippines, South Korea, and Sweden.
Humans have unwittingly nurtured the adversarial relationship between jellyfish and nuclear power plants. That is, human-induced climate change has raised ocean water temperatures, setting conditions for larger-than-usual jellyfish populations. Further, the relatively warm water near nuclear power plant discharge outlets may attract jellyfish swarms, according to one study. Also, pollution has lowered oxygen levels in sea water, which jellyfish tolerate more than other marine animals, leading to their proliferation.
Some look at jellyfish and see elegant ballerinas of the sea, while others view them as pests. Either way, they are nothing if not resilient. Jellyfish are 95 percent water, drift in topical waters and the Arctic Ocean, and thrive in the ocean’s bottom as well as on its surface. Nuclear power plant operators might take note: Older-than-dinosaur jellyfish are likely here to stay. https://thebulletin.org/2021/10/jellyfish-attack-nuclear-power-plant-again/
EU countries ramp up pressure to grant nuclear a ‘green’ investment label
EU countries ramp up pressure to grant nuclear a ‘green’ investment label, By Kira Taylor | EURACTIV.com, 29 Oct 21,
A group of ten European countries have heaped pressure on the European Commission to grant nuclear energy a ‘green’ label under the EU’s sustainable finance taxonomy, which acts as a guide to climate-friendly investments.
Energy ministers from the group of ten supported nuclear’s inclusion in the taxonomy during an extraordinary meeting of the EU’s Energy Council on Tuesday (26 October), convened hastily last week in response to rising energy prices.
A proposal from the European Commission is now expected “by the end of the year,” said Kadri Simson, the EU’s energy commissioner………
Earlier this month, a group of ministers from ten EU countries signed a joint opinion article saying “nuclear power must be part of the solution” to the climate crisis and included in the taxonomy.
The article was signed by the economy and energy ministers from Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Finland, France, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia.
At this week’s ministerial meeting, the Netherlands offered their support while Sweden also spoke favourably about nuclear………..
Anti-nuclear lobby
By far the smallest group of countries in this debate is those who have spoken out against the inclusion of nuclear energy in the taxonomy. Austria and Luxembourg are the most vocal countries here, with Denmark also cautioning against nuclear.
“We think that it would be wrong to raise nuclear energy as the alternative – it’s not cheap and it’s not secure. The prices for the production of nuclear energy are much higher than that for photovoltaic solar production,” said Gregor Schusterschitz from Austria.
Meanwhile, Luxembourg’s energy minister, Claude Turmes, highlighted the length of time it would take to build new nuclear power plants, saying these would not come online until around 2035, making them useless as a solution to this year’s energy crisis.
He added that “extending nuclear reactors beyond 40 years only represents 10 billion tonnes oil equivalent, so you can see it’s a highly risky, low impact strategy”.
“With taxonomy, I think we have to be extremely cautious. Because look at the financial markets, look at the investors, look at what’s happening already with manipulation,” he told ministers.
Germany – a long-standing opponent of nuclear power – was much more neutral at the meeting, perhaps owing to its yet-to-be-formed government.
“We need to decrease our energy dependency – people are seeing this as a reason for nuclear power. Obviously we can’t achieve consensus at an EU level on the role of nuclear power,” said Andreas Feicht, German energy and economy minister.
The environmental NGO WWF has also warned against including nuclear energy and fossil gas.
“Nothing would do more to undermine the European Green Deal than to include fossil gas and nuclear in the green taxonomy. At the time of the COP26 summit, institutionalised European greenwashing of this sort would send a totally counterproductive global signal,” said Henry Eviston, spokesperson on sustainable finance for WWF European Policy Office………
At some point, the Commission will have to side with either the pro- or anti-nuclear camp. Ministers at the meeting called on the European Commission to publish the delegated act as soon as possible and the executive is beginning to run out of road to kick the can down. https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/eu-countries-ramp-up-pressure-to-grant-nuclear-a-green-investment-label/
World is failing to make changes needed to avoid climate breakdown, report finds
Every corner of society is failing to take the “transformational change” needed to avert the most disastrous consequences of the climate crisis, with trends either too slow or in some cases even regressing, according to a major new global analysis.
Across 40 different areasspanning the power sector, heavy industry, agriculture, transportation, finance and technology, not one is changing quickly enough to avoid 1.5C in global heating beyond pre-industrial times, a critical target of the Paris climate agreement, according to the new Systems Change Lab report.
The dangerously sluggish pace of decarbonization, made plain just days before the start of crucial UN climate talks in Scotland, further highlights how the world is badly off track in its attempts to curb climate breakdown.
Guardian 28th Oct 2021
The European Commission struggles with push to have nuclear power included as clean and sustainable
The Green Brief: Gas, nuclear and the EU taxonomy saga
By Frédéric Simon and Kira Taylor | EURACTIV.com 27 Oct 21, ……………………………..The EU taxonomy regulation has created three categories for sustainable investments: “green”, “enabling” and “transition”. In an interview with the FT, McGuiness said a possible compromise could be to create a new “amber” category for activities that are not “green” as such but are still helpful for the green transition. The Commission is also looking at redefining the “transition” category to prevent the taxonomy from becoming too “binary”, McGuiness said.
With the creation of a new intermediate category, and the definition of clear sustainability thresholds for nuclear and gas, the European Union may just have found the answer to a question that has been bogging down the taxonomy for years.
Some will denounce it as a fudge and an assault on the EU’s green objectives. Others will call it a pragmatic answer to one of the trickiest questions posed by the energy transition.
Ireland European Commissioner considers joining the push to classify nuclear as acceptable in the energy transition to sustainability.
McGuinness moves towards including gas and nuclear in green transition
Irish commissioner in eye of storm as member states row amid energy crisis
Irish Times, Oct 26, 2021, Naomi O’Leary Europe Correspondent . Ireland’s European Commissioner Maireád McGuinness is moving closer to classifying nuclear energy and gas as having a role to play in the transition to climate neutrality as an energy price crisis consumes the European Union.
Soaring electricity bills have made the issue politically explosive as the European Commission prepares to release the second part of its so-called taxonomy, which determines what activities are eligible for funding by green bonds, and therefore billions of euro in budget and Covid-19 stimulus cash directed towards the EU’s goal of reaching carbon neutrality by 2050.
France has lobbied intensely for nuclear energy to be classified as green, and plans to invest massively in the sector. But the inclusion of nuclear has been fiercely resisted by other countries, including Italy and Germany, which has almost completed a planned phase-out of the fuel begun in response to the 2011 Fukushima accident.
Other member states, including Greece, have demanded that natural gas be acknowledged as a good replacement for dirtier fuels though this is abhorred as “greenwashing” by climate groups……..
The deep divisions between member states over the energy issue were evident as they met in Luxembourg for an extraordinary summit on Tuesday dedicated to addressing the electricity cost crisis, which has been spurred by dramatic increases in the price of gas due to a combination of factors including demand in Asia and tight supplies from Russia.
Ireland was among a group of nine northern member states to back a quicker shift to renewable energy, and to reject a call led by Spain and France for EU-level intervention to change how the energy market works to counter price rises.
“We’re coming into the winter and the big concern not just in Ireland but across Europe. was how do we protect people from the rising price of energy, how do we keep vulnerable people warm in their homes this winter,” Minister of State Ossian Smyth said as he left the meeting.
“In the medium term, we also need to think about what we need to do to prevent this kind of crisis from happening again. How do we avoid dependence on foreign powers or unstable areas for our supply of gas, and how can we move faster towards energy independence in clean energy sources like renewables.” https://www.irishtimes.com/business/innovation/mcguinness-moves-towards-including-gas-and-nuclear-in-green-transition-1.4711205
World heading for catastrophe without bolder climate plans, UN warns.
World heading for catastrophe without bolder climate plans, UN warns. The world is way off course from averting climate disaster, and countries’ new commitments to cutting greenhouse gas emissions – unveiled ahead of the Cop26 climate summit – “fall far short” of what is required to reach net zero by 2050, the UN has warned. With just days to go before the critical summit, the UN Environment Programme has found countries’ updated “nationally determined contributions” or NDCs – which set out the level of carbon emissions cuts they are planning – only take a further 7.5 per cent off projected global emissions for 2030, while cuts of 55 per cent are needed to meet the 1.5C Paris goal. That means the current plans would need to have seven times the level of ambition to remain under that limit. Independent 26th Oct 2021 https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/unep-emissions-gap-cop26-catastrophe-b1945011.html |
1 This Month
26 April – Chernobyl: Inside the Meltdown airs on National Geographic on Sunday 26th April from 4pm
29 April – Nuclear Expert Webinar #1 – Radiation Impacts on Families with Mary Olson and Cindy Folkers
- 12:15 PM MT – 1:45 PM MT
- Location: Virtual – REGISTER TODAY
4 May -West Suburban Peace Coalition to discuss Iran war at May Educational Forum
Monday, May 4, 7:00 – 8:00 PM Central Standard Time
Title: : How Trump’s Narrative Tries to Shape the Reality of the War on Iran.
Contact Walt Zlotow, zlotow@hotmail.com 630 442 3045 for further information
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
Pine Ridge Uranium is the real threat, not Tehran- Tell Burgum: Stop the Extraction.
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/2352741955560
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- April 2026 (317)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
-
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 