Should hydrogen of nuclear origin be considered as a renewable energy? This is the question that currently opposes the Member States of the EU.
Hydrogen is seen as a promising technology that might help the European Union reduce its dependence on fossil fuels and achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. It might be used in transportation, fertilizer, steel and electricity storage.
However, the vast majority of hydrogen produced today in the Union comes from natural gas. Under these conditions, this energy cannot be used for the climate transition.
The 27 therefore want to promote clean hydrogen, in other words with the use of renewable electricity.
The European Commission proposed a new target in 2021 that would oblige the whole of the EU to ensure that 40% of its energy consumption is from renewable sources by 2030.
This ambition was even revised upwards, to 45%, following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
This figure must be reached collectively, and not by Member State. It must take into account different renewable resources, such as wind, solar, geothermal and hydroelectric energy.
The Commission has proposed to include renewable hydrogen in this overall objective. The text is currently the subject of negotiations between Member States and the European Parliament before becoming legally binding.
This is where the political struggle is played out. A group of member countries, led by France, is pushing for nuclear-generated hydrogen to also be included in renewable energy targets in transport and industry.
This call from Paris is supported by Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia in a joint letter sent at the beginning of February. These capitals defend low-carbon energy, a coded reference to nuclear power.
But their request is met with strong opposition by another letter signed in mid-March by Austria, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg, Portugal and Spain.
“Counting low-carbon energy towards renewable energy targets would instead reduce our climate efforts and slow down investment in much-needed additional renewable capacity,” the seven signatories write.
The composition of the two camps is not surprising. Everyone had already expressed their preference or opposition to the role of nuclear energy in the EU’s green transition.
However, their political weight represents a legislative challenge. Each group has enough votes to form a blocking minority and thus prevent the adoption of the revised renewable energy directive.
The nuclear option
According to current European legislation, nuclear energy is not considered renewable. The reactors are powered by uranium, a metallic chemical element that undergoes nuclear fission and turns into radioactive waste that remains dangerous for thousands of years.
Additionally, uranium mining and refining are energy-intensive processes.
However, nuclear power plants are considered low carbon emitters. They release water vapor and not CO2 into the atmosphere, unlike gas and coal-fired power stations.
This difference is put forward by pro-nuclear States to defend this technology as a solution for the future to strengthen energy independence, reduce pollution and guarantee security of supply in the event that the weather reduces energy production. solar, wind and hydroelectric.
This assessment, however, did not convince the anti-nuclear group. He insists that this sector should not play a role in a climate-neutral society.
Hydrogen therefore represents a new chapter in a long-standing debate.
The differences came to light on Tuesday during a meeting of energy ministers, during which the two camps organized discussions on the sidelines of the meeting in order to convince the undecided.
Italy, the Netherlands and Belgium participated as “observers“in a meeting favorable to nuclear power. Amsterdam and Brussels also participated with Vilnius in a session organized by Austria, which opposes the atom.
The issue made its way into discussions on Tuesday. The meeting brought to light the fault line.
All eyes were on France, which gets more than two-thirds of its electricity from nuclear power plants and is seen as the main promoter of low-carbon hydrogen.
“We can try to find a solution for the French, but nuclear is not green“, insists Teresa Ribera, Spanish Minister for Ecological Transition.
Claude Turmes, Luxembourg Minister in charge of Energy, denounces what he calls “hostage-taking by the French government in all cases“.
Estonia, which was not part of the joint letters, took a critical position. “It is important to preserve the integrity of the Renewable Energy Directive. It should cover renewable sources and give (them) preferential treatment, and nuclear is not renewable“, summarizes the Estonian Minister in charge of Economic Affairs, Riina Sikkut.
French Energy Transition Minister Agnès Pannier-Runacher responds that Paris is not trying to go nuclear”on the same foot” than renewable energy. She points out that the sector has a “important role“to play in the transition.
“We are beginning to realize collectively that the question is not to oppose nuclear energy to renewable energies. The question is really to consider all the levers that can enable us to achieve carbon neutrality and reduce our consumption or our CO2 emissions by 2030 with all the toolbox available“, adds Agnès Pannier-Runacher.
Several Eastern European member states, including Poland, Croatia, the Czech Republic and Hungary, echoed his view.
“We strongly believe that all carbon-free technologies should be treated equally“, emphasizes the Czech Minister of Industry, Jozef Síkela.
“With regard to hydrogen of nuclear origin, we would like it to be recognized within the framework of the objectives of decarbonisation. We believe that nuclear energy should not be subject to negative discrimination“, adds the Hungarian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Péter Szijjártó.
