US scientists announced a breakthrough on fusion energy, potentially a step toward one day harnessing the process that fires the sun to generate carbon-free electricity as the world struggles with climate change.

WION Climate Tracker: Can nuclear fusion save our planet?

Ankit Tuteja brings Tech it Out from Russia, which is one of the leading players in the nuclear energy sector. Tuteja reports from the Atom Export 2022, which is said to be the largest exhibition and platform for discussing the current state of the nuclear industry.

Nuclear fears: Why are people afraid of nuclear energy? | Tech It Out

As part of its increased challenge to NASA's dominance in space exploration, China wants to establish its first base on the moon by 2028, followed by the landing of astronauts there in the years that follow.&nbsp;

According to Caixin, the lunar base will probably be powered by nuclear energy. The Chang'e 6, 7 and 8 missions would build the lander, hopper, orbiter, and rover that make up its basic configuration.&nbsp;

"Our astronauts will likely be able to go to the moon within 10 years," Wu Weiran, the programme's main designer, stated in an interview with CCTV earlier this week.&nbsp;

He claimed that nuclear energy can provide long-term, high-power energy requirements of the lunar base.

In recent years, China has stepped up its space programme, sending rovers to the moon, constructing its own space station, and aiming for Mars.&nbsp;

It now competes directly with the US as a result of the plans. NASA has a rover on Mars and plans to send men back to the moon this decade for the first time since the Apollo programme came to an end in the 1970s.&nbsp;

Also Read:<a href="https://www.wionews.com/technology/eu-allows-5g-rollout-in-flights-sky-is-no-longer-a-limit-537419">&nbsp;EU allows 5G rollout in flights; 'Sky is no longer a limit'</a>

In addition to sending astronauts to the moon, China and the US are both investing enormous sums of money to gain access to resources that might support life on the moon or enable the sending of spacecraft to Mars.

China was the first nation to send a rover to the moon's far side in 2019 and returned with its first lunar samples.&nbsp;

The base will serve as the first outpost on the moon's South Pole, which researchers believe to be the ideal location to find water. That area of the moon is a target for NASA as well. In the future, China wants to turn the base into a global research facility.

(with inputs from agencies) 
&nbsp;

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1  width=&quot;100%&quot;"></iframe>

As part of its increased challenge to NASA's dominance in space exploration, China wants to establish its first base on the moon by 2028, followed by the landing of astronauts there in the years that follow.

As part of its increased challenge to NASA's dominance in space exploration, China wants to establish its first base on the moon by 2028, followed by the landing of astronauts there in the years that follow. According to Caixin, the lunar base will probably be powered by nuclear energy. The Chang'e 6, 7 and 8 missions would build the lander, hopper, orbiter, and rover that make up its basic configuration. "Our astronauts will likely be able to go to the moon within 10 years," Wu Weiran, the programme's main designer, stated in an interview with CCTV earlier this week. He claimed that nuclear energy can provide long-term, high-power energy requirements of the lunar base. In recent years, China has stepped up its space programme, sending rovers to the moon, constructing its own space station, and aiming for Mars. It now competes directly with the US as a result of the plans. NASA has a rover on Mars and plans to send men back to the moon this decade for the first time since the Apollo programme came to an end in the 1970s. Also Read: EU allows 5G rollout in flights; 'Sky is no longer a limit' In addition to sending astronauts to the moon, China and the US are both investing enormous sums of money to gain access to resources that might support life on the moon or enable the sending of spacecraft to Mars. China was the first nation to send a rover to the moon's far side in 2019 and returned with its first lunar samples. The base will serve as the first outpost on the moon's South Pole, which researchers believe to be the ideal location to find water. That area of the moon is a target for NASA as well. In the future, China wants to turn the base into a global research facility. (with inputs from agencies)

China to build its first base on moon by 2028, plans to power it by nuclear energy

With the US increasingly becoming dependent on nuclear power in the wake of the energy crisis sparked by the Russia-Ukraine conflict, American firms have been focusing on developing small nuclear reactors, as it is being viewed as a clean source of power.

But even before these firms could begin work on it, they have already encountered a major stumbling blog. Apparently, only one company sells the high assay low enriched uranium (HALEU), and it's a Russian.

The potential producers have said that a delay in securing HALEU supplies could impact the commercial supply chains even as it struggles to find a replacement to Russian uranium.

Russia has long been a monopoly on HALEU—something that has concerned Washington for several years.&nbsp;&nbsp;Currently,&nbsp;only TENEX, which is part of the Russian state-owned nuclear energy company Rosatom, sells the fuel commercially at the moment.

But in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the US government and companies have become hesitant to rely on Moscow for their supply needs.

Responding to the matter, a US Department of Energy spokesperson told Reuters news agency that the government has already started looking for alternative suppliers.

"Production of HALEU is a critical mission and all efforts to increase its production are being evaluated," the spokesperson said.

The Biden administration is in the final stages of evaluating how much of its inventory of 585.6 tonnes of highly enriched uranium to allocate to reactors, the spokesperson said.

"We understand the need for urgent action to incentivize the establishment of a sustainable, market-driven supply of HALEU," the spokesperson added.

HALEU is enriched to levels of up to 20 per cent rather than around 5 per cent for the uranium that powers most nuclear plants.

(With inputs from agencies)

WATCH WION LIVE HERE: 

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

With the US increasingly becoming dependent on nuclear power in the wake of the energy crisis sparked by the Russia-Ukraine conflict, American firms have been focusing on developing small nuclear reactors, as it is being viewed as a clean source of power.

With the US increasingly becoming dependent on nuclear power in the wake of the energy crisis sparked by the Russia-Ukraine conflict, American firms have been focusing on developing small nuclear reactors, as it is being viewed as a clean source of power. But even before these firms could begin work on it, they have already encountered a major stumbling blog. Apparently, only one company sells the high assay low enriched uranium (HALEU), and it's a Russian. The potential producers have said that a delay in securing HALEU supplies could impact the commercial supply chains even as it struggles to find a replacement to Russian uranium. Russia has long been a monopoly on HALEU—something that has concerned Washington for several years. Currently, only TENEX, which is part of the Russian state-owned nuclear energy company Rosatom, sells the fuel commercially at the moment. But in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the US government and companies have become hesitant to rely on Moscow for their supply needs. Responding to the matter, a US Department of Energy spokesperson told Reuters news agency that the government has already started looking for alternative suppliers. "Production of HALEU is a critical mission and all efforts to increase its production are being evaluated," the spokesperson said. The Biden administration is in the final stages of evaluating how much of its inventory of 585.6 tonnes of highly enriched uranium to allocate to reactors, the spokesperson said. "We understand the need for urgent action to incentivize the establishment of a sustainable, market-driven supply of HALEU," the spokesperson added. HALEU is enriched to levels of up to 20 per cent rather than around 5 per cent for the uranium that powers most nuclear plants. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE:

US nuclear industry struggling to get replacement for Russian enriched uranium

Austria is dragging the European Union (EU) to court. Reportedly, the central European country is not happy with the EU's decision to characterise natural gas and nuclear power generation as sustainable energies.&nbsp;

Austria’s Minister for Climate Action Leonore Gewessler took to Twitter to inform that the government last week filed a lawsuit before the top EU court over the classification used. She added that the categorisation could 'greenwash' natural gas and nuclear energy, despite the damage they cause.&nbsp;

"The decision to include #Nuclear&nbsp;and #Gas in the #Taxonomy regulation does not do justice to the European efforts for a good &amp; climate-friendly future. That is why we brought a #Lawsuit&nbsp;before the European Court of Justice," tweeted&nbsp;Gewessler.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Die Entscheidung, <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Atomkraft?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Atomkraft</a> und <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Gas?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Gas</a> in die <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Taxonomie?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Taxonomie</a>-Verordnung aufzunehmen, wird den europäischen Bemühungen für eine gute &amp; klimafreundliche Zukunft nicht gerecht. Deshalb haben wir vor dem Europäischen Gerichtshof eine <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Nichtigkeitsklage?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Nichtigkeitsklage</a> eingebracht. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/taxonomy?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#taxonomy</a> (1/7)
— Leonore Gewessler (@lgewessler) <a href="https://twitter.com/lgewessler/status/1579407195321831425?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 10, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/hungary-serbia-to-build-pipeline-for-russian-gas-supplies-sidestepping-eu-mandate-524197">Read more:&nbsp;Hungary, Serbia to build pipeline for Russian gas supplies, sidestepping EU mandate</a>

Gewessler cited examples of disasters in Chernobyl and Fukushima and said that nuclear energy came with 'incalculable risks'. As for natural gas, the methane released afterwards is thought to be 80&nbsp;times more harmful to the climate than carbon dioxide in a short term.&nbsp;

"The @EU_Commission has completely ignored some essential legal rules &amp; even the critical opinion of its own panel of experts. This clearly shows: The #fossil #Lobbygroups were satisfied &amp; they themselves are not convinced of their decision," she signed off as saying.&nbsp;

Austria has received support from EU member&nbsp;Luxembourg&nbsp;which has stated that it will stand with the country in its legal case.&nbsp;

Notably, the EU in May earlier this year passed a controversial proposal under which both natural gas and nuclear energy have been put in the category of sustainable investments.&nbsp;

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/man-sues-texas-pete-hot-sauce-company-after-learning-it-is-not-made-in-texas-524231">Read more:&nbsp;Man sues Texas Pete hot sauce company after learning it is not made in Texas</a>

Even then, Austria had lodged its strong protest against the decision and warned of a court case. In an interview, with&nbsp;Times,&nbsp;Gewessler said nuclear and gas energy cannot be part of the green taxonomy.&nbsp;

"In a credible, ambitious, and science-based taxonomy, nuclear and gas are not part of that picture," said&nbsp;Gewessler.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies) 
 
WATCH WION LIVE HERE:&nbsp;

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

Austria is dragging the European Union (EU) to court. Reportedly, the central European country is not happy with the EU's decision to characterise natural gas and nuclear power generation as sustainable energies.

Austria is dragging the European Union (EU) to court. Reportedly, the central European country is not happy with the EU's decision to characterise natural gas and nuclear power generation as sustainable energies. Austria’s Minister for Climate Action Leonore Gewessler took to Twitter to inform that the government last week filed a lawsuit before the top EU court over the classification used. She added that the categorisation could 'greenwash' natural gas and nuclear energy, despite the damage they cause. "The decision to include #Nuclear and #Gas in the #Taxonomy regulation does not do justice to the European efforts for a good & climate-friendly future. That is why we brought a #Lawsuit before the European Court of Justice," tweeted Gewessler. Die Entscheidung, #Atomkraft und #Gas in die #Taxonomie-Verordnung aufzunehmen, wird den europäischen Bemühungen für eine gute & klimafreundliche Zukunft nicht gerecht. Deshalb haben wir vor dem Europäischen Gerichtshof eine #Nichtigkeitsklage eingebracht. #taxonomy (1/7) — Leonore Gewessler (@lgewessler) October 10, 2022 × Read more: Hungary, Serbia to build pipeline for Russian gas supplies, sidestepping EU mandate Gewessler cited examples of disasters in Chernobyl and Fukushima and said that nuclear energy came with 'incalculable risks'. As for natural gas, the methane released afterwards is thought to be 80 times more harmful to the climate than carbon dioxide in a short term. "The @EU_Commission has completely ignored some essential legal rules & even the critical opinion of its own panel of experts. This clearly shows: The #fossil #Lobbygroups were satisfied & they themselves are not convinced of their decision," she signed off as saying. Austria has received support from EU member Luxembourg which has stated that it will stand with the country in its legal case. Notably, the EU in May earlier this year passed a controversial proposal under which both natural gas and nuclear energy have been put in the category of sustainable investments. Read more: Man sues Texas Pete hot sauce company after learning it is not made in Texas Even then, Austria had lodged its strong protest against the decision and warned of a court case. In an interview, with Times, Gewessler said nuclear and gas energy cannot be part of the green taxonomy. "In a credible, ambitious, and science-based taxonomy, nuclear and gas are not part of that picture," said Gewessler. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE:

Austria files lawsuit against EU for greenwashing natural gas and nuclear energy

Iran is rapidly expanding its ability to enrich uranium with advanced centrifuges at its underground plant at Natanz and now intends to go further than previously planned, a confidential UN&nbsp;nuclear watchdog report seen by Reuters showed on Monday.

While indirect talks between Iran and the United States on reviving the 2015 Iran nuclear deal have stalled, Tehran has brought onstream an ever larger number of advanced centrifuges the deal bans it from using to produce enriched uranium.

These machines are far more efficient than the first-generation IR-1, the only centrifuge that the deal lets Iran use to grow its stock of enriched uranium. Iran has been adding them, particularly at two underground sites at Natanz and Fordow that may be designed to withstand potential aerial bombardment.

Watch |&nbsp;IAEA report: Iran racing to expand Uranium enrichment at underground plant

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/iaea-report-iran-racing-to-expand-uranium-enrichment-at-underground-plant-524344/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

The third of three cascades, or clusters, of advanced IR-6 centrifuges recently installed at the underground Fuel Enrichment Plant (FEP) at Natanz has now come onstream, said the International Atomic Energy Agency report to member states. Diplomats say the IR-6 is Iran's most advanced centrifuge.

Iran has also quickly completed the installation of seven cascades that were either not finished or at a very early stage of installation on Aug. 31, Monday's ad hoc report showed. End-August marked the last visit by inspectors mentioned in the IAEA's most recent quarterly report.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/as-nkorea-ramps-up-missile-tests-south-korean-president-says-it-has-nothing-to-gain-from-nuclear-weapons-524275" hreflang="en">As N Korea ramps up missile tests, South Korean president says it has 'nothing to gain from nuclear weapons'</a>

Those seven cascades, one of IR-4 centrifuges and six of IR-2m machines, were fully installed but not yet enriching, Monday's report said.

Iran has also informed the IAEA it plans to add an extra three cascades of IR-2m machines at the FEP, on top of the 12 already announced and now installed, the report showed.

Of those three extra IR-2m cascades, the installation has already started on two of them, the report said.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iran-nuclear-deal-will-not-get-any-better-warns-france-517830">Iran nuclear deal will not get any better, warns France&nbsp;</a>

The report also showed that all the centrifuges enriching at Natanz were still producing uranium hexafluoride (UF6) gas enriched to up to 5 per cent&nbsp;but now they were being fed with natural UF6. That contrasted to the quarterly report issued in September that said on Aug. 31 the centrifuges were being fed with UF6 enriched to up to 2 per cent. It did not explain the change.

In 2018, then-President Donald Trump pulled the United States out of the Iran deal and re-imposed sanctions against Iran that the deal had lifted. Iran responded by breaching the restrictions on its nuclear activities imposed by the deal.

If the deal is revived Iran will have to put its advanced centrifuges into storage, diplomats say.

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

Iran is rapidly expanding its ability to enrich uranium with advanced centrifuges at its underground plant at Natanz and now intends to go further than previously planned, a confidential UN nuclear watchdog report seen by Reuters showed on Monday.

Iran is rapidly expanding its ability to enrich uranium with advanced centrifuges at its underground plant at Natanz and now intends to go further than previously planned, a confidential UN nuclear watchdog report seen by Reuters showed on Monday. While indirect talks between Iran and the United States on reviving the 2015 Iran nuclear deal have stalled, Tehran has brought onstream an ever larger number of advanced centrifuges the deal bans it from using to produce enriched uranium. These machines are far more efficient than the first-generation IR-1, the only centrifuge that the deal lets Iran use to grow its stock of enriched uranium. Iran has been adding them, particularly at two underground sites at Natanz and Fordow that may be designed to withstand potential aerial bombardment. Watch | IAEA report: Iran racing to expand Uranium enrichment at underground plant The third of three cascades, or clusters, of advanced IR-6 centrifuges recently installed at the underground Fuel Enrichment Plant (FEP) at Natanz has now come onstream, said the International Atomic Energy Agency report to member states. Diplomats say the IR-6 is Iran's most advanced centrifuge. Iran has also quickly completed the installation of seven cascades that were either not finished or at a very early stage of installation on Aug. 31, Monday's ad hoc report showed. End-August marked the last visit by inspectors mentioned in the IAEA's most recent quarterly report. Also read | As N Korea ramps up missile tests, South Korean president says it has 'nothing to gain from nuclear weapons' Those seven cascades, one of IR-4 centrifuges and six of IR-2m machines, were fully installed but not yet enriching, Monday's report said. Iran has also informed the IAEA it plans to add an extra three cascades of IR-2m machines at the FEP, on top of the 12 already announced and now installed, the report showed. Of those three extra IR-2m cascades, the installation has already started on two of them, the report said. Also read | Iran nuclear deal will not get any better, warns France The report also showed that all the centrifuges enriching at Natanz were still producing uranium hexafluoride (UF6) gas enriched to up to 5 per cent but now they were being fed with natural UF6. That contrasted to the quarterly report issued in September that said on Aug. 31 the centrifuges were being fed with UF6 enriched to up to 2 per cent. It did not explain the change. In 2018, then-President Donald Trump pulled the United States out of the Iran deal and re-imposed sanctions against Iran that the deal had lifted. Iran responded by breaching the restrictions on its nuclear activities imposed by the deal. If the deal is revived Iran will have to put its advanced centrifuges into storage, diplomats say. WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

Iran using 'advanced machines' to further expand its nuclear enrichment capabilities: IAEA report

Faced with an energy crisis at the hands of Russia, Germany has taken a U-turn from its plans of a nuclear exit and announced on Monday that it would keep two of its nuclear plants on standby beyond the end of this year.

This comes a Russia has shut off gas supplies to Europe. After a three-day maintenance period last week, Russian energy giant Gazprom announced that gas deliveries via the Nord Stream 1 pipeline would not resume&nbsp;as scheduled. It blamed Western sanctions for the decision.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, "problems with pumping (gas) arose due to sanctions that were imposed against" Russia.

Watch |&nbsp;Gazprom misses September 3 deadline to restart gas supplies

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gazprom-misses-september-3-deadline-to-restart-gas-supplies-512675/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Economy Minister Robert Habeck announced in a statement that&nbsp;following a fresh network stress test, two of the three remaining power plants will "remain available until mid-April 2023 in case needed."

The facilities as per AFP would be held in reserve in case they were needed to "make a further contribution to the electricity grid in southern Germany," where the development of renewable energy lagged behind that of the north.

According to Habeck, such a crisis is still "very unlikely" because Germany has "very high security of supply."

The Green Minister also emphasised that Germany was sticking to its plan to abandon nuclear power, with all plants being disconnected from the grid at the end of the year, and that it was not reversing course.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/president-putin-unveils-new-foreign-policy-doctrine-to-preserve-russian-world-513287" hreflang="en">President Putin unveils new foreign policy doctrine to preserve ‘Russian World’</a>

New fuel rods won't be installed, and the reserve programme will end after mid-April 2023, according to Habeck.

The decision partially postpones a nuclear phase-out that was envisioned under the previous chancellor Angela Merkel, who decided to abandon nuclear power in 2011 in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan.

Habeck remarked that it was "not a surprise" that Moscow did not resume gas deliveries via Nord Stream 1.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/sweden-finland-to-offer-liquidity-guarantees-to-energy-companies-513211">Sweden, Finland to offer liquidity guarantees to energy companies</a>

He said, "The only thing that is reliable from Russia is lies" adding that "we will have to solve our problems without consideration of (Russian President Vladimir) Putin's erratic decisions, and that's what we will do."&nbsp;

In Germany, where nuclear power has long been a topic of dispute even before Merkel's decision, extending the lifetime of the plants, which produce 6 per cent of the nation's electricity, has sparked a fierce debate.

(With inputs from agencies)

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

Faced with an energy crisis at the hands of Russia, Germany has taken a U-turn from its plans of a nuclear exit and announced on Monday that it would keep two of its nuclear plants on standby beyond the end of this year.

Faced with an energy crisis at the hands of Russia, Germany has taken a U-turn from its plans of a nuclear exit and announced on Monday that it would keep two of its nuclear plants on standby beyond the end of this year. This comes a Russia has shut off gas supplies to Europe. After a three-day maintenance period last week, Russian energy giant Gazprom announced that gas deliveries via the Nord Stream 1 pipeline would not resume as scheduled. It blamed Western sanctions for the decision. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, "problems with pumping (gas) arose due to sanctions that were imposed against" Russia. Watch | Gazprom misses September 3 deadline to restart gas supplies Economy Minister Robert Habeck announced in a statement that following a fresh network stress test, two of the three remaining power plants will "remain available until mid-April 2023 in case needed." The facilities as per AFP would be held in reserve in case they were needed to "make a further contribution to the electricity grid in southern Germany," where the development of renewable energy lagged behind that of the north. According to Habeck, such a crisis is still "very unlikely" because Germany has "very high security of supply." The Green Minister also emphasised that Germany was sticking to its plan to abandon nuclear power, with all plants being disconnected from the grid at the end of the year, and that it was not reversing course. Also read | President Putin unveils new foreign policy doctrine to preserve ‘Russian World’ New fuel rods won't be installed, and the reserve programme will end after mid-April 2023, according to Habeck. The decision partially postpones a nuclear phase-out that was envisioned under the previous chancellor Angela Merkel, who decided to abandon nuclear power in 2011 in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan. Habeck remarked that it was "not a surprise" that Moscow did not resume gas deliveries via Nord Stream 1. Also read | Sweden, Finland to offer liquidity guarantees to energy companies He said, "The only thing that is reliable from Russia is lies" adding that "we will have to solve our problems without consideration of (Russian President Vladimir) Putin's erratic decisions, and that's what we will do." In Germany, where nuclear power has long been a topic of dispute even before Merkel's decision, extending the lifetime of the plants, which produce 6 per cent of the nation's electricity, has sparked a fierce debate. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

'Only thing reliable from Russia is lies': Faced with energy crisis Germany takes a U-turn to nuclear energy

In a landmark vote for Europe’s climate and energy policies, the European Parliament on Wednesday endorsed labeling some gas and nuclear energy projects as “green,” allowing them access to hundreds of billions of euros in cheap loans and even state subsidies.

The decision placed the European Union’s heavy thumb on the scale of a global debate about how and how quickly major industrialized economies can move from their heavy reliance on fossil fuels — and it immediately proved controversial, prompting boos from opponents inside and outside the parliamentary building in Strasbourg, France.

Critics said it would lock in and prolong Europe’s reliance on fossil fuels, while the measure’s proponents, including in the European Commission, the EU executive arm that drafted it, said it was part of a pragmatic approach to the transition to renewable energy, especially as Europe seeks to wean itself off Russian fuel imports in the wake of the invasion of Ukraine.

The measure had been in the works even before Russia’s tanks crossed the border, but it gained urgency as the European Union responded to the invasion by banning Russian energy sources, including most coal and oil. Left untouched has been Russian gas, on which Europe remains heavily dependent.

The Russian invasion presented European countries with an urgent choice: to get gas from anywhere other than Russia, or double down on renewable sources like wind and solar.

Wednesday’s vote signaled Europe’s intention to prolong its reliance on gas — the principal component of which is methane, which speeds up global warming.

The choice could undermine a competing European imperative to cut its greenhouse gas emissions by more than half by 2030. E3G, an energy research group, said it was “at odds with the overall direction the EU is taking.”

The amendment the Parliament backed Wednesday was part of a broader EU effort to give banks and other organizations tools to evaluate which projects deserve loans and funds on the basis of being environmentally friendly.

WATCH |&nbsp;What is greenwashing, the practice major companies are accused of engaging in?&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/what-is-greenwashing-the-practice-major-companies-are-accused-of-engaging-in-494559/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The policy, known as the “taxonomy,” is meant to stop “greenwashing,” the pervasive practice of mislabeling energy projects as environmentally friendly, and it could determine where hundreds of billions of dollars in investments will flow in coming decades.

But critics of the proposal contend the classifying gas and nuclear projects as sustainable is in itself “greenwashing” and runs counter to European efforts to slash carbon emissions by 55% by 2030 and to reach carbon neutrality by 2050, while also increasing the risks of nuclear accidents.

Greta Thunberg, the Swedish climate activist, called Wednesday’s decision hypocrisy.

“This will delay a desperately needed real sustainable transition and deepen our dependency on Russian fuels. The hypocrisy is striking, but unfortunately not surprising,” she wrote on Twitter after the vote.

The classification of gas and nuclear power as “green” was contentious even beyond environmental circles, with its opponents in the European Parliament spread across the political spectrum, including from the right.

“Billions of euros in ‘green’ financing now risk being diverted into polluting energy sources that are far from being harmless and temporary, at the expense of energy efficiency and renewables,” the European Environmental Bureau, a Pan-European environmental lobby group, said in a statement shortly after the vote, calling it an “act of institutional greenwashing.”

But the measure eventually succeeded with strong backing from Germany and France, Europe’s two leading economies, and it will help both of them sustain their energy policies and industries.

In the aftermath of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear catastrophe in Japan, Germany moved away from nuclear energy entirely, pledging to shift to renewable energy sources. But it has remained hugely reliant on Russian gas as a “bridge” and fallen back on the use of coal especially during shortfalls.

France, by contrast, gets 70% of its energy from aging nuclear plants, which have been plagued by problems and shutdowns in recent years. It recently announced a blueprint budgeted at 51.7 billion euros — more than $53 billion — to build up to 14 next-generation reactors by 2035.

While nuclear energy generation does not directly produce carbon emissions, the specter of nuclear accidents has left many wary of it on a continent still traumatized by the Chernobyl meltdown in 1986.

The European Commission has said that it knows that gas and nuclear are not perfectly aligned with environmental goals and carry risks, but that it still considers them important in Europe’s transition from its current energy mix toward a carbon-neutral future that will be mostly built around renewables. It calls gas a “low emission” fuel, which is only accurate when compared to coal, which is very polluting, but not compared to wind and solar.

“This vote is important recognition of our pragmatic and realistic approach in helping many member states on their transition path towards climate neutrality,” the commission said in a statement shortly after the vote.

“Climate neutrality is our objective and legal obligation. We are committed to using all available tools to move away from high carbon-emitting energy sources,” it added.

These goals, and the means to achieve them over the next few decades, are key to Europe’s efforts to lead the world on climate policy. But Europe’s decision to classify gas and nuclear energy as “green” is now likely to reverberate widely and could also undercut European efforts to coax other countries, like China, to rein in their own emissions, analysts said.

The new classification for gas is likely to make it far harder to meet a climate goal championed at the last international climate negotiations: cutting methane.

Methane is more potent in its ability to warm the planet than carbon dioxide emissions, although it breaks down in the atmosphere sooner. Over 20 years, it can create 80 times as much warming as the same amount of carbon dioxide.

In short, cutting methane emissions would slow down warming more quickly, which is the argument that the European Union itself used when it joined the United States in November in announcing a global pledge to reduce methane emissions by 30% by 2030.

Prominent nongovernmental organizations including WWF and Greenpeace said they planned to litigate against the EU labeling of gas and nuclear, and European lawmakers are also expected to sue the European Commission over its handling of the policy.

But apart from a divergence from its environmental goals, the step Wednesday also constitutes a strategic error in dealing with Russia, other critics said.

So far EU nations have banned Russian coal and most will phase out even the import of Russian oil in response to the Ukraine invasion, but they remain especially dependent on Russian gas for electricity and heating.

Russia has used its gas exports to Europe as a lever to exert pressure on the European Union. The bloc is trying to get gas from other sources, such as Africa, the Middle East and the United States, but is far from banning the Russian imports because it needs them too much.

By doubling down on longer-term gas investments, the European Union practically locks in higher global demand for the fuel longer term, even if it doesn’t buy it from Russia itself. That will mean that Russia can continue selling its gas to other countries at high prices, perpetuating a vital revenue stream.

Some Ukrainian experts and lawmakers decried the decision.

“Vladimir Putin is rubbing his hands with glee today,” Inna Sovsun, a Ukrainian deputy, said in emailed comments. “Europe just handed him a huge present by classifying gas and nuclear as sustainable. A gift that will channel billions into his pockets and further boost his war chest.”

In a landmark vote for Europe’s climate and energy policies, the European Parliament on Wednesday endorsed labeling some gas and nuclear energy projects as “green,” allowing them access to hundreds of billions of euros in cheap loans and even state subsidies.

In a landmark vote for Europe’s climate and energy policies, the European Parliament on Wednesday endorsed labeling some gas and nuclear energy projects as “green,” allowing them access to hundreds of billions of euros in cheap loans and even state subsidies. The decision placed the European Union’s heavy thumb on the scale of a global debate about how and how quickly major industrialized economies can move from their heavy reliance on fossil fuels — and it immediately proved controversial, prompting boos from opponents inside and outside the parliamentary building in Strasbourg, France. Critics said it would lock in and prolong Europe’s reliance on fossil fuels, while the measure’s proponents, including in the European Commission, the EU executive arm that drafted it, said it was part of a pragmatic approach to the transition to renewable energy, especially as Europe seeks to wean itself off Russian fuel imports in the wake of the invasion of Ukraine. The measure had been in the works even before Russia’s tanks crossed the border, but it gained urgency as the European Union responded to the invasion by banning Russian energy sources, including most coal and oil. Left untouched has been Russian gas, on which Europe remains heavily dependent. The Russian invasion presented European countries with an urgent choice: to get gas from anywhere other than Russia, or double down on renewable sources like wind and solar. Wednesday’s vote signaled Europe’s intention to prolong its reliance on gas — the principal component of which is methane, which speeds up global warming. The choice could undermine a competing European imperative to cut its greenhouse gas emissions by more than half by 2030. E3G, an energy research group, said it was “at odds with the overall direction the EU is taking.” The amendment the Parliament backed Wednesday was part of a broader EU effort to give banks and other organizations tools to evaluate which projects deserve loans and funds on the basis of being environmentally friendly. WATCH | What is greenwashing, the practice major companies are accused of engaging in? × The policy, known as the “taxonomy,” is meant to stop “greenwashing,” the pervasive practice of mislabeling energy projects as environmentally friendly, and it could determine where hundreds of billions of dollars in investments will flow in coming decades. But critics of the proposal contend the classifying gas and nuclear projects as sustainable is in itself “greenwashing” and runs counter to European efforts to slash carbon emissions by 55% by 2030 and to reach carbon neutrality by 2050, while also increasing the risks of nuclear accidents. Greta Thunberg, the Swedish climate activist, called Wednesday’s decision hypocrisy. “This will delay a desperately needed real sustainable transition and deepen our dependency on Russian fuels. The hypocrisy is striking, but unfortunately not surprising,” she wrote on Twitter after the vote. The classification of gas and nuclear power as “green” was contentious even beyond environmental circles, with its opponents in the European Parliament spread across the political spectrum, including from the right. “Billions of euros in ‘green’ financing now risk being diverted into polluting energy sources that are far from being harmless and temporary, at the expense of energy efficiency and renewables,” the European Environmental Bureau, a Pan-European environmental lobby group, said in a statement shortly after the vote, calling it an “act of institutional greenwashing.” But the measure eventually succeeded with strong backing from Germany and France, Europe’s two leading economies, and it will help both of them sustain their energy policies and industries. In the aftermath of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear catastrophe in Japan, Germany moved away from nuclear energy entirely, pledging to shift to renewable energy sources. But it has remained hugely reliant on Russian gas as a “bridge” and fallen back on the use of coal especially during shortfalls. France, by contrast, gets 70% of its energy from aging nuclear plants, which have been plagued by problems and shutdowns in recent years. It recently announced a blueprint budgeted at 51.7 billion euros — more than $53 billion — to build up to 14 next-generation reactors by 2035. While nuclear energy generation does not directly produce carbon emissions, the specter of nuclear accidents has left many wary of it on a continent still traumatized by the Chernobyl meltdown in 1986. The European Commission has said that it knows that gas and nuclear are not perfectly aligned with environmental goals and carry risks, but that it still considers them important in Europe’s transition from its current energy mix toward a carbon-neutral future that will be mostly built around renewables. It calls gas a “low emission” fuel, which is only accurate when compared to coal, which is very polluting, but not compared to wind and solar. “This vote is important recognition of our pragmatic and realistic approach in helping many member states on their transition path towards climate neutrality,” the commission said in a statement shortly after the vote. “Climate neutrality is our objective and legal obligation. We are committed to using all available tools to move away from high carbon-emitting energy sources,” it added. These goals, and the means to achieve them over the next few decades, are key to Europe’s efforts to lead the world on climate policy. But Europe’s decision to classify gas and nuclear energy as “green” is now likely to reverberate widely and could also undercut European efforts to coax other countries, like China, to rein in their own emissions, analysts said. The new classification for gas is likely to make it far harder to meet a climate goal championed at the last international climate negotiations: cutting methane. Methane is more potent in its ability to warm the planet than carbon dioxide emissions, although it breaks down in the atmosphere sooner. Over 20 years, it can create 80 times as much warming as the same amount of carbon dioxide. In short, cutting methane emissions would slow down warming more quickly, which is the argument that the European Union itself used when it joined the United States in November in announcing a global pledge to reduce methane emissions by 30% by 2030. Prominent nongovernmental organizations including WWF and Greenpeace said they planned to litigate against the EU labeling of gas and nuclear, and European lawmakers are also expected to sue the European Commission over its handling of the policy. But apart from a divergence from its environmental goals, the step Wednesday also constitutes a strategic error in dealing with Russia, other critics said. So far EU nations have banned Russian coal and most will phase out even the import of Russian oil in response to the Ukraine invasion, but they remain especially dependent on Russian gas for electricity and heating. Russia has used its gas exports to Europe as a lever to exert pressure on the European Union. The bloc is trying to get gas from other sources, such as Africa, the Middle East and the United States, but is far from banning the Russian imports because it needs them too much. By doubling down on longer-term gas investments, the European Union practically locks in higher global demand for the fuel longer term, even if it doesn’t buy it from Russia itself. That will mean that Russia can continue selling its gas to other countries at high prices, perpetuating a vital revenue stream. Some Ukrainian experts and lawmakers decried the decision. “Vladimir Putin is rubbing his hands with glee today,” Inna Sovsun, a Ukrainian deputy, said in emailed comments. “Europe just handed him a huge present by classifying gas and nuclear as sustainable. A gift that will channel billions into his pockets and further boost his war chest.”

Europe calls gas and nuclear energy ‘Green’

Iran may soon have enough Uranium to make a nuclear weapon. A latest report by UN nuclear watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has stated that Iran has uranium quality slightly above the significant levels.

Rise in Iran's enriched Uranium alarms western nations

Scientists at Oxford University have come up with Fusion energy which is a clean, sustainable form of energy by the company First Light Fusion. It is an alternative to the existing nuclear power plants around the world

Oxford Scientists come up with Fusion energy, a clean alternative to Nuclear energy

Iran's supreme leader vowed on Thursday that his country would ramp up the development of its civilian nuclear program, as major world powers continued delicate talks in Vienna to revive Tehran's landmark nuclear deal.

In a televised speech, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei urged the importance of nuclear energy for Iran, while again asserting that it had no interest in nuclear weapons. Khamenei's remarks seemed clearly aimed at the countries involved in the Vienna talks.

"Enemies are making cruel moves against our nuclear energy issue, (putting) sanctions on nuclear energy that they know is peaceful," he said. "They do not want Iran to achieve this great and significant progress."

The accord, which former President Donald Trump abandoned nearly four years ago, granted Iran sanctions relief in exchange for curbs on its atomic program.

Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, Ali Bagheri Kani, tweeted late Wednesday that the parties were "closer than ever" to an agreement.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
After weeks of intensive talks, we are closer than ever to an agreement; nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, though. 
Our negotiating partners need to be realistic, avoid intransigence and heed lessons of past 4yrs. 
Time for their serious decisions. <a href="https://t.co/kRnSte9Bzu">https://t.co/kRnSte9Bzu</a>
— علی باقری‌کنی (@Bagheri_Kani) <a href="https://twitter.com/Bagheri_Kani/status/1494035061007650818?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 16, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

But talks have repeatedly stalled in recent months as Iranian negotiators press hard-line demands, exasperating Western diplomats.

Khamenei, who so far has largely stayed silent on the ongoing negotiations, called claims that Iran was pursuing a bomb "nonsense," saying they were meant to deprive Iran of its legitimate right to nuclear power.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
They know Iran’s nuclear program is peaceful. But they make absurd, senseless claims on how close Iran is to making a bomb. We seek peaceful use of nuclear energy. They know this, but they want the Iranian nation to face difficulties when it needs nuclear energy in the future.
— Khamenei.ir (@khamenei_ir) <a href="https://twitter.com/khamenei_ir/status/1494235034580049922?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 17, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

"If we do not pursue (peaceful nuclear energy) today, tomorrow will be late," he said. Iran long has insisted its nuclear program is peaceful. But the country's steps away from its obligations under the 2015 accord have alarmed its archenemy Israel and world powers.

Tehran has since started enriching uranium up to 60% purity — a short technical step from the 90% needed to make an atomic bomb, and spinning far more advanced centrifuges than those permitted under the deal.

Iran's supreme leader vowed on Thursday that his country would ramp up the development of its civilian nuclear program, as major world powers continued delicate talks in Vienna to revive Tehran's landmark nuclear deal.

Iran's supreme leader vowed on Thursday that his country would ramp up the development of its civilian nuclear program, as major world powers continued delicate talks in Vienna to revive Tehran's landmark nuclear deal. In a televised speech, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei urged the importance of nuclear energy for Iran, while again asserting that it had no interest in nuclear weapons. Khamenei's remarks seemed clearly aimed at the countries involved in the Vienna talks. "Enemies are making cruel moves against our nuclear energy issue, (putting) sanctions on nuclear energy that they know is peaceful," he said. "They do not want Iran to achieve this great and significant progress." The accord, which former President Donald Trump abandoned nearly four years ago, granted Iran sanctions relief in exchange for curbs on its atomic program. Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, Ali Bagheri Kani, tweeted late Wednesday that the parties were "closer than ever" to an agreement. After weeks of intensive talks, we are closer than ever to an agreement; nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, though. Our negotiating partners need to be realistic, avoid intransigence and heed lessons of past 4yrs. Time for their serious decisions. https://t.co/kRnSte9Bzu — علی باقری‌کنی (@Bagheri_Kani) February 16, 2022 × But talks have repeatedly stalled in recent months as Iranian negotiators press hard-line demands, exasperating Western diplomats. Khamenei, who so far has largely stayed silent on the ongoing negotiations, called claims that Iran was pursuing a bomb "nonsense," saying they were meant to deprive Iran of its legitimate right to nuclear power. They know Iran’s nuclear program is peaceful. But they make absurd, senseless claims on how close Iran is to making a bomb. We seek peaceful use of nuclear energy. They know this, but they want the Iranian nation to face difficulties when it needs nuclear energy in the future. — Khamenei.ir (@khamenei_ir) February 17, 2022 × "If we do not pursue (peaceful nuclear energy) today, tomorrow will be late," he said. Iran long has insisted its nuclear program is peaceful. But the country's steps away from its obligations under the 2015 accord have alarmed its archenemy Israel and world powers. Tehran has since started enriching uranium up to 60% purity — a short technical step from the 90% needed to make an atomic bomb, and spinning far more advanced centrifuges than those permitted under the deal.

Iran supreme leader Khamenei urges nuclear energy progress amid talks

For more than two decades, promoters and purveyors of nuclear energy felt shunned at UN climate change conferences.

At the COP26 summit underway in Glasgow, however, they have been welcomed with open arms, the UN's top nuclear regulator told AFP.

The spectre of Chernobyl and Fukushima, along with the enduring problem of nuclear waste, kept energy generated by splitting atoms on the sidelines, even if that energy was virtually carbon free.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/greta-thunberg-calls-cop26-climate-summit-a-failure-427044">Greta Thunberg calls COP26 climate summit 'a failure'</a>

But as the climate crisis deepens and the need to transition away from fossil fuels becomes urgent, attitudes may be shifting.

"Nuclear energy is part of the solution to global warming, there's no way around it," said Rafael Mariano Grossi, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, in an interview.

It already accounts for a quarter of "clean" -- that is, carbon-free -- energy worldwide, and Grossi said this COP26 is the first where it has "had a seat at the table".

"The winds are changing."

To have even a 50/50 chance of capping global warming at 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels -- the threshold for dangerous tipping points that could trigger runaway warming -- global greenhouse emissions must be slashed by almost half within a decade, scientists say.

But things are still moving in the wrong direction: a report on Thursday said emissions in 2021 are approaching record levels.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) has warned they could hit new heights by 2023.

That is helping refocus attention on nuclear.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/5-takeaways-from-the-first-days-of-the-climate-summit-427300">5 takeaways from the first days of the climate summit</a>

"At the 2015 COP in Paris, nuclear wasn't welcome," said Callum Thomas, head of a recruitment firm for the nuclear industry, who was spotted at COP26 sporting a T-shirt saying "Let's Talk Nuclear".

"There was a belief it was not needed. Now many countries are looking at the feasibility, especially with the rise in gas prices."

<h2>'Never stops'&nbsp;</h2>

From the time he took the IAEA's helm nearly two years ago, Grossi, an Argentine diplomat, has been a tireless advocate for the industry.

At his first COP in Madrid he "went in spite of the general assumption that nuclear would not be welcome".

On the contrary in Glasgow, where nearly 200 countries are still trying to put flesh on the bone of the 2015 Paris Agreement, he said "nuclear is not only welcome, but is generating a lot of interest".

Grossi argues that the technology can not only speed the transition away from fossil fuels, but also power research on technologies needed for adapting to climate impacts, from finding drought-resistant crops to eradicating mosquitos. &nbsp;

He acknowledges that it carries serious risks. &nbsp;

The meltdown of three reactors at Japan's Fukushima power plant in 2011 following an earthquake and a tsunami profoundly shook confidence in nuclear.

The industry also has yet to find a way to dispose of nuclear waste, which remains highly radioactive for thousands of years.

But Grossi said these issues are not disqualifying, arguing that statistically the technology has fewer negative consequences than many other forms of energy.

It could also be a complement to renewables.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/indonesia-calls-cop26-deforestation-pledge-unfair-says-development-wont-stop-in-the-name-of-emissions-426834">Indonesia calls COP26 deforestation pledge ‘unfair’, says development ‘won’t stop in the name of emissions</a>’

"Nuclear energy goes on and on for the entire year, it never stops," he said.

Even so, with prolonged construction times, many argue that it is too late to build enough nuclear capacity to effectively join the battle against global warming.

But Grossi said he thinks part of the answer lies in keeping existing reactors up and running.&nbsp;

<h2>100-year-old reactors?&nbsp;</h2>

Many power plants designed to run for 40 years are now licensed for 60 years under strict national safety standards supervised by the IAEA, he said.

"What could be more efficient than a facility that you build that gives you energy for close to 100 years?" he said.

He acknowledged that plants running that long might be a "bit of a provocation".

"But it still might be possible."

In their projections on how to limit the rise in global temperatures and satisfy a growing global demand for energy at the same time, the IEA takes all non-carbon sources on board.

The UN's climate science advisory panel, the IPCC, has also given a place to nuclear in its models, even as it says that its deployment "could be limited by social preferences."

Indeed, attitudes towards nuclear power vary sharply across nations.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/you-might-as-well-bomb-us-says-president-of-palau-at-cop26-climate-summit-426376">'You might as well bomb us,' says president of Palau at COP26 climate summit</a>

While New Zealand and Germany are opposed, India is in discussions with French energy giant EDF to build what would be the largest nuclear power plant in the world.

Meanwhile, both Canada and the United States are developing so-called "small modular reactors", although only Russia has put into operation a floating reactor using this technology.

Price is also not the barrier it used to be, said Grossi.

"Countries see in smaller units a very interesting alternative, which is not in the range of billions but of hundreds of millions," he said. "When it comes to energy projects, this is quite affordable."

For more than two decades, promoters and purveyors of nuclear energy felt shunned at UN climate change conferences. At the COP26 summit underway in Glasgow, however, they have been welcomed with open arms, the UN's top nuclear regulator told AFP.

For more than two decades, promoters and purveyors of nuclear energy felt shunned at UN climate change conferences. At the COP26 summit underway in Glasgow, however, they have been welcomed with open arms, the UN's top nuclear regulator told AFP. The spectre of Chernobyl and Fukushima, along with the enduring problem of nuclear waste, kept energy generated by splitting atoms on the sidelines, even if that energy was virtually carbon free. Also Read | Greta Thunberg calls COP26 climate summit 'a failure' But as the climate crisis deepens and the need to transition away from fossil fuels becomes urgent, attitudes may be shifting. "Nuclear energy is part of the solution to global warming, there's no way around it," said Rafael Mariano Grossi, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, in an interview. It already accounts for a quarter of "clean" -- that is, carbon-free -- energy worldwide, and Grossi said this COP26 is the first where it has "had a seat at the table". "The winds are changing." To have even a 50/50 chance of capping global warming at 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels -- the threshold for dangerous tipping points that could trigger runaway warming -- global greenhouse emissions must be slashed by almost half within a decade, scientists say. But things are still moving in the wrong direction: a report on Thursday said emissions in 2021 are approaching record levels. The International Energy Agency (IEA) has warned they could hit new heights by 2023. That is helping refocus attention on nuclear. Also Read | 5 takeaways from the first days of the climate summit "At the 2015 COP in Paris, nuclear wasn't welcome," said Callum Thomas, head of a recruitment firm for the nuclear industry, who was spotted at COP26 sporting a T-shirt saying "Let's Talk Nuclear". "There was a belief it was not needed. Now many countries are looking at the feasibility, especially with the rise in gas prices." 'Never stops' From the time he took the IAEA's helm nearly two years ago, Grossi, an Argentine diplomat, has been a tireless advocate for the industry. At his first COP in Madrid he "went in spite of the general assumption that nuclear would not be welcome". On the contrary in Glasgow, where nearly 200 countries are still trying to put flesh on the bone of the 2015 Paris Agreement, he said "nuclear is not only welcome, but is generating a lot of interest". Grossi argues that the technology can not only speed the transition away from fossil fuels, but also power research on technologies needed for adapting to climate impacts, from finding drought-resistant crops to eradicating mosquitos. He acknowledges that it carries serious risks. The meltdown of three reactors at Japan's Fukushima power plant in 2011 following an earthquake and a tsunami profoundly shook confidence in nuclear. The industry also has yet to find a way to dispose of nuclear waste, which remains highly radioactive for thousands of years. But Grossi said these issues are not disqualifying, arguing that statistically the technology has fewer negative consequences than many other forms of energy. It could also be a complement to renewables. Also Read | Indonesia calls COP26 deforestation pledge ‘unfair’, says development ‘won’t stop in the name of emissions’ "Nuclear energy goes on and on for the entire year, it never stops," he said. Even so, with prolonged construction times, many argue that it is too late to build enough nuclear capacity to effectively join the battle against global warming. But Grossi said he thinks part of the answer lies in keeping existing reactors up and running. 100-year-old reactors? Many power plants designed to run for 40 years are now licensed for 60 years under strict national safety standards supervised by the IAEA, he said. "What could be more efficient than a facility that you build that gives you energy for close to 100 years?" he said. He acknowledged that plants running that long might be a "bit of a provocation". "But it still might be possible." In their projections on how to limit the rise in global temperatures and satisfy a growing global demand for energy at the same time, the IEA takes all non-carbon sources on board. The UN's climate science advisory panel, the IPCC, has also given a place to nuclear in its models, even as it says that its deployment "could be limited by social preferences." Indeed, attitudes towards nuclear power vary sharply across nations. Also Read | 'You might as well bomb us,' says president of Palau at COP26 climate summit While New Zealand and Germany are opposed, India is in discussions with French energy giant EDF to build what would be the largest nuclear power plant in the world. Meanwhile, both Canada and the United States are developing so-called "small modular reactors", although only Russia has put into operation a floating reactor using this technology. Price is also not the barrier it used to be, said Grossi. "Countries see in smaller units a very interesting alternative, which is not in the range of billions but of hundreds of millions," he said. "When it comes to energy projects, this is quite affordable."

Climate crisis could give nuclear energy a second wind

With an aim to get nuclear power recognised as a sustainable energy source, the government of Finland is looking to lobby in the European Union (EU). The development comes after a&nbsp;secret decision. &nbsp;

Although the EU has already declared wind and solar as sustainable, it is yet to make a decision on gas and nuclear.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/china-rust-belt-province-warns-of-more-shortages-in-energy-crisis-419929" hreflang="en">China rust-belt province warns of more shortages in energy crisis</a>

Currently, nuclear energy is considered a low-carbon energy source in comparison to the emissions caused by mining and transport. This is even when plants are emission-free. &nbsp;

While Finland already has four nuclear plants, another one is nearing completion after several years of postponements due to technical complexities. So, the future of nuclear energy is critical for the country. &nbsp;

By 2035, Finland looks to becoming carbon neutral, and its industry is also highly energy-intensive. &nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-set-to-achieve-450-gw-renewable-energy-installed-capacity-by-2030-centre-420061" hreflang="en">India set to achieve 450 GW renewable energy installed capacity by 2030: Centre</a>

As of now, 30% energy in Finland is produced by nuclear energy. &nbsp;

The government’s alignment to lobby nuclear as a sustainable source is a complete U-turn for the Green Party sitting in the current five-party cabinet, reported Finnish Broadcasting Company (YLE). &nbsp;

Traditionally, the party is anti-nuclear and had resigned from previous governments over the issue. &nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp;

With an aim to get nuclear power recognised as a sustainable energy source, the government of Finland is looking to lobby in the European Union (EU). The development comes after a secret decision.

With an aim to get nuclear power recognised as a sustainable energy source, the government of Finland is looking to lobby in the European Union (EU). The development comes after a secret decision. Although the EU has already declared wind and solar as sustainable, it is yet to make a decision on gas and nuclear. Also Read: China rust-belt province warns of more shortages in energy crisis Currently, nuclear energy is considered a low-carbon energy source in comparison to the emissions caused by mining and transport. This is even when plants are emission-free. While Finland already has four nuclear plants, another one is nearing completion after several years of postponements due to technical complexities. So, the future of nuclear energy is critical for the country. By 2035, Finland looks to becoming carbon neutral, and its industry is also highly energy-intensive. Also Read: India set to achieve 450 GW renewable energy installed capacity by 2030: Centre As of now, 30% energy in Finland is produced by nuclear energy. The government’s alignment to lobby nuclear as a sustainable source is a complete U-turn for the Green Party sitting in the current five-party cabinet, reported Finnish Broadcasting Company (YLE). Traditionally, the party is anti-nuclear and had resigned from previous governments over the issue. (With inputs from agencies)

In EU, Finland lobbies to get nuclear energy labelled as sustainable source  

Iran agreed to allow the UN nuclear watchdog to install new memory cards into surveillance cameras at its sensitive nuclear sites. The announcement was made by the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) after a meeting with the director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Iran allows IAEA to service nuclear monitoring cameras after talks

The British government is investigating ways to block China's state-owned Nuclear energy company from all future power projects including CGN's plan to build a GBP20-billion Sizewell nuclear power station in Suffolk.

UK mulling banning Chinese Nuclear energy company

The impact of nuclear tests undertaken by France between 1960s-1990s may have been underestimated all this time, a study says. Based on declassified French documents and other records, the study attempted to reconstruct the impact of French nuclear tests.

The study found that a shocking number of people, mostly concentrated in French Polynesia were directly affected by the nuclear fallout. Think this is scary? Turns out, almost all of the population of French Polynesia (over 110,000) was exposed to radioactive air.

French Polynesia is a territory consisting hundreds of islands, and was the site of multiple nuclear tests decades ago.

In Pics:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/decade-after-one-of-worlds-worst-nuclear-disasters-what-is-happening-in-fukushima-369080">Decade after one of world's worst nuclear disasters, what is happening in Fukushima?</a>

To reach their conclusion, researched assessed over 2,000 military documents and attempted to retrace the impact of French nuclear tests in terms of contamination. The most dangerous tests were overseen between 1966-1974. Disclose (a news website), a British firm called Interprt, and researchers from Princeton University worked on the project together.

The test conducted on July 17, 1974 over Mururoa Atoll caused a lot of fallout. Two days after the test, the inhabitants of the region were exposed to unprecedented radiation.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/water-leaks-indicate-new-damage-at-fukushima-nuclear-plant-364890" hreflang="en">Water leaks indicate new damage at Fukushima nuclear plant</a>

The investigation shows that the real impact of radiation was over ten times higher than what was revealed in an official report by the French Atomic Energy Commission (CEA) in 2006.&nbsp;Researchers claim that this was owing to the CEA failing to take officially consider&nbsp;contamination that took place through drinking water.

The study is being used to ascertain whether people affected by radiation are eligible for compensation.

The impact of nuclear tests undertaken by France between 1960s-1990s may have been underestimated all this time, a study says. Based on declassified French documents and other records, the study attempted to reconstruct the impact of French nuclear tests.

The impact of nuclear tests undertaken by France between 1960s-1990s may have been underestimated all this time, a study says. Based on declassified French documents and other records, the study attempted to reconstruct the impact of French nuclear tests. The study found that a shocking number of people, mostly concentrated in French Polynesia were directly affected by the nuclear fallout. Think this is scary? Turns out, almost all of the population of French Polynesia (over 110,000) was exposed to radioactive air. French Polynesia is a territory consisting hundreds of islands, and was the site of multiple nuclear tests decades ago. In Pics: Decade after one of world's worst nuclear disasters, what is happening in Fukushima? To reach their conclusion, researched assessed over 2,000 military documents and attempted to retrace the impact of French nuclear tests in terms of contamination. The most dangerous tests were overseen between 1966-1974. Disclose (a news website), a British firm called Interprt, and researchers from Princeton University worked on the project together. The test conducted on July 17, 1974 over Mururoa Atoll caused a lot of fallout. Two days after the test, the inhabitants of the region were exposed to unprecedented radiation. Also read: Water leaks indicate new damage at Fukushima nuclear plant The investigation shows that the real impact of radiation was over ten times higher than what was revealed in an official report by the French Atomic Energy Commission (CEA) in 2006. Researchers claim that this was owing to the CEA failing to take officially consider contamination that took place through drinking water. The study is being used to ascertain whether people affected by radiation are eligible for compensation.

French nuclear tests exposed entire Polynesian population to radiation, new study reveals

French President Emmanuel Macron said that Nuclear power will remain a key part of country's energy needs, in a show of support for the industry even as he looks to reduce nuclear's dominance as a power source.

Macron says nuclear energy will remain France's major source

Japan's Tohoku Electric Power said on Wednesday it has won initial regulatory approval to restart a reactor at its Onagawa power plant, more than eight&nbsp;years after it was damaged in the earthquake and tsunami that caused the Fukushima disaster.

Tohoku Electric said in a statement it has received a first green light from Japan's Nuclear Regulation Authority to restart the No&nbsp;2 reactor at Onagawa, subject to a public consultation period.

Onagawa was the closest among Japan's nuclear stations to the epicentre of the magnitude-9 quake in March 2011, which triggered a tsunami that killed nearly 20,000 people, as well as causing the worst atomic disaster since Chernobyl in 1986.

The station was swamped by the tsunami, but survived with its cooling system intact, saving its reactors from the threat of meltdowns similar to those that occurred at Tokyo Electric Power's Fukushima Daiichi station to the south.

Further approvals will be required before the restart, along with the consent of local authorities, which is not guaranteed.

The reactor is a boiling water reactor (BWR) with the same basic design as those that melted down in the Fukushima crisis.

The Fukushima disaster led to the eventual shutdown of the country's then-54 operational reactors, which once provided nearly a third of Japan's electricity. All had to be relicensed under new standards after the disaster highlighted operational and regulatory failings.

While the approval will be a boost for <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/pope-francis-leaves-japan-after-trip-centred-on-anti-nuclear-message-264572">Japan's resurgent nuclear industry</a>, the sector will still miss a government target of providing at least a fifth of the country's electricity by 2030, an analysis by Reuters showed last year.

Nine reactors have been restarted, all of them pressurized water reactors located far from Tokyo, while the stigma of Fukushima still hangs over use of the older BWR technology.

The issue of nuclear safety in Japan was highlighted again earlier this week when Pope Francis - who met victims of the Fukushima nuclear disaster while in Japan over the weekend - said nuclear energy should not be used until there are ironclad guarantees that it is safe for people and the environment.

Japan's Tohoku Electric Power said on Wednesday it has won initial regulatory approval to restart a reactor at its Onagawa power plant, more than eight years after it was damaged in the earthquake and tsunami that caused the Fukushima disaster.

Japan's Tohoku Electric Power said on Wednesday it has won initial regulatory approval to restart a reactor at its Onagawa power plant, more than eight years after it was damaged in the earthquake and tsunami that caused the Fukushima disaster. Tohoku Electric said in a statement it has received a first green light from Japan's Nuclear Regulation Authority to restart the No 2 reactor at Onagawa, subject to a public consultation period. Onagawa was the closest among Japan's nuclear stations to the epicentre of the magnitude-9 quake in March 2011, which triggered a tsunami that killed nearly 20,000 people, as well as causing the worst atomic disaster since Chernobyl in 1986. The station was swamped by the tsunami, but survived with its cooling system intact, saving its reactors from the threat of meltdowns similar to those that occurred at Tokyo Electric Power's Fukushima Daiichi station to the south. Further approvals will be required before the restart, along with the consent of local authorities, which is not guaranteed. The reactor is a boiling water reactor (BWR) with the same basic design as those that melted down in the Fukushima crisis. The Fukushima disaster led to the eventual shutdown of the country's then-54 operational reactors, which once provided nearly a third of Japan's electricity. All had to be relicensed under new standards after the disaster highlighted operational and regulatory failings. While the approval will be a boost for Japan's resurgent nuclear industry, the sector will still miss a government target of providing at least a fifth of the country's electricity by 2030, an analysis by Reuters showed last year. Nine reactors have been restarted, all of them pressurized water reactors located far from Tokyo, while the stigma of Fukushima still hangs over use of the older BWR technology. The issue of nuclear safety in Japan was highlighted again earlier this week when Pope Francis - who met victims of the Fukushima nuclear disaster while in Japan over the weekend - said nuclear energy should not be used until there are ironclad guarantees that it is safe for people and the environment.

Japan approves restarting nuclear reactor closest to epicentre of 2011 quake

The United States announced Monday it would <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/irans-guards-warn-protesters-of-decisive-action-if-unrest-continues-262988">halt sanctions waivers for Iran's Fordow plant</a>, likely ending a key component of a landmark nuclear deal after Tehran said it had resumed enrichment activities.

Piling pressure as protests hit Iran, the move is intended to discourage work led by Russia's state-owned nuclear company Rosatom at the once-secret site, which was supposed to be transformed into a civilian research centre&nbsp;under the 2015 agreement.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo pointed to Iranian President Hassan Rouhani's announcement of renewed activity at Fordow, one of a series of steps taken by Tehran as it presses Europeans to make good on sanctions relief promised for compliance.

"Therefore the United States will terminate the sanctions waiver related to the nuclear facility at Fordow effective December 15, 2019," Pompeo told a news conference.&nbsp;

"The right amount of uranium enrichment for the world's largest state sponsor of terror is zero," Pompeo said.

"There is no legitimate reason for Iran to resume enrichment at this previously clandestine site. Iran should reverse its activity there immediately," he said.

President Donald Trump last year withdrew from the denuclearisation accord and reimposed sweeping sanctions on Iran, aiming to inflict economic pain and reduce the Shiite clerical regime's influence in Arab countries.

But the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iran-developed-vast-influence-in-iraq-spy-agency-leaks-say-262919">Trump administration</a> has still granted waivers to let other nations implement the nuclear deal, which was negotiated under former President Barack Obama, without facing penalties in the United States.

Critics of Trump have said that the waivers proved the administration saw the benefits of the deal, which sharply expanded access for international inspectors. Iran had been in compliance before the US withdrawal.

US waivers remain in place for other nuclear sites including Bushehr, a nuclear power plant off the Gulf coast being developed with Russia under safeguards.

Hawkish Republicans have been pressing on Pompeo to end the waivers. Senator Tom Cotton praised the decision as he pointed to the weekend protests in Iran over gas price hikes.

"The mullahs are playing with atoms in an underground bunker at Fordow instead of helping their own people, who are demonstrating in the street," he tweeted.

Latest step by Iran

Iran, which insists its nuclear program is exclusively peaceful, has taken a series of measures that fall well short of developing a nuclear weapon but are meant to put pressure on European powers.

The UN's nuclear watchdog said Monday that Iran's stock of heavy water for reactors had crossed the level agreed upon in the 2015 accord for the first time.

Iran's stock of heavy water, which can be used to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons as an alternative to enriched uranium,&nbsp;was 131.5 tonnes, above the 130-tonne limit, said a spokesperson for the agency in Vienna.

At Fordow, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iran-condemns-us-show-of-support-for-rioters-262870">Iran</a> said it began feeding uranium hexafluoride gas into mothballed enrichment centrifuges.

Britain, France, Germany and the European Union said Iran's decision was "inconsistent" with the nuclear deal.

Iran has accused European nations of hypocrisy over the nuclear deal and also attacked the United States for its statements of support for protesters.

Major roads have been blocked, banks torched and shops looted since Friday's abrupt hike in gas prices.

Pompeo again voiced solidarity with the protesters, saying: "The world's watching."

"The Iranian people will enjoy a better future when their government begins to respect basic human rights, abandon its revolutionary posture and its destabilizing foreign policy in the region, and behaves simply like a normal nation," he said.

The United States announced Monday it would halt sanctions waivers for Iran's Fordow plant, likely ending a key component of a landmark nuclear deal after Tehran said it had resumed enrichment activities.

The United States announced Monday it would halt sanctions waivers for Iran's Fordow plant, likely ending a key component of a landmark nuclear deal after Tehran said it had resumed enrichment activities. Piling pressure as protests hit Iran, the move is intended to discourage work led by Russia's state-owned nuclear company Rosatom at the once-secret site, which was supposed to be transformed into a civilian research centre under the 2015 agreement. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo pointed to Iranian President Hassan Rouhani's announcement of renewed activity at Fordow, one of a series of steps taken by Tehran as it presses Europeans to make good on sanctions relief promised for compliance. "Therefore the United States will terminate the sanctions waiver related to the nuclear facility at Fordow effective December 15, 2019," Pompeo told a news conference. "The right amount of uranium enrichment for the world's largest state sponsor of terror is zero," Pompeo said. "There is no legitimate reason for Iran to resume enrichment at this previously clandestine site. Iran should reverse its activity there immediately," he said. President Donald Trump last year withdrew from the denuclearisation accord and reimposed sweeping sanctions on Iran, aiming to inflict economic pain and reduce the Shiite clerical regime's influence in Arab countries. But the Trump administration has still granted waivers to let other nations implement the nuclear deal, which was negotiated under former President Barack Obama, without facing penalties in the United States. Critics of Trump have said that the waivers proved the administration saw the benefits of the deal, which sharply expanded access for international inspectors. Iran had been in compliance before the US withdrawal. US waivers remain in place for other nuclear sites including Bushehr, a nuclear power plant off the Gulf coast being developed with Russia under safeguards. Hawkish Republicans have been pressing on Pompeo to end the waivers. Senator Tom Cotton praised the decision as he pointed to the weekend protests in Iran over gas price hikes. "The mullahs are playing with atoms in an underground bunker at Fordow instead of helping their own people, who are demonstrating in the street," he tweeted. Latest step by Iran Iran, which insists its nuclear program is exclusively peaceful, has taken a series of measures that fall well short of developing a nuclear weapon but are meant to put pressure on European powers. The UN's nuclear watchdog said Monday that Iran's stock of heavy water for reactors had crossed the level agreed upon in the 2015 accord for the first time. Iran's stock of heavy water, which can be used to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons as an alternative to enriched uranium, was 131.5 tonnes, above the 130-tonne limit, said a spokesperson for the agency in Vienna. At Fordow, Iran said it began feeding uranium hexafluoride gas into mothballed enrichment centrifuges. Britain, France, Germany and the European Union said Iran's decision was "inconsistent" with the nuclear deal. Iran has accused European nations of hypocrisy over the nuclear deal and also attacked the United States for its statements of support for protesters. Major roads have been blocked, banks torched and shops looted since Friday's abrupt hike in gas prices. Pompeo again voiced solidarity with the protesters, saying: "The world's watching." "The Iranian people will enjoy a better future when their government begins to respect basic human rights, abandon its revolutionary posture and its destabilizing foreign policy in the region, and behaves simply like a normal nation," he said.

United States ends sanction waivers for Fordow nuclear plant in Iran

The United States plans to allow Russian, Chinese and European companies to continue&nbsp;work&nbsp;at&nbsp;Iranian nuclear facilities to make it harder for&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;to develop a nuclear weapon, two&nbsp;sources&nbsp;familiar with the matter said on Wednesday.

The Trump administration, which last year pulled out of the 2015&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;nuclear deal and re-imposed <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-iran-tensions-ratchet-up-further-despite-un-efforts-252293">sanctions on&nbsp;Iran</a>, will let the&nbsp;work&nbsp;go forward by issuing&nbsp;waivers&nbsp;to sanctions that bar&nbsp;non-US&nbsp;firms from dealing with the Atomic Energy Organization of&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;(AEOI), said the&nbsp;sources&nbsp;on condition of anonymity.

While the&nbsp;waivers'&nbsp;renewal would allow&nbsp;non-proliferation&nbsp;work&nbsp;to continue at the Arak heavy water research reactor and the Fordow fuel enrichment plant, which AEOI oversees, it may also signal that Washington is leaving the door open to diplomacy.

Under the 2015 deal between&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;and six world powers - Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States - Tehran agreed to limit its nuclear program in return for the lifting of economic sanctions that had crippled its economy.

When&nbsp;US&nbsp;President Donald Trump unilaterally abandoned the deal in May 2018, he <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iran-says-new-us-sanctions-target-iranians-access-to-food-medicine-250961">re-imposed&nbsp;US&nbsp;sanctions</a> in a "maximum pressure" campaign designed to force&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;to return to the negotiating table.

Trump wants a broader deal that would also limit&nbsp;Iran's missile program as well as its regional activities;&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;has demanded the United States first resume complying with the 2015 deal called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

France, in particular, has sought to bring the two into a wider dialogue but has so far failed, suggesting neither is yet willing to abandon core elements of policy: the&nbsp;US&nbsp;belief that pressure will bring&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;to its knees, and&nbsp;Iran's refusal to capitulate to&nbsp;US&nbsp;duress.

Under the 2015 deal, the Arak reactor was to be redesigned to render it unable to make bomb-grade plutonium under normal operation, while the Fordow plant was to stop enriching uranium and be converted into a nuclear, physics and technology center.

Chinese state-owned China National Nuclear Corp has done&nbsp;non-proliferation&nbsp;work&nbsp;at Arak, and Russia's Rosatom has done it at Fordow. Rosatom has also provided uranium fuel for&nbsp;Iran’s Bushehr nuclear power plant.

The&nbsp;US&nbsp;State Department had no immediate comment. Rosatom did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

A China National Nuclear Corp spokesman told Reuters on Thursday by email that it was "starting to cooperate with the&nbsp;Iranian side under guidance from Beijing on seeking a positive solution to the&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;nuclear problem". It did not provide further details.

The United States plans to allow Russian, Chinese and European companies to continue work at Iranian nuclear facilities to make it harder for Iran to develop a nuclear weapon, two sources familiar with the matter said on Wednesday.

The United States plans to allow Russian, Chinese and European companies to continue work at Iranian nuclear facilities to make it harder for Iran to develop a nuclear weapon, two sources familiar with the matter said on Wednesday. The Trump administration, which last year pulled out of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal and re-imposed sanctions on Iran, will let the work go forward by issuing waivers to sanctions that bar non-US firms from dealing with the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI), said the sources on condition of anonymity. While the waivers' renewal would allow non-proliferation work to continue at the Arak heavy water research reactor and the Fordow fuel enrichment plant, which AEOI oversees, it may also signal that Washington is leaving the door open to diplomacy. Under the 2015 deal between Iran and six world powers - Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States - Tehran agreed to limit its nuclear program in return for the lifting of economic sanctions that had crippled its economy. When US President Donald Trump unilaterally abandoned the deal in May 2018, he re-imposed US sanctions in a "maximum pressure" campaign designed to force Iran to return to the negotiating table. Trump wants a broader deal that would also limit Iran's missile program as well as its regional activities; Iran has demanded the United States first resume complying with the 2015 deal called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. France, in particular, has sought to bring the two into a wider dialogue but has so far failed, suggesting neither is yet willing to abandon core elements of policy: the US belief that pressure will bring Iran to its knees, and Iran's refusal to capitulate to US duress. Under the 2015 deal, the Arak reactor was to be redesigned to render it unable to make bomb-grade plutonium under normal operation, while the Fordow plant was to stop enriching uranium and be converted into a nuclear, physics and technology center. Chinese state-owned China National Nuclear Corp has done non-proliferation work at Arak, and Russia's Rosatom has done it at Fordow. Rosatom has also provided uranium fuel for Iran’s Bushehr nuclear power plant. The US State Department had no immediate comment. Rosatom did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A China National Nuclear Corp spokesman told Reuters on Thursday by email that it was "starting to cooperate with the Iranian side under guidance from Beijing on seeking a positive solution to the Iran nuclear problem". It did not provide further details.

US to renew waivers allowing non-proliferation work with Iran: Report

China's first white paper places equal emphasis on nuclear energy development and safety, and advocates all countries to shoulder the responsibility of nuclear safety, according to a China Media Group (CMG) commentary published on Tuesday.

China shares responsibility for global nuclear safety: commentary

PM Modi remembers India's Nuclear Energy Pioneer Homi Bhabha in France. Watch more to know.

WION Gravitas: Why PM Modi remembered Homi Bhabha  in France

WION Fineprint: Recalling India's Nuclear Energy Pioneers

It was in 1942 that the great physicist Enrico Fermi successfully built the first ever nuclear reactor under a sports ground at the University of Chicago. Yet, already by 1946, within just four years of that pioneering breakthrough, India, a nation on the other side of the world still under the shackles of colonial rule and considered backwards and destitute, had nevertheless set up an Atomic Research Committee to explore nuclear energy possibilities.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/homi_jehangir_bhabha_1960s-20171030065247.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
Dr Homi Jehangir Bhabha (Others)
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

This was years ahead of many &quot;advanced&quot; nations of the time. Soon thereafter, in 1948, India&rsquo;s Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) was set up. These farsighted steps are owed both to Jawaharlal Nehru and to leading scientists of the country, notably M.N. Saha, S.S. Bhatnagar and Homi Bhabha, who had been closely following nuclear developments around the world.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Dr Bhabha&rsquo;s vision and skill as a builder of institutions and as a diplomat in establishing India&rsquo;s due role in the international nuclear community were quite remarkable.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Dr Bhabha?s vision and skill as a builder of institutions and as a diplomat in establishing India?s due role in the international nuclear community were quite remarkable." target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

But the primary credit for taking the entire enterprise forward and developing it belongs to Dr Bhabha, who was named the first Chairman of AEC and Secretary to&nbsp;the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE). Using his international stature as a physicist and his easy access to Prime Minister Nehru (both Cambridge men), Bhabha set about building the vast nuclear empire which today consists of over 50 different institutions working variously on civilian energy, nuclear weapons as well as pure scientific research.

For a person who had started his career as a theoretical physicist, Dr Bhabha&rsquo;s vision and skill as a builder of institutions and as a diplomat in establishing India&rsquo;s due role in the international nuclear community were quite remarkable. Equally impressive were his aesthetic and artistic tastes. The Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, another of Dr Bhabha&rsquo;s creations, not only had numerous original paintings in its lobby but also the best lawns (and the cleanest toilets) among all our scientific organisations.

How well has Dr Bhabha&#39;s nuclear dream been realised? This is not the appropriate place to discuss the nuclear weapons part of the program. But the civilian reactor program has, sadly, not progressed anywhere nearly as far as had been hoped, in spite of the considerable financial support and bureaucratic freedom DAE enjoyed. At the turn of the century, over 50 years after it was set up, the DAE could deliver only 2.77 GW (gigawatts) of nuclear power.

Worse still, the DAE brass kept announcing targets that were getting pushed further and further away into the future, as results on the ground fell well short of the projections. There were several reasons behind this. One was the tragic death of Dr Bhabha in 1966 in an air crash over the Alps. He was just 56 years old then. It is possible that if he had been alive longer to guide the program, he would not have let it drift and slide so much. One also suspects that he would have refrained from making the tall claims and unrealistic promises that the nuclear agency periodically indulged in.

The other factor was the imposition of nuclear sanctions by the international community after we had conducted the first nuclear test at Pokhran in 1974. This prevented all nuclear commerce with the outside world, including technical collaboration and the import of equipment and uranium fuel. The sanctions were further extended when we conducted more nuclear tests in 1998.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>The plans that the current government announced in the aftermath of the Paris Climate Agreement, of generating 63 GW of nuclear energy by 2032, is extremely unlikely to be realised.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The plans that the current government announced in the aftermath of the Paris Climate Agreement, of generating 63 GW of nuclear energy by 2032, is extremely unlikely to be realised.
" target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

Things began to improve in the new millennium. The Indo-US nuclear Deal in 2008 lifted the sanctions against us allowing us to import Uranium fuel as well as collaborate with other countries to build bigger modern reactors for us. But once again, actual progress has belied much of the hype. At the time of writing, we still have only 7 GW of nuclear energy, less than 3 per cent of the current total energy capacity. Even this improvement is largely because of the two reactors the Russians have built at Kudangulam. Partnerships with French and US reactor suppliers, under negotiation since 2008, are yet to bear fruit.

In view of this, the plan that the current government announced in the aftermath of the Paris Climate Agreement, of generating 63 GW of nuclear energy by 2032, is extremely unlikely to be realised. 
&nbsp;

India's current progress in creating nuclear energy calls into a question the current government, who aims to generate 63 GW of nuclear energy by 2032

It was in 1942 that the great physicist Enrico Fermi successfully built the first ever nuclear reactor under a sports ground at the University of Chicago. Yet, already by 1946, within just four years of that pioneering breakthrough, India, a nation on the other side of the world still under the shackles of colonial rule and considered backwards and destitute, had nevertheless set up an Atomic Research Committee to explore nuclear energy possibilities. Dr Homi Jehangir Bhabha (Others) × This was years ahead of many "advanced" nations of the time. Soon thereafter, in 1948, India’s Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) was set up. These farsighted steps are owed both to Jawaharlal Nehru and to leading scientists of the country, notably M.N. Saha, S.S. Bhatnagar and Homi Bhabha, who had been closely following nuclear developments around the world. Dr Bhabha’s vision and skill as a builder of institutions and as a diplomat in establishing India’s due role in the international nuclear community were quite remarkable. × But the primary credit for taking the entire enterprise forward and developing it belongs to Dr Bhabha, who was named the first Chairman of AEC and Secretary to the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE). Using his international stature as a physicist and his easy access to Prime Minister Nehru (both Cambridge men), Bhabha set about building the vast nuclear empire which today consists of over 50 different institutions working variously on civilian energy, nuclear weapons as well as pure scientific research. For a person who had started his career as a theoretical physicist, Dr Bhabha’s vision and skill as a builder of institutions and as a diplomat in establishing India’s due role in the international nuclear community were quite remarkable. Equally impressive were his aesthetic and artistic tastes. The Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, another of Dr Bhabha’s creations, not only had numerous original paintings in its lobby but also the best lawns (and the cleanest toilets) among all our scientific organisations. How well has Dr Bhabha's nuclear dream been realised? This is not the appropriate place to discuss the nuclear weapons part of the program. But the civilian reactor program has, sadly, not progressed anywhere nearly as far as had been hoped, in spite of the considerable financial support and bureaucratic freedom DAE enjoyed. At the turn of the century, over 50 years after it was set up, the DAE could deliver only 2.77 GW (gigawatts) of nuclear power. Worse still, the DAE brass kept announcing targets that were getting pushed further and further away into the future, as results on the ground fell well short of the projections. There were several reasons behind this. One was the tragic death of Dr Bhabha in 1966 in an air crash over the Alps. He was just 56 years old then. It is possible that if he had been alive longer to guide the program, he would not have let it drift and slide so much. One also suspects that he would have refrained from making the tall claims and unrealistic promises that the nuclear agency periodically indulged in. The other factor was the imposition of nuclear sanctions by the international community after we had conducted the first nuclear test at Pokhran in 1974. This prevented all nuclear commerce with the outside world, including technical collaboration and the import of equipment and uranium fuel. The sanctions were further extended when we conducted more nuclear tests in 1998. The plans that the current government announced in the aftermath of the Paris Climate Agreement, of generating 63 GW of nuclear energy by 2032, is extremely unlikely to be realised. × Things began to improve in the new millennium. The Indo-US nuclear Deal in 2008 lifted the sanctions against us allowing us to import Uranium fuel as well as collaborate with other countries to build bigger modern reactors for us. But once again, actual progress has belied much of the hype. At the time of writing, we still have only 7 GW of nuclear energy, less than 3 per cent of the current total energy capacity. Even this improvement is largely because of the two reactors the Russians have built at Kudangulam. Partnerships with French and US reactor suppliers, under negotiation since 2008, are yet to bear fruit. In view of this, the plan that the current government announced in the aftermath of the Paris Climate Agreement, of generating 63 GW of nuclear energy by 2032, is extremely unlikely to be realised.

India's Nuclear Program: HJ Bhabha's dream remains unfulfilled

nuclear-energy

Nuclear Energy, News on Nuclear Energy, stories on Nuclear Energy, articles on Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Energy stories at Wion, Nuclear Energy news, Nuclear Energy latest news