Entering text into the input field will update the search result below

EU Parliament approves 'green' label for nuclear power, natural gas

Twilight photo of power plant,power plant and sky

WangAnQi/iStock via Getty Images

The European Parliament voted Wednesday to include nuclear power and natural gas in the bloc's list of investments deemed sustainable, a move that could trigger more funding of those sectors but that critics said would slow

Recommended For You

Comments (65)

Have a tip? Submit confidentially to our News team. Found a factual error? Report here.

lshiang profile picture
Facing the reality of Russia invasion of Ukraine, the price of oil and natural gas go through the roof. It is long overdue for EU Parliament to approve 'green' label for nuclear power, natural gas. Nuclear power pant will become the only reliable energy source with least pollution.
ephud profile picture
CO2 is plant food. NASA satellite data shows the earth is measurably greener as CO2 levels rise. Doesn't that make fossil fuels the greenest source of energy there is?
ransim7222 profile picture
@ephud Fossil fuels are plants, just very, very well-aged.
Expensive nuclear only makes sense in a $100/+ crude world. Maybe higher. From permitting to producing to decommissioning, nuclear is financially the worst option.

Abundant, reliable, and potentially cheap natural gas on the other hand should have been the 'transition' fuel for the Climate Change Alarmists, but they let the extremist Green Zealot arm of their determine policy.

On the low, I am noticing Europe quietly building out hydrogen.
7422981 profile picture
@kmi Mostly, they build out hot air.
ransim7222 profile picture
The EU just classified nuclear as green, so they must think differently.
davea0511b profile picture
@kmi Crude > $100 is the world we're living in. And Natural gas? Due to methane leaking (which is 20x worse than CO2 for the ozone), natural gas is no longer considered a "clean" option.
So, the end of the world due to global warming is politically negotiable... who knew?
@socaljoe GW the least of your worries! Get rid of a few sweaters!
Was Hilary Clinton's approval/support for the sale of Uranium One to the Russians (after receiving $2m from the Russians for her foundation) a sustainable move?
How are 20,000 nuclear weapons sustainable? Crazy concept - sustainable. How is 8 billion people and growing sustainable?

Victor Justice profile picture
Interesting photo of Boris Johnson:

Yet U.S. natural gas company stocks have dropped 40% over the past four weeks. All because a fire at one of the Freeport LNG terminals? Seems like a buying opportunity!
Coal is greener than a wind farm indirectly subsidizing Russian destruction of the world!
Victor Justice profile picture
@myeloblast …is this your attempt at humor? “Russian destruction of the world!” Turn off the boob-tube, and read the opposite of whatever you’re normally inclined to.
@Victor Justice no. we should be using coal as the use of oil and nat gas is enabling the Russians to destroy and conquer
The wind farms aren't dropping bombs, so no, coal is the dirtiest fuel.

Everything is greener than coal, except unloading the world's nuclear arsenal.
Interesting how people freezing to death changes the climate change crowd.
human stupidity has not ceiling.
@Gelf74 you are so right, unawareness on a galactic scale.
Victor Justice profile picture
“EU Parliament…”

Sounds like the beginning of a joke!
Coal - worst polluter
Crude oil - next worst
Nat Gas - least polluter of fossil fuels
Biomass - mostly recycled waste as energy source
Solar, Wind, Geothermal, Hydro - all sustainable and non-air polluting, yet all have their drawbacks
Nuclear - continuous, reliable power with no air pollution - expensive to start with potential safety and disposal challenges
@bigeasy8 the only sustainable way forward for the long term is a combination of the bottom 4, possibly eliminating natural gas over the very long term (50-100 years).
@Joe jetski ALSO improve battery storage & make FUSION energy viable!
HootieTreads profile picture
Nuclear makes sense but why gas?
7422981 profile picture
@Chris1w Otherwise, no hot showers and frozen pipes...that is the new definition of Green.
Steve Kean profile picture
@7422981 and a much better alternative than coal.
@7422981 I am extremely bullish on nuclear power. Hopefully the current situation encourages far more investment into nuclear energy.
How convenience, those evil powers make up the so called Climate Change rules as they go along and impose their view on the poor and powerless countries. Now the same gangs start their coal plants again. They try to DICTATE the rest of the world follow their tyrannical rules. Now these gangs meet
their match today: China-India-Russia- S. America-Africa....etc.
Victor Justice profile picture
@zip6485 …could you please explain this for me again, but this time in English?
ephud profile picture
@Victor Justice

You don't speak gibberish?
Victor Justice profile picture
@ephud 😂
Reduce population. That is the only way.
Jim Kimmelman profile picture
@ding dong US oil consumption is about the same as 1995, I am pretty sure we have a lot more people living here.
bill h illify profile picture
@ding dong
Something like Squid Games to choose?
@ding dong now that women can’t have sex anymore. For pleasure. Good luck on that
snafflebit profile picture
throw out the esg and green religion scam and get back to work.
Capital Gains profile picture
So as long as they call it green even if it is not technically green then it okay? Whatever helps them sleep at night, maybe Biden needs to do this, slap some green stickers on all the oil barrels, exported and imported, problem solved, Heck they can even paint the tankers all green, if that will helps as well
@Capital Gains its not like solar and wind are really green either. The whole sham is much more about money and personal power than it was ever about the environment. At least green stickers wouldn’t cause so much damage to the working class.
@Mr Nobodi
You know what else isn't green?
Coal, oil, and natural gas.

Things are called green because they're more environmentally friendly than the worst polluters, that's all.

Coal is the worst and the world needs more energy so they're bumping up some things that are greener than coal.

Please point me to the time in history when the "working class" wasn't complaining about how hard their lives are.

You can't. They always complained about their jobs. And the "working class" had it a lot worse before anyone knew about green or clean energy.

Back when fossil fuels owned the world, they didn't even have an 8 hour work day, health benefits, or a minimum wage. They had no worker safety. No workers compensation. They employed children. That's your workers paradise?

Related Stocks

SymbolLast Price% Chg
To ensure this doesn’t happen in the future, please enable Javascript and cookies in your browser.
Is this happening to you frequently? Please report it on our feedback forum.
If you have an ad-blocker enabled you may be blocked from proceeding. Please disable your ad-blocker and refresh.