European citizens divided over nuclear energy
European citizens divided over nuclear energy – What Greeks believe, https://greekcitytimes.com/2022/01/07/european-citizens-nuclear-energy/A “tie” prevails in the European public opinion for the production of energy through nuclear power plants, as recorded by the latest relevant Eurobarometer survey.
The differences, however, are large from country to country, with the weight of “NO” prevailing in the EU’s largest population, Germany, where 69% are against this form of energy.
It is also striking that in France, where about 70% of energy is produced in individual plants, the disapproval rate is quite high at 45%.
This number is particularly important if one takes into account that at this time the French government, with the personal mobilisation of President Emmanuel Macron, seeks to classify nuclear energy in “environmentally friendly” technologies.
This issue has provoked several reactions, both from some countries and from political forces, with the European Greens declaring a few days ago that they are considering appealing to the European Court of Justice against the Commission for its proposal.
Austrian Environment Minister Leonore Gewessler had hinted at something similar, with experts in European law questioning whether such an appeal could be justified.
Overall in Europe and with a sample of around 27,000 respondents the acceptance and rejection rates were exactly the same, with 46%.
3% had no opinion and 5% did not answer.
Opinions on solar (92%) and wind energy (87%) are overwhelmingly positive.
The countries with the highest percentages of negative opinion after Germany and Austria (66%) included Greece and Luxembourg.
Citizens are divided in Belgium, Denmark, Spain and Portugal, where YES or NO does not prevail.
High levels of support were recorded where nuclear power is already being used – the Czech Republic with 79%, Bulgaria with 69%, Poland with 60%, as well as in Finland where a new nuclear reactor has recently started operating. The survey also recorded slightly higher acceptance rates among men surveyed than women.
UK: Blackburn and Darwen Council approving and old nuclear dump site for commercial development ?
A CONTROVERSIAL development site which residents and politicians fear is
above buried nuclear waste has been kept in the latest version of a
borough’s planning blueprint.
Blackburn with Darwen Council included the 94
acres of countryside near the M65’s Junction 5 in its draft local plan
published last year as suitable for employment uses.
But residents and WestPennine Tory councillor Julie Slater fear nuclear waste was dumped down old
mineshafts in the 1950s. Now following a consultation a new version of the
blueprint has been published and the the green belt land between Belthorn
and Guide remains earmarked as ideal for commercial and job-creating
development.
Lancashire Telegraph 7th Jan 2022
Fault found in France’s Chooz 2 nuclear reactor – its outage shutdown now extended
Chooz 2 nuclear reactor outage extended after fault discovered
Reuters PARIS, Jan 6 (Reuters) – The outage of the 1.5 gigawatt (GW) No.2 reactor at the Chooz nuclear power plant in northern France has been extended after an inspection found the same fault as at the Civaux plant in the west of the country, operator EDF (EDF.PA) said on Thursday.
The two plants were shut down in December after discovery of corrosion in a safety system at the Civaux plant. read more
The reactor outage was extended to Apr. 20 from the previous expected return date of Jan. 23.
| The repair solution is being investigated with the French nuclear safety authority ASN, EDF said, adding that inspections on the Chooz 1 reactor are still in progress…………French power grid operator RTE said in December that French nuclear capacity in January was expected to be at its lowest level ever for this time of year. read more ….Nuclear power accounts for about 70% of France’s electricity mix and the COVID-19 pandemic has delayed maintenance work on some nuclear reactors. https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/chooz-2-nuclear-reactor-outage-extended-after-fault-discovered-2022-01-06/ |
Scotland very nearly reached goal of 100% renewable energy over 2020
Final figures released by the Scottish government show that the country
just missed out on reaching its goal of 100% of its energy consumption
being from renewables by 2020. In the year, the equivalent of 98.6% of
gross electricity consumption in Scotland was from renewable sources in
2020, up on the provisional figure of 97.4% released in May 2021.
Current 6th Jan 2022
UK’s Heysham nuclear plant to shut down two years earlier than planned
The Heysham 2 nuclear power station in Lancashire is set to shut down for
good two years earlier than planned following a new assessment. The power
station, the fuel for which is made at the Springfields factory at Salwick,
will now stop generating power in 2028. In 2016, the site’s operational
life was extended by seven years to 2030 as no new power station projects
were in the pipeline and nuclear is needed to maintain a steady base load
for the electricity grid.
Blackpool Gazette 9th Jan 2022
Including nuclear power as ”sustainable” completely undermines the European taxonomy’s original aim of the Green Deal
The published proposal is an incredible greenwashing of long outdated and dangerous technologies. It undermines the taxonomy’s original goal of providing investments for an ecological restructuring of society – the Green Deal.
Instead, the proposal keeps the nuclear technology, which has long since failed in reality, alive and tempts to rely on fossil gas for too long. Every euro that flows into nuclear and gas based on this
classification is missing for real sustainability and effective climate protection.
Ausgestrahlt 5th Jan 2022
https://www.ausgestrahlt.de/blog/2022/01/05/eu-taxonomie-analysiert-yellow-deal-statt-klimaschutz/
Government Wants YOU to Pay for New Nuclear
Thanks to CND for this information: The government is trying to force through controversial new legislation which will make consumers bankroll the nuclear power industry, whilst giving them no protection from spiralling costs. This will force thousands more families into fuel poverty. The electricity generated from nuclear power is double the costs of renewables. Nuclear […]
Government Want YOU to Pay for New Nuclear — RADIATION FREE LAKELAND (UK) ON BY MARIANNEWILDART
The government is trying to force through controversial new legislation which will make consumers bankroll the nuclear power industry, whilst giving them no protection from spiralling costs. This will force thousands more families into fuel poverty. The electricity generated from nuclear power is double the costs of renewables. Nuclear is hampered by generic design flaws, long delays and safety risks. It’s dangerous to people and planet. To meet Britain’s 2050 net zero goals, instead of forcing consumers to bankroll a failed industry, the government should be investing more in renewables.
Contact your MP, urging them to vote against the Bill on Monday 10th January. See briefing CND is sending to MPs.
We are writing now to urge you to vote against the Nuclear Energy (Finance) Bill which has its final reading in the House of Commons on Monday 10 January.
This controversial new legislation will force consumers to bankroll the nuclear power industry, whilst giving them no protection from spiralling costs. This will force thousands more families into fuel poverty.
The Bill will enable energy companies to charge consumers to construct and operate new nuclear power plants under a regulated asset base (RAB) funding model. Evidence shows that under such models, costs for nuclear power stations abandoned during construction as well as cost over-runs of $2.1 billion are all being passed on to consumers. Richard Hall, Chief Energy Economist at Citizens Advice, who gave evidence to the parliamentary Committee examining the Bill, argues ‘…consumers do not have any control over the risk. Essentially, they are the passive recipient of the risks.’
The electricity generated from nuclear power is twice the price of renewables. Nuclear is hampered by generic design flaws, long delays and safety risks. It’s dangerous to people and planet. To meet Britain’s 2050 net zero goals, instead of forcing consumers to bankroll this costly, inefficient and dangerous form of power generation, the government should be investing in renewables and making homes energy-efficient to reduce carbon emissions as well as energy bills.
As you know there is no “away” for nuclear wastes and the government are presently spending eyewatering amounts of money on public relations largely in Cumbria to try and persuade the County to bury heat generating nuclear wastes under our precious and irreplacable land and sea. The reason? Not for safety’s sake but in order to clear the decks for more nuclear crapola for which we all must pay time and time again in every way possible?
We urge you to vote against this Bill.
with many thanks
Marianne Birkby on behalf of
Radiation Free Lakeland
France – a serious anomaly detected in several EDF nuclear reactors
Nuclear: a serious anomaly detected in several EDF reactors. While several
nuclear production units are not running due to ten-yearly inspection
visits, EDF announced on Thursday that it would extend the shutdown of a
reactor at Chooz by three months, after having detected a fault there
similar to that of another plant. stopped. While this has so far only been
identified in reactors of the same generation, it questions the safety of
the fleet, on which France depends to produce its electricity. In the
Tribune, Karine Herviou, Deputy Director General of the Institute for
Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety (IRSN) reports a serious anomaly.
La Tribune 6th Jan 2022
Les Echos 6th Jan 2022
Reuters 6th Jan 2022
UK Parliament to debate Nuclear Energy (Financing) Bill on 10 January – may transfer billions of new nuclear costs to consumers
The Nuclear Energy (Financing) Bill has its final reading in Parliament on Monday 10 January. If passed, it will change the way the nuclear power industry is financed, transferring billions of pounds onto individual
consumers, whilst affording them no protection from spiralling costs. This will force thousands more families into fuel poverty. CND is urging all Members of Parliament to vote against this legislation.
CND Briefing 6th Jan 2022
Coronavirus cases doubled in a few days at Sellafield nuclear site
CORONAVIRUS cases at Sellafield have more than doubled in a week as
Omicron continues to spread rapidly throughout the county. Numbers of cases
among those employed on the site rose from 320 in the week to Wednesday 29,
up to 712 in the week to January 5.
Carlisle News & Star 7th Jan 2022
https://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/19829854.coronavirus-rates-double-week-sellafie
Nuclear submarine visiting Gibraltar puts people and the environment in danger
Gibraltar fury erupts as US submarine told to leave Rock over ‘nuclear risk’
A US submarine has been urged to leave Gibraltar in order to stop putting the Rock at “nuclear risk”. Express UK, By MICHAEL CURZON, Tue, Jan 4, 2022. The USS Albany made a scheduled port visit in Gibraltar on December 30, 2021. Ecological campaigners criticised the visit as putting the Rock at a ”nuclear risk” over the New Year period and demanded the submarine to “leave”.
Spanish non-governmental organisation Verdemar Ecologistas en Acción said the presence of nuclear submarines at the rock puts thousands of people – along with the environment – at risk.
It said: “Campo de Gibraltar does not want to participate in any submarine war.
“We continue to insist that these submarines are floating bombs and put our families and our environment at risk.”
The organisation was equally critical in December following reports of a UK Astute-class vessel docking in Gibraltar. ………….
t also doubled down on its insistence that the submarine “leave and stop putting at nuclear risk” the Cadiz coast of the Strait of Gibraltar.
The USS Albany made a further stop in December off the coast of Limassol, Cyprus and engaged in coordinated operations with NATO.
Additional reporting Maria Ortega. https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1544360/gibraltar-news-us-submarine-nuclear-risk-uss-albany
Falkland Islands in a nuclear-free zone, yet Britain deployed 31nuclear weapons there.
UK Deployed 31 Nuclear Weapons During Falklands War, January 5, 2022 British warships in 1982 were armed with dozens of nuclear depth charges in a nuclear-free zone in Latin America, Richard Norton-Taylor reports. Consortium News, By Richard Norton-Taylor Declassified UK.
The revelation is contained in a new file released to the National Archives. Marked “Top Secret Atomic,” it shows that the presence of the nuclear weapons caused panic among officials in London when they realized the damage, both physical and political, they could have caused.
The military regime in Argentina claimed the Falkland islands and invaded on April 2, 1982. The U.K. government under Margaret Thatcher dispatched a naval task force to the South Atlantic to retake the islands.
A Ministry of Defence (MoD) minute, dated April 6, 1982, referred to “huge concern” that some of the “nuclear depth bombs” could be “lost or damaged and the fact become public.” The minute added: “The international repercussions of such an incident could be very damaging.”
Nuclear depth bombs are deployed from navy ships to attack submerged submarines.
The unidentified official who wrote the minute continued:
“The secretary of state [John Nott] will wish to continue the long-established practice of refusing to comment on the presence or absence of UK nuclear weapons at any given location at any particular time.”
Heated Row
The existence of the weapons provoked a heated row between the MoD and the Foreign Office. The latter asked the MoD to “unship” the weapons. The Navy refused to do so……………………………….
Nuclear Free Zone
The Foreign Office was also anxious about the presence of the nuclear weapons because of the 1967 Treaty of Tlatelolco. This established a nuclear free zone in Latin America and surrounding waters, including the Falklands.
Although Britain had signed and ratified the treaty’s protocols other countries, including Argentina, had not done so. According to Freedman, Margaret Thatcher insisted that no ship carrying nuclear weapons would enter the three-mile territorial waters around the Falklands which would be a “potential breach” of the Tlatelolco treaty.
The MoD admitted in 2003 that British ships in the task force carried nuclear weapons and that a weapon container had been damaged. But the number of weapons had not been revealed before this document was transferred to the National Archives in Kew, south west London.
But a number of documents from the file have been weeded by the MoD or the Cabinet Office. They include an intriguing note, dated April 11, 1982, beginning “The Chiefs of Staff believe…” What they believed we are not allowed to know.
What About Gibraltar?
Many more documents are missing from a separate file, now declassified, entitled “Gibraltar: Impact of the Falklands Crisis”.
Gibraltarians, like the Falkland Islanders, inhabited a British “Overseas Territory” and were concerned because Spain supported Argentine claims of sovereignty over the islands just as it claimed Gibraltar, the large rock and British base on the southern tip of the Iberian peninsula.
Whitehall weeders have withheld no fewer than 73 documents from the Gibraltar file. They have done so under exemptions in the Freedom of Information Act, and, specifically, sections 27(i), 40 (2), and 41.
These cover information whose disclosure might “prejudice” the interest of the U.K. abroad, “personal data” and “information provided in confidence.” Passages in other documents in the file have also been excised.
What has the British government to hide? Documents declassified previously may offer some clues. Thatcher repeatedly expressed concern about the implications of the Falklands crisis for Gibraltar.
Despite the public rhetoric, successive U.K. governments have been prepared to negotiate about sovereignty of the Falklands and sought a joint sovereignty agreement with Spain over Gibraltar in 2000 and again in 2002. This article is from Declassified UK. https://consortiumnews.com/2022/01/05/73354/
Ireland’s EU commissioner Mairead McGuinness insists that nuclear power is ”green”, amidst backlash over the EU ”taxonomy”
McGuinness insists EU move to label nuclear and gas ‘green’ based on science
Comments come amid backlash towards draft of so-called taxonomy
Naomi O’Leary Europe Correspondent, Irish Times, , Jan 4, 2022 Ireland’s EU commissioner Mairead McGuinness has insisted that a controversial plan to classify some nuclear and gas power energy as “green” for investment purposes is based on scientific advice.
It comes amid a backlash towards a draft of the so-called taxonomy, which is a labelling system for economic activities deemed to be “green” and is intended to drive investment towards achieving the European Union’s goals of carbon neutrality by 2050.
The draft was issued on New Year’s Eve, hours before a deadline to release it within 2021. The Commission has been forced to deny this was an attempt to slip the proposals out with little notice.
The deeply contentious file falls under Ms McGuinness’ brief as commissioner for financial stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union, putting the Irish former Fine Gael MEP in the hot seat as EU member states and political groups tussle over the topic.
Setting standards
The taxonomy is intended to set standards for what kind of activities businesses can present as “green”. There are plans to make it apply also to EU funds, potentially driving a flood of money towards the sectors included.
Under the draft plans, nuclear power plant investments could be labelled as green if it is a “transitional” fuel and receives a permit before 2045. Any project must include funding, plans and a site for the safe disposal of radioactive waste………
The draft proposal has been sent to member states and the European Parliament and will now be subject to discussions. It could be blocked if a qualified majority of at least 20 member states, or half the MEPs in the European Parliament, vote to oppose it.
Austria’s climate minister responded to the draft by threatening to “sue” if the plan for nuclear went ahead as described. Meanwhile, some in the nuclear industry protested the proposed tightened standards were too strict. The issue also caused discord between the Green and Social Democrat parties in Germany’s new coalition.
Ms McGuinness said in a statement to The Irish Times that the Commission’s work in the area “is based on robust, science-based criteria” and that the taxonomy regulation “gives a prominent role to scientific advice and advice from experts across the economy and civil society”………….. https://www.irishtimes.com/business/energy-and-resources/mcguinness-insists-eu-move-to-label-nuclear-and-gas-green-based-on-science-1.4768772
Anger as European Union is poised to subsidise the corrupt and rapacious nuclear industry
Germany and Austria have expressed their fury over a French victory on EU rules that would open the door to new investment in nuclear power. The European Commission’s proposed new “taxonomy” rules will allow private investment in atomic energy to be linked to climate policy subsidies as well as funding for gas-fuelled power stations to replace coal-fired generators.
Incensed Austrian ministers compared the Brusselsdecision, which was rushed through late on New Year’s Eve, to Adolf Hitler’s 1941 “Nacht und Nebel”, night and fog, decree to round upand destroy all resistance to the Nazis.
“The EU commission took a step towards greenwashing nuclear power and fossil gas yesterday in a night and fog action,” Leonore Gewessler, the Austrian climate protection minister, said. “They are harmful to the climate and the environment and destroy the future of our children.”
Greenpeace UK has urged Boris Johnson not to allow gas or nuclear to be included in Britain’s own green investment rules. “This loophole could be a drain for Europe’s climate ambitions, as they switch from phasing out dirty fuels, to phasing out dirty fuels only when it seems convenient. The UK must resist being pulled into this failing approach,” Doug Parr, the chief scientist and policy director of British Greenpeace, said.
Times 2nd Jan 2022
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/eu-capitals-at-odds-on-nuclear-power-kd2fsznr6
European Commission’s divisive plan to label nuclear power ”green”, revealed on the sly?
“Short of digging an actual hole, the European Commission couldn’t have tried harder to bury this proposal”
” we get a document written behind closed doors and published on New Year’s Eve,”
EU labels nuclear power ‘green’, Germany calls it dangerous, Sydney Morning Herald, By John Chalmers, January 4, 2022 Brussels: The German government has condemned nuclear energy as dangerous, slamming European Union proposals that would let the technology remain part of the bloc’s plans for a climate-friendly future.
Germany is on course to switch off its remaining three nuclear power plants at the end of this year and phase out coal by 2030, whereas its neighbour France aims to modernise existing nuclear reactors and build new ones to meet its future energy needs. Berlin plans to rely heavily on natural gas until it can be replaced by non-polluting sources for energy.
The opposing paths taken by two of the EU’s biggest economies have resulted in an awkward situation for the bloc’s Executive Commission.
“We consider nuclear technology to be dangerous,” German government spokesman Steffen Hebestreit told reporters in Berlin, noting that the question of what to do with radioactive waste that will last for thousands of generations remains unresolved.
Hebestreit added that Germany “expressly rejects” the EU’s assessment of atomic energy, has repeatedly stated this position towards the commission and is now considering next steps.
The European Union has rejected accusations that it waited until New Year’s Eve to publish the divisive proposals to allow some natural gas and nuclear energy projects to be labelled as sustainable, saying “we weren’t trying to do it on the sly”.
The commission’s decision to include gas and nuclear investments in the European Union’s “sustainable finance taxonomy” rules was circulated in a draft proposal late on December 31 and leaked to some media organisations.
“Short of digging an actual hole, the European Commission couldn’t have tried harder to bury this proposal,” said Henry Eviston, spokesman on sustainable finance at the European Policy Office of the environmental group WWF.
“When the question was whether renewables are green, the commission gave citizens three chances to provide their opinion. For fossil gas and nuclear, we get a document written behind closed doors and published on New Year’s Eve,” he said in an online posting………………………………….
The European Commission will now collect comments to its draft until January 12 and hopes to adopt a final text by the end of the month. After that, the text can be discussed with EU governments and Parliament for up to six months. But it is unlikely to be rejected because that would require 20 of the 27 EU countries, representing 65 per cent of EU citizens, to say “no”.
The aim of the agreement is to send a signal to private investors as to what the EU considers acceptably “green” and stop greenwashing, whereby companies or investors overstate their eco-friendly credentials. The deal will also set limits on what governments can use EU recovery funds to invest in.
https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/eu-labels-nuclear-power-green-germany-calls-it-dangerous-20220104-p59lmt.html
1 This Month
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (156)
- April 2026 (356)
- 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)
-
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 