Today, we mark the one-year anniversary of the “Dear Greenpeace” campaign—a rallying cry from young people demanding an honest, science-based approach to the climate crisis. We’re at the edge of disaster, hurtling past the 1.5°C threshold, and time is not on our side. The global energy transition is failing without nuclear power, an essential component of any viable clean energy transition.
In the past year, the urgency of the climate situation has only intensified as we witnessed 13 continuous months of record-breaking warming. Despite the significant contributions of renewable energy, it is clear they cannot bear the clean energy transition's weight. The stakes are higher than ever; we need heavy lifters like nuclear power in the game if we are to have any hope of pulling the planet back from the brink of being uninhabitable.
When the campaign was launched, it sent a clear and uncompromising message to Greenpeace: it’s time to reassess, to evolve, and to align with the scientific consensus. The message remains the same today: “Dear Greenpeace, drop your opposition to nuclear energy.” The science is clear—nuclear power is a viable and essential component of the global clean energy transition.
For decades, Greenpeace has been a vocal opponent of nuclear power, advocating instead for a world powered entirely by renewables. While their intentions are rooted in environmental protection, the consequences of this stance have been profound. By focusing their efforts on blocking nuclear projects, Greenpeace has inadvertently delayed progress on climate action. These delays have not only set back efforts to reduce global carbon emissions but have also hindered the expansion of clean, reliable energy in regions where it is most needed.
What’s more concerning is that Greenpeace’s opposition persisted despite the knowledge that blocking nuclear energy would lead to greater fossil fuel consumption. This reality is especially disheartening, given that the burning of fossil fuels remains the single greatest contributor to global warming. By obstructing nuclear projects, Greenpeace has, in effect, prolonged our dependency on fossil fuels, making it harder to meet our climate targets and protect future generations.
Their current lawsuit against the European Commission for the inclusion of nuclear energy in the EU Sustainable Finance Taxonomy is just one of the latest examples of this climate delay. This case is currently on hold while the European Court of Justice hears the Austrian government lawsuit against the European Commission, also over the inclusion of nuclear energy.
This means we must wait to defend nuclear energy in court against Greenpeace. However, this campaign has always been about more than just defending nuclear energy in this court case; it’s about advocating for a just and equitable global transition.
The clean energy transition is about so much more than just climate action and we have always highlighted the critical importance of equitable energy access. The call for more electricity is not just a matter of convenience for those in the Global North but a question of human rights and survival for those in the Global South.
Energy poverty is not an abstract concept; it is a daily reality for millions, manifesting in countless ways—every woman forced to hand wash her family's clothes, every child forced to work, every man who perishes in work that can well and truly be automated by machines, they are the victims of energy poverty. And so is every single person that dies from easily preventable diseases, from firewood pollution in the home, from heat or cold stress, or from lack of access to clean water. That is what electricity access is about.
The transition must be carried out with the needs of the most vulnerable at its heart, ensuring that the benefits of clean energy are accessible to all. For the Global North, this means accelerating the transition and reducing our carbon footprint to leave room for the Global South to industrialise and develop.
To Greenpeace, and to all who still doubt: it’s time to accept the science. The future includes nuclear, and that future must start now. Join us, or step aside—because we can’t afford anymore inaction. A habitable planet is at stake, and the clock is ticking.
Wherever nuclear energy is being opposed, we will be there to stand up for it. Donate today to support this campaign.
In solidarity, Ia Aanstoot
Comentários