Following a long-heated debate, European lawmakers voted to move ahead with a plan to label some nuclear and natural gas power as ‘green’ energy. The landmark vote for Europe’s climate and energy policies will allow natural gas and nuclear energy access to hundreds of billions of euros in cheap loans and even state subsidies.
Although the measure had been on the table even before the beginning of Russia’s military operation in Ukraine, it has become more urgent today as the European Union struggles to ban Russian coal and oil. However, Europe remains heavily dependent on Russian gas.
Regardless of this urgency to find solutions for the European energy crisis, many observers see the EU decision to show the green light to gas and nuclear energy will have consequences that will shape world climate policy for years to come.
The plan comes in the framework of policy, known as the “taxonomy,” which is meant to stop “greenwashing,” the pervasive practice of mislabelling energy projects as environment-friendly, and it could determine where billions of dollars in investments will flow in the coming decades.
The EU’s move mirrors another by the G7 during their latest summit to back the deployment of gas, particularly LNG, and nuclear power. However, G7 leaders were keen at the same time to renew their climate pledges while urging for an increase in energy production to secure supply and overcome the energy crisis.
However, several opponents of the proposal see that classifying gas and nuclear projects as sustainable is in itself “greenwashing” and runs counter to European efforts to slash carbon emissions while also increasing the risks of nuclear accidents.
Many critics warn that billions of euros in ‘green’ financing now risk being diverted into polluting energy sources at the expense of energy efficiency and renewables.
Their argument elaborates how Europe’s tendency to prolong its reliance on gas, the principal component of which is methane, can speed up global warming. Some also saw reliance on natural gas still giving an edge to Russia over Europe.
Critics also refuted the allegations about the sustainability and cleanness of nuclear energy, highlighting the fact that uranium mining produces greenhouse gases, while accidents at nuclear power plants like Chornobyl in 1986 and Fukushima in 2011 can render entire regions uninhabitable for the foreseeable future.
Nearly five months ago, the proposal about natural gas and nuclear energy faced greater opposition not only from environmentalists but also from politicians and business tycoons who refuse to invest in outdated energy sources.
But in the shadow of the current crisis, the proposal could easily gain greater support as it is still considered an important step on the way of Europe’s transition from its current energy mix toward a carbon-neutral future that will be built mostly around renewables. It’s also an important step to phase out coal.
Those who support the move see fewer threats from new nuclear plants using the most advanced technologies.
The recent vote by the European Parliament and moves by G7 reflect a growing recognition that achieving energy transition will be far more complex and difficult to achieve, especially under current geopolitical complexities. However, optimists can see light at the end of the tunnel as European Union is still keeping its pledge to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55 per cent at the end of the decade and to become climate neutral in 2050, in accordance with European Climate Law.
Discussion about this post