1 / 9

Challenges in Nuclear Energy Planning: Obstacles to Aarhus Implementation

Explore the obstacles and challenges in implementing the Aarhus Convention in nuclear energy-related planning. Discover the lack of transparency, procedural problems, and limited public participation. Gain insights into the content quality of energy strategies, nuclear risks, and environmental impacts. Examine the issues in construction, including EIA procedures, alternative assessments, and waste management. Learn about the limitations in access to justice and the need for transparency and participation. Contact jan.haverkamp@greenpeace.org for more information.

julec
Download Presentation

Challenges in Nuclear Energy Planning: Obstacles to Aarhus Implementation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Nuclear energy related planning – obstacles and challenges in Aarhus implementation jan.haverkamp@greenpeace.org NUCLEAR TRANSPARENCY WATCHPrevent and anticipate through transparency and participation

  2. LEVELS OF PLANNING • GENERAL PLANS (climate, environment, economy, financial, spacial planning, security, social) • ENERGY STRATEGIES and NUCLEAR ENERGY STRATEGIES • CONSTRUCTION • RELATED PROJECTS 2 / 9

  3. ENERGY STRATEGIES and NUCLEAR ENERGY STRATEGIES I • SEAs • procedural problems • no SEA - art. 7 AC • too short times for public to participate - art. 7 and art. 6(3) AC • no hearings or other participative formats 3 / 9

  4. ENERGY STRATEGIES and NUCLEAR ENERGY STRATEGIES II • SEAs • content quality • lack of sufficient and sufficiently realistic and detailed alternatives - art. 6(6)(e) AC • no scenarios leading to 100% renewable energy 2050 • no assessment full chain environmental impacts • lack of sufficiently detailed overview of consequences of nuclear energy - art. 6(6)(b) AC • technologies • siting options • nuclear risks and emergency situations • radioactive waste (and spent fuel) management 4 / 9

  5. CONSTRUCTION I • EIAs • procedural problems • standing - art. 3(9) AC • time frames public participation - art. 6(3) AC • early public participation - art. 6(4) AC • hearings – format - art. 6(5) and 6(7) AC • taking public participation into due account - art. 6(8) AC • frivolous EIA procedures 5 / 9

  6. CONSTRUCTION II • EIAs • content • highly technical non-technical summaries (cut-and-paste) - art. 6(6)(d) AC • no alternatives to the project including zero option - art. 6(6)(e) AC • no assessment of severe accidents with substantial emission of radioactive substances - art. 6(6)(b) AC 6 / 9

  7. CONSTRUCTION III • EIAs • salami tactics • fuel chain emissions – no data on mining, fuel production - art. 6(4) and art. 6(6)(b) AC • waste management, spent fuel management - art. 6(4) and art. 6(6)(b) AC • supporting technology (grids, transformer stations, infrastructure) - art. 6(4) and art. 6(6)(b) AC 7 / 9

  8. ACCESS TO JUSTICE • no standing - art. 9(2) AC • no direct applicability Aarhus Convention • no injunctive relief - art. 9(4) AC • long procedures • high costs • no implementation of court rulings 8 / 9

  9. jan.haverkamp@greenpeace.org NUCLEAR TRANSPARENCY WATCHPrevent and anticipate through transparency and participation

More Related