Environmental organization Greenpeace is suing the European Commission over the EU’s list of renewable energy sources. In addition to wind and solar energy, for example, nuclear energy and natural gas are also defined as green fuels in this list. This means that investments in these energy sources are considered sustainable investments in Europe, which is a thorn in Greenpeace’s side.
“Natural gas is a fossil fuel,” says Faiza Oulahsen of the environmental organization. “If you burn it, a lot of CO2 is released. We don’t think nuclear power is sustainable either, because it creates mountains of radioactive waste.”
According to Greenpeace, nuclear energy is therefore not in line with the European principle of “do no significant harm”. This means that an activity should not have a negative impact on other environmental targets. The environmental organization calls the EU list an example of green laundering. Things are portrayed as more sustainable than they actually are.
“Transition Activities”
The European Commission has always advocated the inclusion of natural gas and nuclear energy on the list, stating that nuclear energy and natural gas should be considered as “transition activities”. For example, gas could accelerate the transition from the even more polluting coal to renewable energy sources, according to Europa. According to the commission, gas and nuclear power plants are still necessary because very little energy is currently available from solar, wind and water.
The subject has been on the agenda for a while. Natural gas and nuclear power were still missing from the first edition of the EU list from 2021 because Brussels had not yet decided on them. When it became clear last year that the European Commission considers both forms of energy to be green temporarily or permanently, environmental organizations immediately reacted critically.
Dutch banks and insurers such as Achmea, Triodos and ASN also found the choice of gas and nuclear power inexplicable. The same is true for EU member states Luxembourg and Austria, which announced their intention to take legal action against the European Commission last year.
Climate matters
Greenpeace considers the legal process to be promising. The case against the European Commission is expected to be heard at the European Court of Justice in April.
The environmental club isn’t the first to take an authority to court. In 2015, the court in The Hague ruled that the Dutch state should do more to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, in a case brought by the sustainability foundation Urgenda.
As a result, “climate lawsuits” have been filed against large companies, such as the Milieudefensie lawsuit against Shell. The lubricant company was compelled by a court to reduce its CO2 emissions in 2021 and appealed against it.
Source: NOS
Roy Brown is a renowned economist and author at The Nation View. He has a deep understanding of the global economy and its intricacies. He writes about a wide range of economic topics, including monetary policy, fiscal policy, international trade, and labor markets.
