Greenpeace Rejects Sweden’s Nuclear Plans

• February 17th, 2009
• Posted by Daniel Challis

INTERVIEW: Greenpeace Nordic has rejected the Swedish government’s plan to end its nuclear phase-out policy, calling it a “dangerous” option.

It’s called for nuclear power to be removed from Sweden’s energy plans.

The organisation’s Energy Campaigner Martina Krueger told EUAustralia (16.2.09) that Greenpeace was not alone in saying that nuclear energy was a n unsustainable energy source and should be phased out.

“Nuclear is dirty and dangerous in all leads of the production, from uranium mining to the unsolved question of what to do with the nuclear waste.

“There is also the proliferation risk of nuclear material which needs to be considered,” she said.

Greenpeace Nordic is pushing for energy efficient technologies to be implemented by the government, such as wind and solar power as well as small-scale local energy production.

According to Ms Krueger, prior to the agreement with Sweden’s government to shift its policy back towards nuclear, but on a commercial basis,  the nuclear industry talked about nuclear as the only “cheap solution” to energy efficiency.

“The tone has definitely changed.

“Since the government has made it clear there won’t be subsidies for nukes, it is now saying nuclear is needed but will be expensive,” she said.

Public sentiment towards nuclear power has waxed and waned over the years; normally, says the environmental movements, in response to “extreme circumstances” that can jolt people’s opinions.

That was the case in August 2006 when an electrical fault at the Forsmark nuclear plant brought it close to meltdown.

“Whenever something happens that begs the safety question, support for nuclear power drops,” Ms Krueger said.

The government in Sweden is pushing to overturn a 29 year-old ban (see EUAustralia, ‘Sweden’s Nuclear Plans – Part Of A Trend’, 6.2.09), which would allow new nuclear reactors to be built on existing sites.

The Prime Minister, Fredrik Reinfeldt, says he does not feel tied to a 1980 referendum that brought in  the ban, because it didn’t specify how nuclear energy should be replaced.

The government says the country needs nuclear power in order to meet its 2020 goal of cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 40%,  from 1990 levels.

Reference:

Daniel Challis, Interview with Martina Krueger, Energy Campaigner, Greenpeace Nordic. 16.2.09, 23:00.

Picture:

www.greenpeace.org

• View Similar Articles