By Vladyslav Los
The EU’s internal discussion about the future energy policy threatens to become yet another issue that will divide the Union. As the European Commission wants to update its list of sustainable energy sources, the inclusion of nuclear energy in the document is a certain fiasco for the German government and its allies in the argument. Germany’s successful lobbying for natural gas is an even bigger problem for the EU’s green future (and, possibly, future in general).
A reliable energy supply is the most important prerequisite for our societies to function properly. Without energy, we wouldn’t be able to light our homes and offices at night, stay warm in winter, produce anything worth producing, grow enough food, and fuel our vehicles to transport people and goods around the world. According to the World Resources Institute, energy production is the source of nearly three-quarters of the global greenhouse gas emissions, which makes the energy sector, essential for our wellbeing, the main cause for climate change, one of the biggest threats to this very wellbeing. The need for a sustainable energy production method is almost self-evident.
Renewable energy sources now have considerably big shares in the energy mixed of the Member States. One of the reasons was the establishment of the European taxonomy for sustainable activities.
Fighting climate change has been one of the big goals of the EU for decades. Since 1980, Europe’s share in global emissions has been constantly decreasing in both relative and absolute numbers. While outsourcing a big share of the production capacities into Asian countries definitely played a big role in this dynamic, European governments enacted numerous acts and legislations for environment protection and climate change prevention. Renewable energy sources now have considerably big shares in the energy mixes of the member states. One of the reasons for that was the establishment of the European taxonomy for sustainable activities, which makes a constant funds inflow into the field of clean energy production possible by listing the potential investments considered by the EU as a perspective in fighting climate change.
In the currently unfolding argument about the green energy sources listed in the taxonomy, France and Germany, who usually show exemplary unity in strategic decisions, ended up on the opposite sides of the table.
France, the long-time owner of the second biggest nuclear power capacities in the world, is likely to soon be rewarded for its fight for atomic fission to be recognised as a “green” method of energy production. France, which produces around 80% of electricity and around 40% of all of its energy in nuclear reactors, has strong support in the current debate over the European energy strategy from various countries including Poland, Sweden, Czech Republic and Romania, which are building or planning new nuclear power plants.
A nuclear energy reactor is a highly sophisticated technology and its usage for day-to-day energy production bears certain risks … However the advantages are impressive.
A nuclear reactor is a highly sophisticated technology and its usage for day-to-day energy production bears certain risks. A sustainable way to store the used reactor fuel is a challenging task and more than serious security measures and precautions must be taken to ensure stable functioning of the nuclear power plant and prevent major disastrous accidents like those at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. However, the advantages are impressive. Nuclear energy is very affordable despite huge investments needed at the start, the output is sustainable and controllable, the whole chain of production can easily be decarbonized. But most importantly, uranium, a relatively common element used as reactor fuel, is mined by many different countries, the EU’s strategic allies like Canada and Australia being among the top 3 producers.
Germany, Europe’s industrial long-time powerhouse with respectively high energy demands, still heavily relies on coal and natural gas. Due to its commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and to the constant pressure from environment activist groups, German parliament passed legislation to stop using lignite for energy production by 2038. The new government is even considering putting an end to coal usage by 2030. Keeping in mind that the last nuclear power reactor will be stopped in 2022 at the latest, the world’s fourth-biggest economy is left with natural gas as the sole source of energy to make up for the deficits of the rapidly growing yet far from reliable net of solar and wind power plants.
Germany has a relatively long and not-so-happy relationship with nuclear power. Less than half a year after the accident at Fukushima, the German parliament voted for “Atomausstieg” (German for “Nuclear exit”) to end the usage of the nuclear reactors in energy production. Now, the EU’s most populated country is fighting to prevent nuclear power from being considered a “green” source of energy. Although joined by Liechtenstein, Portugal, Denmark, and Austria, who made threats to sue the European Commission should the outcome be negative, Germans found themselves in a clear minority position and are now facing an almost inevitable fiasco in a more-than-decade-long argument.
In what seems to be a hard compromise between Germany and France, natural gas will apparently enter the EU’s taxonomy of sustainable energy sources together with nuclear power.
In what seems to be a hard compromise between Germany and France, natural gas will apparently enter the EU’s taxonomy of sustainable energy sources together with nuclear power. In her interview with Reuters, German now ex-chancellor Angela Merkel, defended the nuclear power exit, describing natural gas as a “Brückentechnologie” (German for “stopgap technology”) for Germany, just as nuclear power is for France.
There are several problems here. One is, that while energy production from natural gas causes only a half of the greenhouse gas emissions than the coal-based process, cutting even a part of Germany’s enormous CO2 budget by half is far from carbon-neutral energy market or even emitting little enough gases to hope for the carbon capture technologies to equalize it. The other problem with natural gas is that more than half of the German natural gas is imported from Russia, making Germany highly reliable on a strategic opponent of NATO. This creates tensions with the United States, East-European member states like the Baltic countries and Poland, and with non-EU partners like Ukraine. Germany using natural gas as a stopgap technology is like someone trying to quit smoking by switching to E-cigarettes. There may be a little less smoke, but you have to buy liquids from that shady guy who has just stabbed your neighbour.
The European Union is facing many big challenges: Long negotiations about the EU’s budget and the pandemic relief funds last year, the ongoing struggle between the European Commission and Poland and Hungary, Belarussian hybrid war on the Eastern border, Russian troop buildup near Ukrainian territory, Chinese economic actions against Lithuania. Energy issues must not become one of the problems but rather unite Europe. It is crucial for the European future that there is a robust strategy with regard to satisfying its enormous energy needs. For that, Germany and France have to reach an agreement like they’ve done it thousands of times before. And as far as I am concerned, it better be the French way this time.
The European Union is facing many big challenges: Energy issues must not become one of the problems but rather unite Europe.
Vladyslav Los Vladyslav Los is the president of BridgeEurope Online Chapter since April 2021. His work is mainly concentrated on digital formats for BridgeEurope and includes the re-launch of the BridgeEurope podcast and blog. Vlad's political interests lie in promoting civility and solution-based discourse, drawing attention to importance of political and general education.
Unlike many of the members, whose background is in political science, Vlad is a third year Bachelor student in Physics, showing how the BridgeEurope debate naturally extends beyond the realm of politics students.
BridgeEurope Blog serves as a platform for reflection and discussion on current topics. The opinions expressed in the blog represent the view of the authors solely and not the view of BridgeEurope.