RBI opposes the inclusion of nuclear power into the Green EU Taxonomy

In the light of the accelerating climate crisis, nuclear energy and its place in the future energy mix is being debated. Currently its share of global electricity generation is about 10 percent. Some countries accord nuclear energy a certain role in the pursuit of climate neutrality and in ending the era of fossil fuels. But the experience with commercial nuclear energy generation over the past seven decades points to the significant technical/environmental, economic, and social risks involved.

Therefore, European political discussion is still controversial on the classification of the use of nuclear energy as sustainable. As a possible compromise, the Commission could include nuclear with some constraints - maybe classified as 'transitional'. However, the risks - both to the environment and human beings - would remain unchanged and unforeseeable.

The Green EU Taxonomy clarifies which economic activities serve the environmental goals and do not cause significant harm. That means a sustainable activity must contribute to one or more environmental objectives and does not significantly harm any other environmental objective. Current nuclear power technologies harm at least three of the six environmental objectives of the EU Taxonomy and there is currently no pathway to mitigate this harm.

Environmental and social organizations raised their concerns: Granting nuclear the label of sustainability would undermine the EU's climate targets, divert much-needed investments in the green transition and jeopardize the credibility of the entire European Green Deal. These arguments are also based on scientific evidence:

In a study, researchers from the Scientists for Future network show that nuclear energy is too dangerous, too expensive, and too sluggishly deployable to play a significant role in mitigating the climate crisis. In addition, nuclear energy is an obstacle to achieving the social-ecological transformation, without which ambitious climate goals are elusive. Also currently promoted new technologies (e.g. Small Medium Reactors) are immature and far from commercially viable.

Particularly in terms of the credibility as Responsible Banker and ESG pioneer, it is important for us to have a clear stance also on controversial issues that ultimately also affect the society and environment. This approach is also expected by our stakeholders.