"We are not here to define the energy policies of any country. We are here to emphasise that it is really a bad decision to place nuclear within the European taxonomy. It is not safe, it is not sustainable and it costs a lot of money", he argued.
European financing, stressed Matos Fernandes, should be directed towards other options, mainly wind and solar energy, and he added that they are in contact with the private sector to take this same position.
“All the money that goes into nuclear energy is definitely money that should be put into renewable energy and that's what the world needs. We need energy, but it doesn't come from fossil [fuels]. And we need energy that does not contain nuclear waste”, he insisted.
In an intervention before Matos Fernandes, the German Environment Minister, Svenja Schulze, stated that “nuclear energy cannot be a solution to the climate crisis” because it is too risky, too slow and not sustainable.
Currently, around 12% of Germany's electricity comes from nuclear and half from renewable sources.
In 2011, after the accident at Japan's Fukushima nuclear power plant, German Chancellor Angela Merkel announced that it would end the country's 17 nuclear power plants by 2022, despite fears that this would lead to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions due to the use of gas and coal.
France is the third largest producer of nuclear energy in the world, behind the United States and China.
Scientific, statistically based data, and the reality prove this gent and his German counterpart completely wrong! What is he saying is not backed up by facts! Matos Fernandes is a demagogue politician who like many in his socialist government are better characterized by sistematic mismanagement of public affairs, lying as convenient, and even denying the reality. Facts and data from all credible sources show the pacific use of nuclear energy as being the safest, cheapest, more reliable and by far the most environmentally sound form of energy produced in large quantities as required by our modern societies. Properly managed like many countries do (France, USA, Israel, etc.) the energy from nuclear sources is and should the there to satisfy the large quantities of energy all the time we need it and not just was the sun shines or the wind propeller moves!
By Tony Fernandes from Other on 14 Nov 2021, 16:41
Errata: In the second last line of my comment please replace the word "was" by "when". Thank you.
By Tony Fernandes from Other on 15 Nov 2021, 01:08
The choice is simple. Keep coal, forget nuclear. Go nuclear, reduce reliance on coal and fossil fuels. Other alternatives are unreliable and equally expensive.
By Ian from Lisbon on 15 Nov 2021, 06:52
This man should be updated on Nuclear Energy. He is putting fission and fusion on the same package. Read about the plasma fusion on Tokamaks, or plasma on conversion of lasers. What are the waste on Deuterium an Tritium, or even on Helium3? I feel shame as a Portuguese, to see some smart guy not knowing what he is talking about
By Adriano from Other on 15 Nov 2021, 09:01
Nuclear energy is safe, and sustainable.
I question if this minister even knows what those words mean.
By Miguel from Lisbon on 15 Nov 2021, 14:07