TOP

Nuclear Transparency Watch

Prevent and anticipate through transparency and participation

Illustrative Programme for Nuclear Energy (PINC)

🇪🇺🔎 Nuclear Transparency Watch participated to the Illustrative Programme for Nuclear Energy (PINC) in 📅 May 2025 to address the following question:
On what ground could the 🇪🇺 EU support the «nuclear revival» ☢️📈 supported by some Member States ?

The following feedback can be found here.

“First and foremost, its important to recall that the countries supporting this revival are obviously mostly concerned and interested – they are operating nuclear energy and even industrializing it – and those 13 EU Member States are led by France a country reported to be lacking democracy in energy debates in various occasions including currently with the PPE (Programmation Pluriannuelle de lEnergie).

Also, before addressing this revision of the EUs Illustrative Programme for Nuclear Energy (PINC) in itself, its interesting to look back at the 2016 PINC which projected 14 GW of new nuclear capacity by 2025 when only 3.6 GW materialized because promises and reality are two different things especially when it comes to energy production which requires safety, time and a certain stability both political and financial. Today, the political situation in the EU and worldwide is more polarized and uncertain than ten years ago, in 2022 Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine leading to many issues around the Nuclear Power Plants there (Chernobyl and Zaporijia) and this year Donald Trump has created some major instability on the markets over night with its Liberation Days tariffs showing the economical vulnerability and dependency of most of the countries in the world. Therefore, when it comes to energy its crucial to have a broad and transparent perspective to support more easily EUs values and strategy because Europes current reliance on Russian uranium (valued at over 700 million in 2024) contradicts its sanctions regime for instance in addition to weaken its energy security (NTW supports the EU Commission’s roadmap for ridding itself of energy imports from Russia, including uranium and nuclear fuel published yesterday).

Furthermore, nuclear energy is highly represented in the EU – with around 100 operating reactors – compared to other regions in the world, but also not new. Its aging nuclear infrastructure (e.g., Frances fleet with an average age of 37 years) is in fact increasingly vulnerable to both climate change and cyber or military threats. In addition the nuclear sector is also aging and declining with more decommissions than new builds which face chronic delays and cost overruns (e.g., Flamanville-3 (France) and Olkiluoto-3 (Finland) – took over a decade longer than planned).

Instead of promising a «nuclear revival» to achieve carbon neutrality, the EU should focus on safety of the existing nuclear facilities including radioactive waste for which there isn’t yet any proven solution for the thousands of years ahead of us. In fact, from 2009 to 2024, nuclear Levelised Cost of Energy (LCOE) rose by 49%, while that of solar PV and wind decreased by 83% and 63% respectively providing quicker returns and less financial risks (WNISR 2024). Furthermore, nuclear energy’s exposure to climate-related disruptions such as droughts and heatwaves, which reduce reactor cooling efficiency and increase shutdown risks should also be compared to other source of energy because this undermines its reliability in a warming climate.

The European Commissions decision to allow only 4 weeks for public consultation after an 8-year gap is questionable especially when EU countries have also proven to be undemocratic on this topic. In the eye of trust building and citizen engagement, its important to be ambitious in including public in a meaningful way.

For those reasons, NTW believes that the main concern and interest should remain the safety of the life around the existing nuclear installations still operating or decommissioned before anything. Democratizing nuclear energy is a key aspect for safety and transparency especially nowadays with the serious economic, security and military challenges we’re facing, therefore resources should be given to citizens willing to engage beyond polarization and distrust to overcome potential misinformation or opacity.”

Report of the Aarhus Convention and Nuclear Round Table report

“Implementation of the Nuclear Safety Directive: transparency, public participation, and the role of civil society in independent nuclear regulation”

➡️ 📄 ACN roundtable report ⬅️

This report of the ACN round table held on 21-22 January 2025 was drafted by the co-organisers (NTW and DG ENER), reflecting the discussions and the presentations given during the event.

More information is available ▶️ here

EURAD-2 an EU programme on radioactive waste management

The EU programme EURAD-2 is following EURAD-1 a programme where Nuclear Transparency Watch (NTW) was involved from 2019 to 2024.

1st FORSAFF WP seminar 🗓23-24 April 2025 

Small Modular Reactors waste🛢️☢️ were addressed during the FORSAFF seminar 1 from 23-24 April 2025 🗓 at the ASNR‘ facility in Fontenay-aux-Roses 🇫🇷 gathering around 50 participants in person or online.

This Work Package dedicated to Small Modular Reactors waste 🛢️☢️ had 2 objectives:
• to identify stakeholder perceptions and concerns related to SMR waste management and develop recommendations for transparent information exchange and dialogue including improving communication with the public.
• to discuss on topic “Policy and Regulatory Framework” with challenges posed to existing policies and regulations by introduction of SMRs and associated spent fuel and radioactive wastes.

A good part of the seminar was dedicated to civil society concerns with some time for working groups exchanging on different challenging cases. 


1st CLIMATE WP workshop 🗓 26-27 March 2025 

Radioactive waste 🛢️☢️ and climate change impacts 🔥 🌊 were addressed during the 1st Climate workshop from 26-27 March 2025 🗓 at the Mines’ facility in Fontainebleau. A technical visit focusing on climate change impacts in Nemours 🇫🇷 (CEREEP center) launched this event.

Erosion test at the CEREEP center

Presentation, analysis, cross-study of keynote papers prepared by different waste management actors, including civil society, helped the 41 participants in elaborating shared viewpoints and outcomes regarding the prior topics to be considered.

Plenary session at the Mines facility in Fontainebleau
1st “Interaction with Civil Society” (ICS) workshop 🗓 24-25 March 2025 
In this new programme, a 1st “Interaction with Civil Society” (ICS) workshop took place in Fontainebleau 🇫🇷 at Mines-Paris’ facility on 🗓 24-25 March 2025 with participants from many 🇪🇺 European countries to exchange on ☢️🛢radioactive waste.
💼📋 This workshop which has been organised by NTW was particularly dedicated to the general overview of the programme’s  4 “Strategic Studies”:
🔹CLIMATE (impact of climate change);
🔹OPTI (HLW repository optimisation including closure);
🔹ASTRA (alternatives RWM strategies) and
🔹FORSAFF (WM for SMRs and future fuels).

Fourth NEA Stakeholder Involvement Workshop in Paris

NEA Stakeholder Involvement Workshop

The Summary Report from the Third NEA Stakeholder Involvement Workshop on Optimisation in Decision Making, which took place in Paris from 5–7 September 2023, where NTW was actively involved, has now been published.

The report captures the key findings from the discussions, including case studies, practical reflections, and proposals on how to facilitate optimisation in decision making through meaningful stakeholder involvement. It also outlines the next steps toward a generic framework for optimised decision making in the nuclear sector and beyond.

A Fourth NEA Stakeholder Involvement Workshop, will take place in Paris on 15–17 October 2025.

In preparation for the workshop, the NEA will be hosting a series of preparatory webinars. The third and final webinar is set to take place on 7 May 2025 and is now open for registration.

Continued participation and contributions will help in contributing for the next workshops.

Background

In fact, the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) will hold its Fourth NEA Stakeholder Involvement Workshop on Optimisation in Decision Making: From Insight to Action on 15-17 October 2025 in Paris, France

The workshop is the latest in a series of events that began in 2017 and seeks to foster dialogue and collaboration among diverse stakeholders in the nuclear sector.

The Third NEA Stakeholder Involvement Workshop on Optimisation in Decision Making, held in September 2023, brought together 120 participants from 23 countries, including representatives from regulators, operators, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), civil society and indigenous communities. Discussions centred on creating a framework for decisions that are optimised, inclusive and sustainable. The next event in the series will feature further discussion on developing a practical framework for optimised decision making.

Preparatory webinars

In the lead-up to the October 2025 event, the NEA has hosted two preparatory webinars exploring key factors that contribute to power imbalances and their mitigation when engaging stakeholders in nuclear decision making. Each webinar attracted approximately 50 participants, offering focused discussions. A third webinar is planned for 7 May 2025 to further equip participants with tools to support meaningful stakeholder engagement.

What to expect

The three-day Fourth NEA Stakeholder Involvement Workshop will feature:

  • plenary presentations by leading experts;
  • open dialogues to facilitate meaningful discussion; and
  • moderated panel discussions offering diverse perspectives.

Participants will include representatives from government bodies, industry, academic and research institutions, NGOs, international organisations and civil society to foster a broad and inclusive dialogue. The workshop outcomes will be compiled into a publicly available report, contributing to the ongoing discourse on the role of stakeholder engagement in the optimisation of decision making in the nuclear sector.

Opportunity to engage

The NEA is looking for case studies on the practical application of approaches and tools for stakeholder engagement, building on trust and ensuring transparency.

Contributions are welcome: the NEA can be contacted at stakeholder2025@oecd-nea.org

Find this article and more information on NEA home page: https://www.oecd-nea.org/jcms/pl_99778/fourth-nea-stakeholder-involvement-workshop-to-be-held-in-paris

Deep Geological Facility in the UK

Deep Geological Facility and correspondence in UK regional newspaper

A letter of NTW’s member, Tim Knowles, was published in a regional newspaper in Cumbria 🇬🇧 relating to the withdrawal of the only other area than Cumbria as a potential UK Deep Geological Facility location.

This letter underlines how this decision marks a very significant stage in the siting process and clearly affecting the “balance of power” between government, industry and communities.

 

 

 

19th March 2025

Sir,

The inevitable has happened in that the only alternative UK site for a deep nuclear waste repository has been withdrawn by Lincolnshire County Council in response to local hostility and other concerns. That leaves only West Cumbria and its two artificially split “communities” as the only potential location, unless government chooses to ignore the legal “volunteerism” approach and impose another solution.

By now everyone who takes an interest knows that an undersea mudstone type geology will be the likely location. Now that Lincolnshire is out of the picture that only really leaves a repository site fifteen to twenty miles out under the Irish Sea, probably accessed by tunneling out from a surface location near Sellafield. We have lived with this probability for decades and while it may be the most logical solution, huge issues remain to be resolved.;
🔹There is still no proof that the currently accepted high level waste packaging approach will survive the necessary thousands of years or that retrievability of the waste might be appropriate.
🔹The complex issues of whether plutonium should really be treated as waste given its potential as fuel plus the growing security and possible military use options are still not fully resolved.
🔹The issue of the major impact on our community, its infrastructure and the compensation benefits it should receive for hosting are far from resolved. It should be remembered that applying UK law and using comparator schemes like the Swedish system for repository benefit, West Cumbria should receive at least three billion pounds.

We need our politicians to gear up, learn about the international dimensions and risks associated with nuclear waste management and not to accept at face value what they are told by the nuclear industry and its regulators. This community should be professionally represented by independent experts and although the UK Treasury wont like it, government money should provided to allow peer reviews, impact assessments and strategic planning in a way to be
agreed by West Cumbrians.

It is sad but true that many of the promises made by both nuclear industry and government over many years have frequently not been delivered This huge project must be handled honestly and fairly, not only for West Cumbria today but because it will affect the lives of many future generations.

Tim Knowles
in the Whitehaven News

Interview of Dr. Petar Kardzilov in TV Eurocom on nuclear issues in Bulgaria

Dr. Petar Kardzilov was interviewed in “Honestly with Lyuba Kulezic” on TV Eurocom regarding his application under the Law on Access to Public Information with questions to the Minister of Energy regarding the State Enterprise Radioactive Waste and the Kozloduy NPP (click here for the link to the interview in Bulgarian).

There was an article in English about it (click here) and a complete translation of the interview here below:

Radioactive Issues

Interview with Petar Kardzhilov in the weekly publicistic program “Honestly with Lyuba Kulezich” on Eurocom TV, 06.03.2025 (uploaded to the Eurocom TV website on 07.03.2025).

Lyuba Kulezich: Petar Kardzhilov is here, you know him very well, he is a specialist in communications during risks and crises, one of the most consistent advocates for the right to freedom of Desislava Ivancheva and Bilyana Petrova – the infamous mayors of Mladost, who were thrown in prison for corruption. But the topic for which I invited him here tonight is a paradoxical title, which is his work, and which made me understand that within the Kozloduy NPP there is a nuclear waste storage facility – a topic that is extremely painful, not very popular in the public eye. But this same facility sells honey. Honey! Honey, in the sense of eating – bee honey! I could not understand anything from this insane contradiction. And that is why I invited him to explain it to me. Colleague Kardzhilov, what does this mean? Are we storing nuclear waste, are we producing honey at the nuclear waste storage facility? What is actually happening?

Petar Kardzhilov: Thank you very much for the invitation, dear Mrs. Kulezich! We are talking about the State Enterprise “Radioactive Waste”, which is subordinate to the Ministry of Energy, is not part of the Kozloduy NPP, but there are two of the main units on the Kozloduy NPP site, the other is the repository in Novi Han. In general, according to the Law on the Safe Use of Nuclear Energy… But, first, I must clarify here that I have been dealing with the topics of transparency and safety in nuclear energy as a doctor of public communication in risks and crises long before I became a PR in the Mladost region, and I am currently in an organization for transparency in nuclear energy, which was created after Fukushima.

Lyuba Kulezich: It is an international organization.

Petar Kardzhilov: Yes, the international Nuclear Transparency Watch. We search, find and report information that is not discussed in the media regarding nuclear power plants and nuclear energy. Such information is, for example, the level of radiation protection and the preparation of citizens for responding to crisis situations in individual countries, for example, a major accident at a nuclear power plant with increased radioactivity in the environment. Other such topics are the management of radioactive waste and the construction of new or the lifetime extension of the operating existing nuclear units.

Lyuba Kulezich: Why was it necessary for you to submit a request under the Access to Information Act to the Ministry of Energy regarding this problem – the storage of radioactive waste? Where is this problem in our country? Why is it not being talked about? What is this honey? I tell you again: I rarely encounter culinary-radioactive combinations as a common theme.

 Petar Kardzhilov: Yes, indeed. Well, this is the well-known, so-called “green washing” – when you try to account for some activity to the public, but you simply use some completely different “green” activities. If it were this honey festival, which has existed for sixteen years…

Lyuba Kulezich: …Within this enterprise?

Petar Kardzhilov: Yes, they are the main organizer and it is organized in their information center in the city of Kozloduy. If it were, let’s say, some kind of form that would attract citizens and explain to them what categories of radioactive waste exist, how long they are active and how high their activity is; for some isotopes it is about millions, even billions of years. They must be kept isolated from the environment in order for future generations to be safe. These issues are not explained, neither at the honey festival in question – as can be seen from the announcement on the website of the SE RW, nor on the website itself in separate sections with photos, etc. There are other questions in my request for information, for example, why the previous minister signed a contract with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for a study on deep drilling for the disposal of radioactive waste…

Lyuba Kulezich: Are you talking about Vladimir Malinov?

Petar Kardzhilov: Yes, Vladimir Malinov. And when in the strategy that we are appealing with Eng. Petar Penchev – Strategy for RWM in Bulgaria, updated version from the beginning of 2024. We are appealing it because it has not been discussed with society, with organizations, with active citizens like us and because of many existing vices. It is written in it that Bulgaria must build a deep geological repository – for the most dangerous part of the RW, which is the SNF, which, as we know, has been piling up since the beginning of the war in Ukraine at the Kozloduy NPP site.

Lyuba Kulezich: You know this, people don’t.

Petar Kardzhilov: Yes, it is generally published in some more serious media and websites, but they are hardly read by many people. Our mass media talk about Russian reactors, American reactors, what the price is, what the fuel is, how Bulgaria will almost perish without the production of electricity from NPP, which is not the case at all. But they never talk about these messes, these series of interconnected problems, such as radioactive waste, the preparation of citizens for a reaction in the event of a serious accident. By the way, we did a study three years ago with the Foundation for Environment and Agriculture of Mrs. Albena Simeonova and we came to the conclusion that the people in Kozloduy have no idea at all what to do after the sirens are sounded and they are announced…

Lyuba Kulezich: The people in Kozloduy?!

Petar Kardzhilov: Yes, the people in the city of Kozloduy, as we surveyed in two more cities and four villages around the Kozloduy NPP.

Lyuba Kulezich: But nobody knows? In an emergency situation?!

Petar Kardzhilov: Nobody knows, except for 5% of all 120 respondents we surveyed. And the respondents were from the Kozloduy hospital, two schools in the city, as well as municipal employees from these seven settlements.

Lyuba Kulezich: Okay, but you started talking about the idea of ​​the previous Energy Minister Malinov for burying RW…

Petar Kardzhilov: …Through deep drilling – deep borehole disposal…

Lyuba Kulezich: With a contract concluded with the US Chamber of Commerce. What is wrong with that?

Petar Kardzhilov: Well, the wrong thing is that a technology that is presented as modern and is only briefly mentioned in this strategy that we are appealing – for the management of radioactive waste and spent fuel, given that this is an American technology invented in the 1970s, which we now know has been categorically rejected in four US states. And right now, this company is looking for a guinea pig to drill for RW.

Lyuba Kulezich: But is that already a fact or is that why you are asking the new minister Zhecho Stankov?

Petar Kardzhilov: That’s why I ask the new minister how far this project has come, are such studies being conducted, by whom and where. And in the end…

Lyuba Kulezich: Nobody knows anything!

Petar Kardzhilov: …why nobody knows anything about these issues that affect generations in the future, hundreds of generations in the future.

Lyuba Kulezich: And how can people, citizens, understand the different types of RW that our plant releases? Where are they stored? What are the dangers? Are there any? How can they be prevented? Who takes care of the export of this NF, if there is an export of such fuel?

Petar Kardzhilov: There is no more export, because the war in Ukraine has started, only the glazed highly active and long-lived radioactive isotopes will be returned to us. Well, people certainly could not understand these important questions either from the website of the SE RW, or from the website of the Nuclear Regulatory Agency, let alone from the website of the Kozloduy NPP. There is no such information anywhere. One must be a specialist, handle documents, educate oneself with great effort and spend hours on the Internet to reach these conclusions, which most of the media, the mass media never explain to us and offer to our attention, because they clearly have no interest.

Lyuba Kulezich: Why not? I was just going to ask you, you are a member of an international organization for transparency in nuclear energy. With this silence, this shady behavior regarding such a key issue, of three institutions. What do you think is the reason for this? Is it just negligence?

Petar Kardzhilov: No, not just negligence. It is a matter of a mess. The mess in nuclear energy is the opposite of the system. A system, for example, an automobile plant, works in transparent ways, nothing is hidden there. While in nuclear energy, all the problems that are interconnected and interdependent must remain a secret. Because if everything is public, questions will begin about our money. Because, as Prof. Kaschiev announced…

Lyuba Kulezich: Georgi Kaschiev, yes.

Petar Kardzhilov: Yes, Prof. Georgi Kaschiev, who was the chairman of the first nuclear regulatory body in Bulgaria. He calculated that for 2023, Kozloduy NPP spent 320 million leva more on electricity production compared to 2020, 2021 and 2022.

Lyuba Kulezich: What does this mean?

Petar Kardzhilov: Well, this is another of the questions I asked Minister Stankov, since an inspection has begun at the Kozloduy NPP, as they briefly announced “due to suspicions of financial abuse”. I asked Mr. Stankov, according to the Access to Public Information Act, to report at least what the Kozloduy NPP’s accounting says. Where does this overspending for electricity production come from? It can’t possibly be from changing the fuel from Russian to American, even though the American is more expensive, but that happened last year – 2024. Also, I can’t imagine this overspending being from cleaning up and limiting the damage from the incident that occurred with the spill of radioactive water with boric acid last year – the end of May.

Lyuba Kulezich: In Unit Six.

Petar Kardzhilov: Yes, that’s right. Now, in the management of Kozloduy NPP, as well as of SE RW, there are some people… Over the past few years, several executive directors have changed at the plant. Galab Donev, first of all, the acting prime minister of President Radev, appointed Georgi Kirkov as executive director, and Andrey Krasnocharov as deputy executive director. This man, as it became known from the media, was investigated by a commission at Kozloduy NPP, which revealed how he manipulated data so that the oligarch from Pernik city, Lyudmil Stoykov, could win orders awarded by Kozloduy NPP. And, this same Mr. Krasnocharov is still the deputy executive director today, even after the replacement of three executive directors.

Lyuba Kulezich: Many questions, many questions, a whole bunch of questions that are crucially important to get an answer to. When do you expect this answer, colleague Kardzhilov? When should you receive it? There are deadlines under the law on access to information.

Petar Kardzhilov: The deadline is basically one month, I submitted it last week on Thursday. Since there are other organisations, they may request an extension of two more weeks.

Lyuba Kulezich: But these answers are extremely important, we need to learn them, because they concern such terrible consequences if this problem is left like this, on its own. And you mentioned something in our preliminary conversation about the nurse Natalia Stancheva.

Petar Kardzhilov: Yes! Natalia Stancheva. I asked if we could show the photo with her. Here it is. She revealed a terrible abuse – the existence of a polyclinic on the territory of the NPP, and also reported the existence of a pharmacy, a shop, restaurants, etc. – all of this is prohibited by law…

Lyuba Kulezich: Yes, yes, we remember who was sued – a slap trial – to pay one million leva to the Kozloduy NPP for damaging its prestige, as they claimed.

Petar Kardzhilov: Now she is looking for a lawyer, but since she is being harassed on the phone, she asked them to write her an SMS first if any lawyer wants to take over. The current situation with her is absurd and brutal: she has been kept in solitary confinement for four months and has not received a salary. Despite this, she has access, has not been fired and is present at the plant, she goes to work every day but doesn’t get assignments. Local lawyers cannot be trusted, because in the small town of Kozloduy everyone knows each other and are connected.

Lyuba Kulezich: Another paradox! Related to the permitted, unauthorized, semi-legal at the Kozloduy NPP and our nuclear energy. This was Dr. Petar Kardzhilov, whom you know well as a specialist in risks and crises communication, with extremely important questions that wait an answer from the Ministry of Energy, but affect our common life – all of us with you, one crazy case – who stores or does not store spent nuclear fuel, what is its fate? And that was “Honestly”…

Why 68% of Ukrainians Oppose the Completion of the Khmelnytskyi Nuclear Power Plant – panel discussion

A sociological study on Ukrainian public opinion regarding nuclear energy was conducted by the research agency Info Sapiens at the request of NGO Ecoaction and the Heinrich Böll Foundation, Kyiv Office – Ukraine.
The results of this study will be presented during an online event on March 20. The discussion will also cover key technological, economic, and environmental risks associated with the completion of Units 3 and 4 at the Khmelnytskyi Nuclear Power Plant. Recently, the Ukrainian Parliament approved draft  law No. 11392, which provides for the purchase of russian equipment from Bulgaria for this project.

Experts, politicians, and civil society will discuss the implications of these construction plans.

Registered participants will receive a link to the Zoom meeting prior to the event. The discussion will be conducted in Ukrainian with simultaneous translation into English: https://forms.office.com/pages/responsepage.aspx?id=WHBqOCUHH0a19D8oug9wnjW-88x2cJJPpgPK6CWpDvxURDJVR1dHS09DUlVEN1dHSkZXN1FPOUZLUi4u&route=shorturl

Date: March, 20th, 11 a.m. EET (10 a.m. CET)
Place: online via ZOOM

Speakers:

  • Inna Sovsun, Member of the Parliament of Ukraine
  • Olha Lyashchuk, project coordinator at NGO Ecoclub
  • Anastasia Shurenkova, researcher at InfoSapiens agency
  • Yuriy Nikolov, journalist and co-founder of the project Nashi Hroshi (Our Money)

Moderator Artem Kolesnyk, energy policy expert at NGO Ecoaction

Radiation Protection Research – PIANOFORTE White Paper

PIANOFORTE is a European Partnership for Radiation Protection Research ☢️ contributing to improve the protection of the public, workers, patients and the environment from environmental, occupational and medical exposure to ionizing radiation.
It brings together 58 partners representing 22 European Union countries 🇪🇺 as well as the United Kingdom  🇬🇧and Norway 🇳🇴, and is coordinated by the French Autorité de Sûreté Nucléaire et de Radioprotection (ASNR) and co-financed by the European Union’s EURATOM program and the governments of the participating countries.

Through the research activities carried out within its framework, PIANOFORTE contributes to the implementation of European policies such as the European plan to combat cancer , the green pact for growth, and the implementation of the roadmap for reducing industrial and natural risks.

PIANOFORTE has just released a White Paper on “The Vital Role of Radiation Protection Research in Europe’s Future”:

German elections and nuclear energy

On February 23, 2025, the Bundestag members were elected by the German people 🇩🇪.
The party with the most representatives, the center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and its Bavarian sister party, the Christian Social Union (CSU), forming the CDU/CSU, will build a governing coalition to hold a parliamentary majority
CDU/CSU already refused to form a coalition with the far right party AfDn therefore it’s likely to see one of the coalition represented below to be formed by Easter.
Source: Federal Returning Officer – February 24, 2025
Now regarding the impacts of this new political scene on nuclear energy, we can first refer to the CDU/CSU’s programme where can read:
“We remain committed to nuclear power.
We are focusing on research into fourth- and fifth-generation nuclear power, small modular reactors and fusion power plants.
We are studying the possibility of resuming operation of recently closed nuclear power plants.”
However, considering the political situation and the views of nuclear experts in Germany, it’s not likely that they will be able to reopen the recently closed nuclear power plants. In fact even the companies that operated them don’t support it.
Regarding the “new developments in the nuclear field, whether it is research or later industrial manufacturing” our German member, Jo Leinen, who is a former member of the European Parliament (SPD) thinks that “the conservatives want to be part of the technological race”.
Another member of Nuclear Transparency Watch, Dr. Hauke Doerk a consultant for radioactivity and energy policy at the Umweltinstitut München e.V. also thinks that research in new generation nuclear, SMR and Fusion is likely continued to be funded.

A leaflet to know what to do in case of a nuclear accident

What to do in case of a nuclear emergency ?
How to prepare?

In Europe 168 nuclear power reactors are in operation (IAEA PRIS data) from its Eastern to Western part, in which an accident can happen like Chernobyl and Fukushima.

Moreover, 3 years after the invasion of Ukraine by Russia, we see how war can impact safety and security of the nuclear power plants with multiple crisis around Zaporizhzhia and Chernobyl nuclear power plants which reminded the world of this terrible accident leading to the evacuation of 115,000 persons in the late 1980’s.

This month, on Friday, February 14 a drone strike occurred on the New Safe Confinement structure at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant with fortunately “no indication of a breach in the inner containment” shell and radiation levels remaining within normal parameters according to the State Emergency Service of Ukraine.

 

For this reason, in an open letter Nuclear Transparency Watch called the European Nuclear Safety Regulators Group (ENSREG) to consider stress-testing nuclear power stations in the light of the new situation in Europe.

CALL for a post-Ukraine nuclear stress test process for all European nuclear power stations

Furthermore, a working group within Nuclear Transparency Watch worked on a leaflet meant to inform civil society on What to do in case of a nuclear emergency and how to prepare?

This leaflet is not meant to replace the information provided by the institutions such as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) or local authorities on this topic but rather to offer a complementary support from civil society to civil society.

Therefore, this leaflet will be translated in the different European languages of the civil society organisations composing Nuclear Transparency Watch network to support them and for any other civil society organisation or individual interested.

Address

  • Nuclear Transparency Watch
  • 38, rue Saint Sabin
  • 75011 PARIS
  • FRANCE
  • +32 (0) 2 284 53 97