Thread by @GreenpeaceEU

As we remember the #Chornobyl nuclear disaster, we remain gravely concerned at the risk of another nuclear catastrophe due to the war in Ukraine, and we call on @vonderleyen and @McGuinnessEU to withdraw the #EUTaxonomy plan for nuclear & gas

Thread:

greenpeace.org/international/…

When Russian forces shelled the #Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine in early March, it set off a blaze that was only just brought under control, and shocked the world

bbc.com/news/world-606…

Greenpeace condemned the Russian attack on the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in the strongest possible terms at the time. We #StandWithUkraine and we abhor all nuclear threats

https://twitter.com/GreenpeaceEU/status/1499722226647580674

Zaporizhzhia was not the first time a military attack targeted a nuclear facility. It has happened before and will almost certainly happen again, as long as there continues to be nuclear power and nuclear threat

Here are some other instances where nuclear facilities, some partially-constructed, have been attacked, usually out of a fear of nuclear weapons proliferation:

Iran vs. Iraq, 1980

nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/how-…

Iraq. vs Iran, 1987

upi.com/Archives/1987/…

Iraq vs. Israel, 1991

latimes.com/archives/la-xp…

Israel vs. Iraq, 1981

independent.co.uk/news/world/isr…

USA vs. Iraq, 1991

nytimes.com/1991/01/17/opi…

Cyber attack: USA vs. Iran, 2008

theguardian.com/technology/201…

These experiences in Ukraine and elsewhere are a sobering reminder that peace is not to be taken for granted, and that relying on nuclear power involves a clear risk that parties to conflict will attack nuclear plants, or worse, use nuclear weapons

Nuclear plants are vulnerable in war, but serious contamination events can result from other factors too. A loss of electricity or water supply, flooding, tidal waves like #Fukushima, wildfires, or human error. Climate change makes many of these more likely

The only way to end these nuclear threats is to shut nuclear plants. But the EU, in an act of shameless #greenwashing, wants to give nuclear a sustainable #EUTaxonomy label instead, despite the availability of cleaner, cheaper, safer renewables

euractiv.com/section/energy…

Labelling nuclear and fossil gas as sustainable under the #EUTaxonomy has always been a terrible idea, but it’s now also clear that the plan has a huge blind spot for the kind of threats that the war in Ukraine has shockingly revealed

dw.com/en/ukraine-the…

Including nuclear and gas in the #EUTaxonomy of sustainable investments is a historic mistake which must be stopped

We call on the European Parliament to reject the #EUTaxonomy for nuclear and gas and #StopFakeGreen!