Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1473180
These articles are part of a content series called Ewropej. This is a multi-newsroom initiative part-funded by the European Parliament to bring the work of the EP closer to the citizens of Malta and keep them informed about matters that affect their daily lives. These articles reflect only the authors' view. The European Parliament is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains. 14.7.2022 11 COMMERCIAL THE European Parliament (EP) vot- ed in June in favour of the inclusion of nuclear and gas power plants in the EU taxonomy as environmentally sus- tainable. This recognition of the two energy sources as "green" and transi- tional was broadly supported by the Visegrád Group (V4) governments. The vote comes amid fierce debate and diverging positions among EU member states. The technical, sci- entific and political dimensions con- cerning the suitability of the "sustain- able label" for nuclear and gas have all assumed importance as the topic be- comes increasingly politicized. While Germany was a key supporter of the inclusion of natural gas in the EU "tax- onomy" rulebook, France pressed for the addition of nuclear power on the list. The Russian war against Ukraine, moreover, added a geopolitical ele- ment to the debate. Central and Eastern European (CEE) governments (including the V4), for their part, actively backed the labe- ling of both energy sources as "green" in the EU taxonomy. And a letter from Ukraine, a country that recently be- came a candidate state to the European Union, also called for including nucle- ar and gas in the EU taxonomy to en- hance the energy security of Europe. Kyiv has particularly stressed the need to replace Russian gas – nucle- ar and natural gas power could play an integral role in Ukraine's post-war reconstruction. Austria and Luxem- bourg, conversely, threatened to take the Commission to court for includ- ing gas and nuclear in the "green" la- beled EU investment list. Anti-nucle- ar demonstrations, furthermore, were held in Strasbourg, and Greenpeace released a report putting a spotlight on efforts by the Russian lobby to pro- mote the inclusion of nuclear and gas in the EU taxonomy. These latest developments poten- tially threaten to challenge the EU's prospects of implementing its Green Deal Strategy and its status as a global frontrunner towards meeting climate goals. It is, nevertheless, pertinent to note that the EU taxonomy started as a complex classification system tar- geted at labelling those parts of the economy marketable as sustainable investments. Though it refrains from outright banning investments in ac- tivities not labelled "green", it limits the companies and investors that can be categorized as climate friendly. This classification scheme ensures that green activities are rendered more visible and attractive. In October 2021, members of the V4 countries and several other CEE coun- tries signed an open letter defending nuclear energy and advocating its in- clusion in the EU taxonomy. e joint letter to the European Com- mission from the leaders of seven coun- tries – the Czech Republic, France, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia – espoused the poten- tial benefits of the inclusion of nuclear energy as part of the EU's climate and energy policy. Fast forward to February 2022 – the European Commission pro- posed designating these sources with the green label through the Taxono- my Delegated Act that covers nuclear and gas power generation. Despite a motion opposing this inclusion, if the Council declines to object to the CE proposal, the Taxonomy Delegated Act will enter into force and apply as of 1 January 2021. At the EU level, a unified position on nuclear power has historically prov- en elusive. Member states have held varied opinions and pursued different approaches toward nuclear energy re- flecting distinct national energy tra- jectories. The V4 members, however, have elected to include nuclear energy in their potential energy mixes despite their different political profiles and energy policies. While Poland and the Czech Repub- lic boast coal as a primary source of energy, for example, Hungary relies merely on natural gas and crude oil. Slovakia, meanwhile, depends on nu- clear energy and natural gas. Poland stands out as the only V4 country where nuclear is currently ab- sent in its energy mix. Warsaw, never- theless, treats nuclear energy as foun- dational to its future energy security and plans to build nuclear facilities that will diversify its electricity gen- eration. As indicated by Poland's Energy Pol- icy spanning the period until 2040, commissioning of the first unit (with a capacity of 1-1.6 GW) of its first nu- clear power plant is planned for 2033. Though the short-term impact of the inclusion of nuclear and gas in the EU taxonomy will be limited in the V4, it could incentivize new investments over the medium- and long-term. While the EU taxonomy specifies certain criteria to access private fund- ing, the scheme primarily functions to label assets as "green" rather than constrain access to funding sources. The V4 countries, consequently, can continue deploying gas and nuclear energy as previously dictated in their energy strategies. The financing of new projects, nevertheless, must meet the conditions laid out in the EU tax- onomy to enhance the attractiveness of the respective energy projects. The V4 countries would be prudent, in this vein, to mitigate their depend- encies on Russian fossil fuels, nuclear technology and uranium and ensure continuous access to capital that sup- ports sustainable economic activities. The Esbjerg Declaration could serve as a model for cooperation within the V4 format in making headway towards a sustainable and green transition. Poland Czech Republic Hungary Slovakia Coal 73.9% 44.2% 11.6% 8.5% Natural gas 9.3% 6.8% 25.1% 10.2% Nuclear 0% 34.6% 48.2% 54.0% Other sources 1.2% 1.7% 1.2% 4.0% RES 15.6% 12.7% 13.9% 23.3% Reflections on the EU Taxonomy Sources of electricity in the Visegrád Group states in 2019