I have two specific scientific problems with labelling nuclear *and* gas investments as compatible with the EU sustainable finance taxonomy.
I hope the European Court of Justice will be abled to rule on these -and annul the EU Commission's delegated act. 1/7
#NotMyTaxonomy
I hope the European Court of Justice will be abled to rule on these -and annul the EU Commission's delegated act. 1/7
#NotMyTaxonomy
First. Nuclear is climate-friendly, but creates some high-level waste (high radioactive activity for a very long time). They need to be managed. But EU Commission doesn't require that, it only ask for Member States to have a "documented plan". (Art 4.26.1.f). 2/7
That's horsecrap.
We need to be serious about radioactive waste management. We need more than a "documented plan" to have something in place in 2050. We need more than ink on paper, we need real-life sites -like Bure in France or Onkalo in Finland. 3/7
We need to be serious about radioactive waste management. We need more than a "documented plan" to have something in place in 2050. We need more than ink on paper, we need real-life sites -like Bure in France or Onkalo in Finland. 3/7
Second. Burning fossil gas is harmful for climate. Full stop. Including it in the taxonomy, in any way, shape or form, is pure greenwashing and goes against Science. 4/7
Yet, let's look for the most devilish sneaky fossil gas lobbying sucess: Art 4.29.1.b.i.
Your fossil gas investments passes the taxonomy threeshold if you promise (pinky swear) that you emit more than 550kgCO2e/kW over twenty years. 5/7
Your fossil gas investments passes the taxonomy threeshold if you promise (pinky swear) that you emit more than 550kgCO2e/kW over twenty years. 5/7
In other words. Your 1GW fossil gas power plant is "green" if you promise to emit maximum 550.000 tons (!) of CO2e in 20 years.
What happen when you break that ceiling after, say, 10 years of operation?
We don't know. So most likely, you will get away with it. 6/7
What happen when you break that ceiling after, say, 10 years of operation?
We don't know. So most likely, you will get away with it. 6/7
Today, EU parliamentarians had the chance to say no to this. A majority said "OK". That's shameful cynism.
Now the only recourse I see, is to ask for the EU Court of Justice to rule, as something so shamefully anti-scientific might well be illegal. 7/7
Now the only recourse I see, is to ask for the EU Court of Justice to rule, as something so shamefully anti-scientific might well be illegal. 7/7
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
