Tuesday

3rd Oct 2023

Analysis

Are nuclear and gas green? Depends if you ask EU or experts

  • The rules are clear: a green economic activity may "do no significant harm" to the environment (Photo: Peter Teffer)
Listen to article

One of the hottest political fights in the EU in the past few weeks has revolved around an impenetrable 414-page investment guide that shows investors what counts as 'green' economic activity.

The so-called EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities became law in July 2020.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Become an expert on Europe

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

But some rules, including the categorisation for nuclear and gas, were left to be decided later by the European Commission.

Predictably, it has since become bogged down by political infighting.

Surging gas prices caused a group of countries, spearheaded by France, to reignite the push for nuclear and gas at both EU summits, in October and December.

They argued gas and nuclear should be classified as 'green' in the taxonomy.

After multiple delays, the commission has now said it will adopt rules in mid-January, based on a consultation with experts and member states.

But an EU diplomat, speaking anonymously, confirmed that the decision will mostly come down to "what comes out of talks between France and Germany" over the coming weeks.

This has led to grumblings among investors and experts alike.

Investors have said political compromise and the inclusion of nuclear and gas puts the whole project at risk because it diminishes the scientific credibility.

Some experts advising the commission on the taxonomy have even left the project.

"Many experts feel badly treated because they have set down criteria for nuclear and gas over a year ago," Green MEP Bas Eickhout told EUobserver.

But some member states feel the question has "become too important for science", said one EU diplomat, who asked not to be named.

Science-based?

The taxonomy was set up as a science-based classification system.

"It was never meant to be a battleground for political debate about what is green," Eickhout told EUobserver.

Experts from finance, business, academia and civil society were asked to compile criteria determining what economic activities can be considered environmental - in grammes of CO2 per production unit.

This ranges from pouring cement (no more than 0.498 tonnes of CO2 per tonne), driving a car (50 grammes of CO2 per kilometre, zero after 2026), to purifying drinking water (a maximum of 0.5 kilowatt-hours of energy per 1,000 litres).

Nuclear and gas were left out of the taxonomy.

But commission experts in 2020 recommended sustainable energy generation can not exceed 100 grammes of CO2 per megawatt-hour.

This would exclude even the most efficient natural gas plants, which emit two to three times that amount.

As stipulated in the taxonomy, a green economic activity may "do no significant harm" to the environment, the protection of biodiversity, or any of the other goals outlined in the agreement.

This principle is central in determining if nuclear can be a 'green' energy source.

On Tuesday, a group of commission experts petitioned MEPs not to include nuclear.

"The risk of a severe nuclear accident cannot be excluded, even in the best commercially-available nuclear power plants," they wrote.

They also said the taxonomy is the wrong tool to decide if nuclear is green or not.

The Fukushima nuclear power plant is still leaking radioactive water in the oceans 10 years after being hit by a tsunami.

To take such risks, even in the name of sustainability, should be a matter of political choice.

It should not be 'science-washed' to "satisfy member states" that wish to attract green investment for their energy source of choice, they wrote.

Gas is more risky

The inclusion of nuclear in the taxonomy "won't save nuclear", Eickhout told EUobserver. "It won't make a difference for the industry if it is listed green or not."

Nuclear is notoriously expensive, with production costs often far exceeding predictions.

The only two plants in Europe currently in active development, the Finnish Olkiluoto-3 and French Flamanville-3, were supposed to come online in 2009 and 2012.

Neither are yet operational, tripling anticipated costs.

"Investors won't suddenly think: I'm going nuclear because it is included in the taxonomy."

But according to Eickhout, the inclusion of gas is a different issue.

"If gas is included, it will become much harder for the EU to resist investing in gas projects," he said.

"Another risk is that other countries may follow suit. African countries are now figuring out how to build a green energy system. If the EU will invest in gas, no matter if they call it 'green' or 'transitional', other countries will probably mimic that."

"This may really endanger limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees celsius. I really believe that."

Critics attack Commission's New Year's Eve nuclear and gas plan

The European Commission has been accused of undermining public scrutiny of its plans to label natural gas and nuclear as a "green" investment - after it published its long-awaited proposal on New Year's Eve when "nobody was watching".

Analysis

Is the ECB sabotaging Europe's Green Deal?

The European Central Bank (ECB) recently raised interest rates to the highest point in the currency's 21-year existence — but the effects of its policies on renewables are badly understood.

Opinion

How do you make embarrassing EU documents 'disappear'?

The EU Commission's new magic formula for avoiding scrutiny is simple. You declare the documents in question to be "short-lived correspondence for a preliminary exchange of views" and thus exempt them from being logged in the official inventory.

Latest News

  1. The EU-Kenya free trade deal shows a waning 'Brussels effect'
  2. Hoekstra pledges to phase-out fossil fuel subsidies
  3. 10 years on from the Lampedusa shipwreck — what's changed?
  4. EU ministers go to Kyiv to downplay fears on US, Slovak aid
  5. Hoekstra faces tough questioning to be EU Green chief
  6. Frontex shared personal data of NGO staff with Europol six times
  7. Why EU Commission dumped Google's favourite consultant
  8. Slovak's 'illiberal' Fico victory boosts Orbán, but faces checks

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of MinistersThe Nordic Region is stepping up its efforts to reduce food waste
  2. International Medical Devices Regulators Forum (IMDRF)Join regulators, industry & healthcare experts at the 24th IMDRF session, September 25-26, Berlin. Register by 20 Sept to join in person or online.
  3. UNOPSUNOPS begins works under EU-funded project to repair schools in Ukraine
  4. Georgia Ministry of Foreign AffairsGeorgia effectively prevents sanctions evasion against Russia – confirm EU, UK, USA
  5. International Medical Devices Regulators Forum (IMDRF)Join regulators & industry experts at the 24th IMDRF session- Berlin September 25-26. Register early for discounted hotel rates
  6. Nordic Council of MinistersGlobal interest in the new Nordic Nutrition Recommendations – here are the speakers for the launch

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of Ministers20 June: Launch of the new Nordic Nutrition Recommendations
  2. International Sustainable Finance CentreJoin CEE Sustainable Finance Summit, 15 – 19 May 2023, high-level event for finance & business
  3. ICLEISeven actionable measures to make food procurement in Europe more sustainable
  4. World BankWorld Bank Report Highlights Role of Human Development for a Successful Green Transition in Europe
  5. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic summit to step up the fight against food loss and waste
  6. Nordic Council of MinistersThink-tank: Strengthen co-operation around tech giants’ influence in the Nordics

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us