Germany reaffirms its opposition to nuclear power being designated as ”sustainable”
Germany will work towards an exclusion of nuclear power from the EU taxonomy for sustainable investments, the country’s environment minister Svenja Schulze has affirmed. “We don’t want nuclear energy, we don’t think it’s sustainable and we don’t want the EU to support it,“ the acting minister from the Social Democrats (SPD) told newspapers of the Funke Mediengruppe in an article carried by the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.
Schulze added that the German government is not alone on this position, countering an initiative of several other EU member states under the leadership of France to give nuclear power a greater role in the EU’s plans for decarbonisation and the greening of the financial system.
Building nuclear plants would be much too expensive and time-consuming for effective climate action, with plants commissioned now only being ready for operation by 2045 due to lengthy searches for a location, licensing hurdles and expectable protests against it, she argued. Conservative (CSU) Bavarian state premier Markus Söder backed Schulze’s rejection to make the
technology a tool for climate action, arguing that Germany’s nuclear phase-out “is based on broad societal acceptance.”
Clean Energy Wire 8th Nov 2021
Europe’s dilemma over whether or not to include nuclear power in its sustainabble finance taxonomy
Greenwashing or viable solution? Europe has a big decision to make on nuclear power, CNBC, NOV 9 2021Silvia Amaro @SILVIA_AMARO
It is a long-standing dilemma that the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, must resolve in the coming weeks.
Ultimately, its decision will have repercussions on its efforts to be a global leader in the area of climate change.
LONDON — The European Union must decide whether nuclear is a clean source of energy, but the decision is tough with countries divided about the right labelling.
Some EU members, notably France, which have big investments in nuclear and are wary of using gas from Russia see the energy resource as a viable option. Other nations, including Germany, believe it is time to move away from it and are worried about nuclear waste.
It is a long-standing dilemma that the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, must resolve in the coming weeks. The commission is due to publish its sustainable finance taxonomy — rules that will help clarify to investors what the bloc sees as green investments — as an attempt to boost financing in these areas.
Ultimately, its decision will have repercussions on its efforts to be a global leader in the area of climate change……………….
Opponents to inclusion of nuclear power into the EU green taxonomy, led by Germany, argue that the technology is not suitable to achieve sustainability targets, including establishing a transition to a circular economy,” Henning Gloystein, director for energy, climate and resources at consultancy group Eurasia, told CNBC via email.
“The core problem for critics is that there is no solution for long-term storage of nuclear waste. All current solutions are temporary,” he added.
The inclusion of nuclear in the EU’s green taxonomy has also been criticized by activists.
The World Wide Fund for Nature has said that classifying nuclear as somewhat sustainable “would allow the greenwashing of billions of euros of financing for these activities, despite the high emissions from fossil gas and the radioactive waste produced by nuclear power.”
Green image at risk
More broadly, whatever the commission decides will also send a signal to other nations.
The European Commission praises itself for having the most concrete plan on how to cut greenhouse gas emissions — a plan that is still yet to be approved by lawmakers.
The institution has also lobbied other parts of the world, including China, to put forward concrete steps on how they intend to achieve carbon neutrality……….. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/09/cop26-europe-has-a-big-decision-to-make-on-nuclear-power.html
Finland’s Greens remain anti-nuclear, despite antics of a breakaway group
‘Which greens, there’s two? One carrying the original Green message, of the 1970s, egalitarian, social democracy, adopted by all other European countries.Green League – The Greens” Known throughout Europe, as the European Greens• Finnish: Vihreä liitto• Swedish: Gröna förbundet
— Paul RichardsNuclear Fuel Cycle Watch Australia, 11 Nov 21, Finland greens are reported to have switched to pro-nuclear power
The other, pro-nuclear group, broke away, branding itself green. Much like the Liberal Party, in Australia, who are hard-right, neocon and neoliberal.Liberal by brand, conservative by demonstrated values. A long con, that thoroughly confuses the Republican idiocracy in the US. A group, who think liberals are, communists. https://www.facebook.com/groups/1021186047913052
Investor backlash predicted, if European Union were to include Nuclear and Gas as ”Green” in its EU Taxonomy
Net-Zero Alliance Plans to Reject Gas, Nuclear as Green Assets, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-08/net-zero-alliance-plans-to-reject-gas-nuclear-as-green-assetsBy John Ainger and Alastair Marsh9 November 2021
- UN-convened asset owners weigh in on taxonomy debate
- The group favors separate legislation for energy transition
The European Union will likely face investor backlash if it includes natural gas and nuclear energy in its green rulebook, known as the EU taxonomy.
The United Nations-convened Net-Zero Asset Owner Alliance, which is part of the wider finance industry’s $130 trillion climate agreement announced last week, wrote in a document that hasn’t been finalized that it would oppose such a decision. Instead, fossil fuels should go into an extension or separate piece of legislation for transition technologies, the group said.
“The Alliance supports a taxonomy that is credible, usable, as well as science- and evidence-based,” according to the document seen by Bloomberg News. The inclusion of gas “would be inconsistent with the high ambition level of the EU taxonomy framework overall.” For nuclear, “it will be of utmost importance to apply strict criteria when assessing” the principle of do-no-significant-harm, “with respect to the other environmental objectives to identify a potential taxonomy alignment,” it said.
The development marks a blow to those EU members who’d hoped the bloc would take a softer stance on gas and nuclear. It also sets the tone for other investors keen to put their net-zero pledges to work, less than a week after international financial institutions representing 40% of total global assets pledged to work toward carbon neutrality by the middle of the century.
The European Commission is under pressure from member states such as France, which want to include nuclear and gas as key planks of their green transition strategies. The debate has intensified in recent months as energy prices soar amid a lack of supply. A decision on the so-called complementary delegated act is expected in the coming weeks.
Environmental groups have criticized the potential inclusion of gas, arguing it would undermine the EU’s ambition of setting the “gold standard” for green investing. It also would result in the bloc failing to meet its goal of cutting emissions by 55% by 2030 from 1990 levels and becoming carbon neutral by mid-century, they said. For nuclear, meanwhile, there are concerns over the environmental impacts of radioactive waste.
The Net-Zero alliance, whose members include Allianz SE and the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, urged the EU Commission, member states and their expert bodies to make sure any decision arrived at is “science and evidence-based,” according to the document.
:
France and other pro nuclear countries push for nuclear to be included as ”sustainable” in EU taxonomy.
Mairead McGuinness urged to reclassify nuclear power as possible ‘green’ solution for EU https://www.independent.ie/news/environment/mairead-mcguinness-urged-to-reclassify-nuclear-power-as-possible-green-solution-for-eu-41028296.html
Irish Commissioner under pressure amid global warming and energy crisis, John Downing .
November 08 2021 Ireland’s EU Commissioner Mairead McGuinness is under pressure to reclassify nuclear power as “green energy”, giving it a central role in the battle against global warming and easing Europe’s energy crisis.
Commissioner McGuinness hopes to decide in the coming weeks on a controversial move which could also give natural gas a transition role in scaling down carbon emissions burning the planet.
Decision time comes amid a major EU energy crisis, with spiralling prices in every member state, and an increasing demand for real action on the pledged 55pc reduction in carbon emissions by 2030 with zero carbon by 2050.
If Ms McGuinness gets the move through the policy-guiding Commission, the issue will then pass to member governments and the European Parliament where battle-lines are already drawn.
On one side, pro-nuclear countries like France will promote the change as a “pragmatic solution” – but others will speak of “greenwashing” and creating more problems to solve immediate issues.
Ms McGuinness told the Irish Independent that member states must ultimately decide their own energy mix whatever the outcome.
There is an important debate ongoing about the role of nuclear energy and natural gas in the transformation of the EU energy sector and their potential inclusion in the EU taxonomy – a classification system for sustainable investments,” Ms McGuinness said yesterday.
“To be part of the EU sustainable investment taxonomy, an energy source must make a significant contribution to the fight against climate change. Nuclear energy is low carbon,” she added.
But she also warned that other aspects of nuclear power were still being studied, looking at “the requirement to do no significant harm” to the environment.
“Right now our work is focusing on scientific reports on this aspect of nuclear power,” Ms McGuinness said.
EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen gave a strong hint on the direction of travel when speaking to reporters after a leaders’ summit in Brussels on October 22.
“The energy mix of the future needs more renewable and clean energy. Alongside this, we also need a stable source, nuclear energy, and during the transition, also natural gas.
“That is why – as called for by many leaders – the Commission is going to come forward with a taxonomy proposal in the near future,” said Ms von der Leyen.
A pivotal issue in all of this will be the attitude taken by the new German government which is expected to be in place by December 6, the feast of St Nicholas and an important national day.
Back in June 2011, the now outgoing German chancellor, Angela Merkel, committed to ending all nuclear power in the state by December 2022.
She will be replaced by Social Democrat leader Olaf Scholz, heading a three-party coalition of the Green Party and the Liberal FBD.
The Green Party is, by definition, committed to ending nuclear power generation in Germany but the current energy crisis, aggravated by undue dependence on Russian natural gas, complicates this matter as coalition negotiations continue.
France gets 70pc of its electricity from nuclear power stations.
Ireland is committed to creating a ‘Celtic Interconnector’, taking power from France via an undersea powerline due for completion by 2026.
France and other pro nuclear countries push for nuclear to be included as ”sustainable” in EU taxonomy.
Ethical Investors press Serco to drop bid for contract with the Atomic Weapons Establishment
Best known for its involvement with NHS test and trace during the
coronavirus pandemic Serco is believed to have had plans to compete for
contracts with the Atomic Weapons Establishment, which makes and maintains
warheads. Serco abandoned its bid after investors warned that if the
FTSE250 company began working on nuclear weapons they may have to dump
shares to meet Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) standards, the
Telegraph first reported. A spokesperson for Serco declined to comment on
the news.
City AM 7th Nov 2021
UK government considers withdrawing from EU science and research programmes
| The government is considering withdrawing from EU science and research programmes worth £77 billion because of deteriorating relations with Brussels. Ministers are working on alternatives to Horizon Europe, the EU’s research funding scheme, Copernicus, its satellite system, and Euratom, its atomic energy treaty. Withdrawing would pull up to £15 billion in funding from Brussels and deny British researchers the opportunity to participate in its programmes. A government paper circulated to a Brexit cabinet sub-committee last week and leaked to The Sunday Telegraph suggests that the government is considering pulling out of the schemes if relations with Brussels deteriorate further. The UK is to pay £2.1 billion annually to the Horizon programme to maintain access for British scientists and researchers to pan-European projects and funding. It has also secured access to the Copernicus Earth observation programme, important to the UK space sector, and has also agreed to continue its involvement in the Euratom nuclear research programme. Times 8th Nov 2021 https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/row-with-european-union-puts-77bn-science-and-research-schemes-at-risk-33n82pv9z |
Rapid growth in solar and wind power in UK
| MORE than 10,000 megawatts per hour of renewable energy were produced in Southampton last year. Figures from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy show 16,730 megawatts per hour (around 17 gigawatts) of renewable electricity were generated in Southampton in 2020. This was 10% more energy than the 15 GWh produced the year before, and 23% more than the amount produced in 2014 – the earliest year of data available. Across the UK, 134,600 GWh of renewable energy was generated in 2020, a 13% rise on the year before, and above the 9% increase from 2018 to 2019. Climate think tank Ember said huge falls in costs means the growth in offshore wind power is set to go “parabolic” in the coming months. Phil MacDonald, chief operating officer at the organisation, added: “But the Government is still missing the opportunity of cheap onshore wind, and not doing enough to explore earlier-stage technologies like geothermal and tidal. The biggest producer of energy in Southampton last year was solar power, which generated 10 GWh – 62% of the total. Daily Echo 8th Nov 2021 https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/19700736.figures-renewable-energy-produced-southampton-yearly/ |
Anxieties in Pays de la Loire over plan for small nuclear reactor.
With her proposal to host a mini-power plant, the president of Pays de la Loire is reviving local tensions around nuclear power. The idea of setting up an SMR on the site of the Cordemais coal-fired power station launched by
Christelle Mor Anglais, President of Les Républicains in the Pays de la Loire region, is causing concern.
Le Monde 6th Nov 2021
Former UK environment minister Tim Yeo an unreliable ”expert” on nuclear energy .
Is Tim Yeo really a reliable expert of nuclear energy? https://electricalreview.co.uk/2021/11/05/is-tim-yeo-really-a-reliable-expert-of-nuclear-energy/
As part of a lengthy feature querying the need for new nuclear power stations, how magnanimous it is of The Sunday Times to quote Tim Yeo, the former Tory environment minister.
He said, “We need a significant nuclear element in the energy mix if we’re going to get to net zero in the timeframe that is necessary — and that means having these new plants built.” He was cited as the current chairman of an entity called New Nuclear Watch Institute, which is funded by the nuclear industry.
But how reliable is Tim Yeo? Back in 2015, Yeo was described by a judge when he lost a libel case as “unreliable,” “dishonest,” “untruthful,” “untrue,” and “unworthy of belief.”
He has also recently been found guilty of deliberately misusing his “fiduciary powers” as Chair of TMO Renewables, and repeatedly offering misleading evidence in court. He was accused of a “dishonest strategy for maintaining control of the board,” a strategy that included “misleading existing shareholders” into thinking the company had just received a substantial cash investment, when in reality the ‘new friendly shareholders’ he had cited had not invested a penny. Amongst the latest judge’s conclusions were that Yeo was motivated by an “improper purpose,” and that his tendency to “speechify” gave his evidence a “contrived, evasive and rather self-serving quality.”
I am sure it is a coincidence that the libel case he lost back in 2015 was against The Sunday Times.
Serco pulls out of bidding for work on UK’s nuclear arsenal, because of ethical investing concerns
The rise of ethical investing has forced the outsourcer Serco to
pull out of bidding to help manage Britain’s nuclear weapons arsenal,
leaving the Ministry of Defence reliant on fewer potential partners for the
critical work. The FTSE 250 company has abandoned plans to compete for
contracts with the Atomic Weapons Establishment, which designs, makes and
maintains warheads, City sources revealed. The decision follows warnings
from fund managers that working with nuclear weapons might force them to
dump Serco shares due to non-compliance with Environmental, Social and
Governance (ESG) standards.
Telegraph 6th Nov 2021
Russian deputy UN envoy supports China’s concern on AUKUS’ nuclear threat
Russian deputy UN envoy supports China’s concern on AUKUS’ nuclear threat
By Global Times Russia supported the concerns voiced by China on AUKUS, the new tripartite defense alliance formed with the intention of intimidating China, at a recent meeting of the UN General Assembly’s First Committee, saying that they are legitimate concerns as this kind of cooperation is related to the nuclear field and clearly has a military dimension.
More time and information are needed in order to respond properly to the trilateral nuclear cooperation, Russian Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN Office and Other International Organizations in Geneva Andrei Belousov, who represented Russia at recent meetings of the UN General Assembly’s First Committee in New York, was quoted as saying in Russian media reports. …………
He noted that ASEAN countries also expressed serious concerns at the First Committee’s session as they viewed AUKUS as a threat to regional security. In particular, the delegations of Indonesia and Malaysia said that the implementation of the initiative might trigger an arms race in the region.
The trilateral partnership announced in September will allow Australia to build at least eight nuclear-powered submarines using US technology. Russian President Vladimir Putin accused AUKUS of undermining regional stability and hoped the nuclear submarine cooperation will not develop in an unprecedented way and create additional problems in the region. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian said on October 14 that the AUKUS nuclear submarine cooperation has created serious nuclear proliferation risks, and clearly violated the spirit of the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
He noted that it would not only have a far-reaching impact on the international non-proliferation system, but also bring real threats to regional peace and stability. …….. https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202111/1238296.shtml
UK govt calls for submissions on Nuclear Energy Financing Bill
Do you have relevant expertise and experience or a special interest in the
Nuclear Energy (Financing) Bill 2021-22, which is currently passing through
Parliament? If so, you can submit your views in writing to the House of
Commons Public Bill Committee which is going to consider this Bill. The
first sitting of the Public Bill Committee is expected to be on Tuesday 16
November. Written evidence can now be sent in to the Public Bill Committee.
The Committee is scheduled to report by Tuesday 30 November. However,
please note that when the Committee concludes its consideration of the Bill
it is no longer able to receive written evidence and it can conclude
earlier than the expected deadline of 5.00pm on Tuesday 30 November. You
are strongly advised to submit your written evidence as soon as possible.
The sooner you send in your submission, the more time the Committee will
have to take it into consideration.
House of Commons 4th Nov 2021
The EU Taxonomy is designed to identify which activities are green: it’s about science, not promoting business
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
Decision-makers cannot let economic questions on energy security and cost thwart the scientific integrity of the EU Sustainable Taxonomy and still have an opportunity to save the credibility of the EU’s sustainable finance policy framework. It is now up to them to take responsibility
How to save the scientific integrity of the EU’s green finance taxonomy, By Elise Attal and Jan Vandermosten, 29 Oct 21 Decision-makers cannot let economic questions on energy security and cost thwart the scientific integrity of the EU Sustainable Taxonomy, write Elise Attal and Jan Vandermosten.
Elise Attal is Head of EU Policy at the Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI), a United Nations-supported international network of investors. Jan Vandermosten is a Senior Policy Analyst at PRI
It is crunch time for the EU Sustainable Taxonomy; a classification framework developed to help investors direct capital towards sustainable economic activities.
Member states and industry are heavily lobbying to include gas-fired electricity and nuclear energy within the definition of sustainable activities for climate mitigation.
While these sectors may be needed in the short-term to secure energy supply, their inclusion would fundamentally undermine the scientific integrity of the EU Sustainable Taxonomy – the bedrock on which the entire credibility of the EU sustainable finance framework relies.
Policymakers and industry should consider the risks of tarnishing investor confidence in this carefully designed and sophisticated framework aimed at providing long-term certainty.
The EU Sustainable Taxonomy regulation delineates an economic activity as sustainable if it “substantially contributes” to one out of six environmental objectives while at the same time “doing no significant harm” to any of the other five objectives. Screening criteria, based on best performance thresholds and life-cycle analysis, for instance, are under development for each environmental objective by an independent expert group, the Sustainable Finance Platform.
The Platform’s assessment relies on conclusive scientific evidence and – in the case of the climate change objective under the EU Taxonomy – whether the economic activities contribute to the long-term temperature goal of the Paris Agreement. First screening criteria for climate change mitigation and adaptation were adopted by the European Commission in April. Still, a decision on gas-fired power and nuclear was postponed at that time.
The inclusion of gas-fired electricity would seriously compromise the EU Sustainable Taxonomy’s ability to act as an independently and scientifically designed tool for guiding investment into environmentally sustainable activities in line with the EU’s goal of reducing emissions by 55% by 2030.
Research on net-zero by 2050 pathways for the energy sector, including the recent IEA World Energy Outlook, stresses that there is no remaining carbon budget for new gas investments and that existing gas-fired power plants will have to be phased out by 2035 in the OECD and 2040 globally.
The current EU Sustainable Taxonomy screening criteria for climate mitigation state that power generation from different technology sources can only make a substantial contribution to climate change mitigation within an emissions threshold of 100g CO2e/ kWh. Most existing gas production today would even fall above the ‘significant harm’ threshold for climate change mitigation, which has been set at 270g CO2e/kWh.
The merits of including nuclear energy in the EU Sustainable Taxonomy are also debatable.
Nuclear energy’s potential substantial contribution to climate mitigation objectives is clear, but important questions remain over its ability to meet the “do no significant harm” criteria with regards to other environmental objectives. A report by the Joint Research Centre that was commissioned to inform a decision on this matter has been criticised (e.g. SCHEER, Heinrich Böll Stiftung, Austrian Institute of Ecology) for not sufficiently addressing risks related to the storage of nuclear waste, severe incidents and nuclear proliferation.
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.
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……..
Decision-makers cannot let economic questions on energy security and cost thwart the scientific integrity of the EU Sustainable Taxonomy and still have an opportunity to save the credibility of the EU’s sustainable finance policy framework. It is now up to them to take responsibility. https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/opinion/how-to-save-the-scientific-integrity-of-the-eus-green-finance-taxonomy/
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
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 (163)
- 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 