After Fukushima: Nuclear Power, Yes!
| Author | Gabrielle Williamson |
| Position | Managing Partner of the Brussels office of Heuking Kühn Lüer Wojtek, a German law firm |
| Pages | 20-20 |
Page 20 ❧ THE ENVIRONMENTAL FORUM Copyright © 2011, Environmental Law Institute®, Washington, D.C. www.eli.org.
Reprinted by permission from The Environmental Forum®, July/August 2011
While German s panic
at the prospect, many
Member States look to
ramp up nuclear power
After Fukushima:
Nuclear Power, Yes!
The title of this article is based on
a German political party state-
ment from four decades ago which
said: “Nuclear power? No thanks!”
After the devastating earthquake
and tsunami leading to the nuclear ac-
cident in Japan, in many EU Member
States there has been a heated debate
about the safety and future of nuclear
energy. Scientific and technical is-
sues are not always playing the lead
role, however, but rather instead it
has been lobbying by environmental,
citizens, and even religious groups.
Germany is traditionally a country
which, although it has a number of
functioning nuclear power plants, also
has strong public opinion against this
energy source. e State of Baden-
Württemberg recently elected its first
joint Green and Socialist government
since the Second World War, primar-
ily because of the nuclear energy is-
sue. e German Federal Govern-
ment has, apparently, given in to this
pressure and just recently, Chancellor
Angela Merkel announced that eight
nuclear plants would be closed im-
mediately, with another six following
by 2021 and another three the next
year.
Part of the problem with Germa-
ny’s attitude toward nuclear energy
is its geographic location during the
Cold War, at the center of Europe.
While this is no longer a promi-
nent threat, the concept of “nuclear”
weapons and “nuclear” energy seem
to be inter-mingled in many people’s
minds. e Chernobyl nuclear acci-
dent in 1986 certainly did not help
matters.
e critical attitude of much of the
German public toward nuclear ener-
gy is also affecting EU-wide regula-
tion. e EU Energy Commissioner,
Günther Oettinger, is German. He
has been instrumental in trying to set
EU-wide safety and performance tests
for reactors, including developing
and executing continent-wide reac-
tor stress tests. Initially, 195 reactors
in 14 countries are to be reviewed for
safety. However, Oettinger is running
into considerable opposition by a
number of EU Member States, which
maintain that the Commission does
not have the authority to obligate the
Member States to conduct such tests.
German industry, on the other
hand, is concerned about the govern-
ment’s plan for nuclear plant closings,
especially since industry uses more
than half of all the electricity gener-
ated in the country.
e concern is what
impact these closings
will have on interna-
tional competitive-
ness. At least two of
the biggest German
utilities, E.ON AG
and RWE AG, are contemplating
bringing legal action against the Ger-
man government, alleging “billions
of euros” in expected damages by the
new government policy.
It should be noted that a number
of EU Member States think positively
about nuclear power. It is, after all, a
clean and safe source of energy and en-
sures that there is not undue reliance
on foreign oil and gas, which come
from the Middle East and Russia. Also,
these other sources of energy tend to
be more polluting, especially in a time
of attempts to reduce carbon emis-
sions. Finally, if all or most EU nuclear
power plants are shut down, there are
not enough alternate energy sources to
replace them. At issue here, in particu-
lar, are wind and solar energy.
Among the nuclear-friendly coun-
tries in the EU is France, which made
a public policy decision many years
ago to source its energy primarily
through nuclear power plants. Also,
in countries such as Spain, the Czech
Republic, Belgium, and Sweden, nu-
clear power accounts for quite large
parts of the countries’ power gen-
eration. In addition, in Finland and
Bulgaria, construction of new nucle-
ar power plants is planned. Hence,
such countries are rather negative
on political demands to shut down
older nuclear power plants. ese
countries maintain that the Ger-
man public panic over this issue is
unfounded; since we do not have
earthquakes, tsunamis are very rare
in Europe and none of the German
reactors are known to be lying on
earthquake faults.
As might be expected, there are,
therefore, also heated debates in the
EU about the need to conduct uni-
form stress tests and what these tests
should include. In May, the Mem-
ber States came to an
agreement as to the
implementation of
the EU-wide stress
tests on all nuclear
power plants and the
criteria to be used. As
no consensus could
be reached on the issue of terrorism,
the impact of an attack and preven-
tive measures will not be included.
e only issues to be determined
by the stress tests are the impact of
natural disasters and man-made fail-
ures.
Results of the stress tests are ex-
pected next April, and the Commis-
sion is working to try to extend the
testing to non-EU countries, such as
Switzerland, the Russian Federation,
Ukraine, and Armenia.
By Gabrielle Williamson
A V EU
Gabrielle H. Willia mson is Managi ng
Partn er of the Brussels ofce of H euking
Kühn Lüe r Wojtek, a German law rm. She
also practices i n the rm’s Düsseldor f of-
ce. S he can b e reached at g.williamson@
heuking.de.
To continue reading
Request your trial