Australian Strategic Policy Institute sees nuclear submarines as a step towards the full nuclear chain
Nuclear submarines could lead to nuclear power for Australia, The Strategist 15 Apr 21‘‘………..Submarines could lead to a broad nuclear industry in Australia. This possibility will be the subject of a seminar to be held at ASPI on Thursday 15 July, jointly hosted by the Submarine Institute of Australia and UNSW Canberra. More information is available here….””
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/nuclear-submarines-could-lead-to-nuclear-power-for-australia/
LEAK: EU to table ‘climate taxonomy’, leaving gas and nuclear for later
LEAK: EU to table ‘climate taxonomy’, leaving gas and nuclear for later, By Frédéric Simon | EURACTIV.com with Reuters 16 Apr 21. The European Commission plans to delay a decision on whether to label nuclear and natural gas power plants as a sustainable investment under green finance rules due to be published next week, according to a leaked document seen by EURACTIV.
The EU executive is due to publish on 21 April the first section of its “sustainable finance taxonomy,” a long list of economic activities plus the specific rules they must meet to be labelled as green investments in the EU.
The rules, spelled out in a “Taxonomy Climate Delegated Act”, set out detailed green finance criteria for undisputed low-carbon technologies like renewables but leaves out gas and nuclear power for a separate decision to be take at a later stage by EU member states and the European Parliament.
Gas and nuclear have proven the most contentious issues in the debate on green finance, with countries in eastern and southern Europe threatening to veto an earlier draft because it did not label gas as “green” or “transition” investments.
France, meanwhile, said it would fight to make nuclear recognised as a green technology under the EU’s sustainable finance rules. “This is a real political fight,” said French economy minister Bruno Le Maire who stressed “the determination of France” to get a green investment label for nuclear power under the taxonomy.
Two-step approach
By putting forward a separate proposal for gas, nuclear and other “transition” activities later this year, the Commission is effectively throwing the hot potato to EU member states and the European Parliament, acting as co-legislators.
“The Commission intends to put forward a separate legislative proposal in Q4 2021, specifically covering how certain economic activities, primarily in the energy sector, contribute to decarbonisation,” says a draft Commission proposal obtained by EURACTIV.
According to the EU executive, “this will bring clarity to the debate” and allow legislators to follow up on the December summit where EU leaders acknowledged the role of natural gas as a “transition technology” in the fight against climate change.
The Commission last month suggested labelling some gas plants as green, under strict conditions, when they replace coal in power generation. But that proposal satisfied neither side, nor the EU’s own green finance advisers, who urged Brussels to resist political pressure to weaken the rules, saying their credibility is at stake.
From the Commission’s viewpoint, leaving the decision to the European Parliament and EU member states “will have several advantages”.
“On the one hand, it will allow a transparent debate by co-legislators on the contribution of natural gas and nuclear technologies to the decarbonisation objectives, respecting the right of Member States to determine their energy mix in an appropriate way. On the other hand, it will clarify to investors in a timely manner how such investments should be treated from the perspective of environmental considerations,” says the Commission’s draft document.
Among environmentalists, the two-step approach is seen as a pragmatic response to take the heat out of the debate and move forward with the less controversial aspects of the taxonomy.
“Postponing the discussion on fossil fuels is a political necessity at this stage, due to the fossil fuel lobbies’ enormous pressure on the Commission to greenwash their activities,” said Henry Eviston, WWF spokesman on sustainable finance.
“However, the EU must quickly clarify that fossil fuels are not green. Full stop. The Green Deal’s credibility is at stake here,” he said………….. https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/leak-eu-to-table-climate-taxonomy-leaving-gas-and-nuclear-for-later/
*Net Zero Without Nuclear**
Jonathon Porritt 15th April 2021, Jonathon Porritt: Even as the prospects for nuclear power continue to decline, the industry is spending more and more money seeking to persuade Governments, commentators and ‘gullible greenies’ that we’re going to need new nuclear power to get us to a Net Zero economy by 2050.
I’ve spent the last six months looking into this mismatch: declining prospects, escalating hype. All captured in my new Report, ‘Net Zero Without Nuclear’ – accessible here: Net Zero Without Nuclear 15.04.21 ‘Net Zero Without Nuclear’ has been generously endorsed by Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, the Green Party, CND and a host of experts in this critical scientific and policy area.
http://www.jonathonporritt.com/net-zero-without-nuclear-the-case-against-nuclear-power/
ACT seeks proposals for massive 250MW ‘Big Canberra Battery’ network — RenewEconomy
ACT issues call for proposals for massive 250MW network of distributed big batteries. The post ACT seeks proposals for massive 250MW ‘Big Canberra Battery’ network appeared first on RenewEconomy.
ACT seeks proposals for massive 250MW ‘Big Canberra Battery’ network — RenewEconomy
April 16 Energy News — geoharvey
Science and Technology: ¶ “Rising From The Ashes, Alaska’s Forests Come Back Stronger” • Michelle Mack, an ecologist at Northern Arizona University, did a study of regrowth in Alaskan forest that burned in 2004. It was published in the journal Science, and was unexpectedly hopeful. The burned boreal forests are on track to hold a […]
April 16 Energy News — geoharvey
The Nuclear Question: Violence Begats Violence, by Alicia Sanders-Zakre and Dorothy VanSoest talks about Nuclear Action — Rise Up Times
“The cost of building and maintaining the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent, or GBSD, as it’s known, could swell to $264 billion over the coming decades, with much of the money going to military contractors, including Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics.”
The Nuclear Question: Violence Begats Violence, by Alicia Sanders-Zakre and Dorothy VanSoest talks about Nuclear Action — Rise Up Times
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 