Egypt is building a nuclear energy plant, expected to go online in 2026 when countries like Germany have shut down all its domestic nuclear power. The El Dabaa Nuclear Power Plant is the first nuclear power plant planned for Egypt and will be located at El Dabaa, Matrouh Governorate, Egypt, about 320 kilometers northwest of Cairo.

According to project documents, the plant is expected to generate around 37 billion kWh per year, enough energy to power about 10 million homes. Consider that millions of Egyptians are very poor and use bitumen for cooking.

Egypt is building the nuclear power plant with Russia, and the head of Egypt’s Nuclear Power Plants Authority (NPPA), Sherif Helmy, recently took part in the Young Scientists Forum in the Russian city of Sochi, an event that drew senior international experts and officials in the nuclear energy sector.

This flagship project is aimed at boosting Egypt’s energy capacity and deepening Moscow–Cairo strategic ties.

In a statement, the NPPA said Helmy used the forum’s main session — themed “From the First Russian Nuclear Plant to Global Technological Leadership” — to outline the significant progress at El Dabaa nuclear power project.

He told reporters the installation of the reactor pressure vessel for the first unit, attended remotely by the Egyptian and Russian presidents via video link, marked a historic milestone and underscored strong political backing in both countries.

Helmy said Egypt’s nuclear program aligns with the country’s National Climate Change Strategy 2050, adding that nuclear power plays a critical role in supporting economic and industrial development. He made it clear that current priorities include completing the El Dabaa project on schedule and tracking global advances in small modular reactors (SMRs). Turkey is also steadily developing nuclear energy technology around Eastern Europe and Baltic states.

Helmy praised Egyptian–Russian cooperation, describing it as a solid strategic partnership that is essential for delivering the project’s goals. He said the NPPA is seeking deeper collaboration on peaceful nuclear applications and initiatives to promote nuclear energy across Africa.

Concluding his participation, Helmy said Egypt would continue to train national personnel, strengthen international cooperation and expand scientific and technical capabilities to advance the country’s sustainable energy vision.

Given that the Egyptian Navy can’t save people trapped inside a dive boat from drowning, we have little faith that the Egyptian authorities will be able to manage a nuclear reactor safely.

The post Egypt building nuclear power appeared first on Green Prophet.

When Israel launched a surprise, precision strike wave against Iran’s nuclear and other essential infrastructure on June 13, 2025, the world’s attention turned not only to the military, political, and human fallout but also to the environmental risks. Iran and its leaders immediately accused Israel of committing environmental war crimes. The supporting evidence for this claim was fires at oil depots, fuel deposits being damaged, and the targeting of nuclear research and development facilities.

From Israel’s perspective, these accusations are just distractions and diversions to ignore a larger truth: Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons poses a larger and longer-lasting environmental threat to the Middle East than Israel’s defensive measures ever will.  

Israel has long believed and employed the practice of stopping existential threats before they come to fruition. This doctrine led Israel to conduct strikes, similar to its 2025 attack, on nuclear facilities in Iraq in 1981 and Syria in 2007. While both operations were controversial at the same time, which seems to be the trend with Israel’s attacks, they are now acknowledged to have prevented potentially worse, specifically environmental, outcomes.

In June 2025, Israel used the same logic when it attacked Iran. Nuclear facilities in Natanz, Fordow, and Arak, among other infrastructure, where uranium enrichment along with other nuclear activities were targeted. Israel’s goal was clear: cripple Iran’s nuclear program before it had operational weapons. For Israeli leaders, the alternative to not attacking was unthinkable. An Iran with nuclear capabilities would not only destabilize regional politics but also risk a major humanitarian and environmental disaster.  

See Related Article: Experts at US-Arab Policy Conference debate Mideast’s future as global energy supplier

Critics of the attack warned and cited instances of radioactive leaks. However, agencies like the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirmed the lack of leaks and are also continuing to measure sites to ensure no radioactive increase. Chemical exposure is the real environmental danger. Chemicals used in enrichment that are not cared for and stored properly can become toxic and can potentially be inhaled or contaminate groundwater. The underground nature of Iran’s nuclear development facilities helped decrease the chance of air exposure. Additionally, Israeli military planners deliberately designed strikes to maximize damage to infrastructure and minimize environmental fallout. Israel’s precision proves that Israel recognizes environmental safety even amid war. 

Iran’s environmental department has accused Israel of targeting fossil-fuel storage, oil depots, industrial plants, and nuclear facilities with the intention of causing environmental destruction. Tehran’s state media highlighted fires at oil depots and refineries, claiming that the attacks and subsequent destruction created toxic air and soil contamination. Israel rejects these accusations. Its view is that the strikes were carefully planned and carried out with precision to undermine Iran’s economic, military, and nuclear programs.

By crippling key infrastructure, Israel seeks to cut off financial and physical resources as well as the support they provide for Iran’s proxies. From Israel’s perspective, Iran is attempting to weaponize environmental justice as propaganda while ignoring the larger risks that they are creating by their national ambitions. 

See Related Article: Iran is sinking in sinkholes from overwatering

While Iran points towards oil fires and chemical leaks, Israel argues that the long-term environmental risks of a nuclear Iran far outweigh the immediate impact of its targeted strikes. Consider the following situations:

• Nuclear accident: Poorly secured and contained enrichment facilities could leak uranium into soil, water, and other resources
• Regional proliferation: If Iran secures nuclear weapons, other nations in the region may pursue their programs in response, exponentially increasing the risk of accident and sabotage
• Terrorist access: With Iranian proxies active across the Middle East, material or weapons could fall into the hands of groups with no regard for environmental or human safety
• Regional instability: A nuclear Iran would increase the likelihood of war, where nuclear attacks would devastate the environment 

For Israel, these risks make preventative action not only the way to save human life but also to save the environment from potential destruction.

Iran’s accusations of environmental war crimes fit into a broader narrative attempting to portray Israel as reckless and destructive. But Israel points out key hypocrisies. Iran’s secrecy, blocking inspectors from accessing facilities, Iran’s industrial pollution, and their weaponization of outrage shift their malpractice onto Israel. 

Israel frames its strategy around an ethical argument: to allow Iran to continue unchecked would not only be a gamble in terms of Israeli lives but also with the environmental health of the Middle East as a whole. 

The strikes on Iran have sparked fierce debate, but from Israel’s perspective, the choice was easy: either accept the risks of a nuclear Iran or act decisively to stop it.

Israel chose action, not out of disregard for the environment, but because it views preventive strikes as the lesser of two ecological evils. The immediate damage pales in comparison to the devastation a nuclearized Iran could unleash.

For Israel, protecting the land, air, and water of the Middle East means ensuring that a nuclear catastrophe never becomes part of the region’s future.

The post How Israel’s Strikes Avert Iran’s Environmental Threat appeared first on Green Prophet.

Martin Varsavsky, a seasoned entrepreneur behind billion-dollar clean energy exits, says he’s lost faith in the renewable energy paradigm. Moshe Luz, director at Ivanpah, the world’s largest solar thermal power tower project in California’s Mojave Desert, believes just the opposite.

This is more than a disagreement between two experts. It is a flashpoint in a global conversation about how we transition to a clean energy future—whether through sweeping centralized infrastructures or distributed, ecological innovations.

Varsavsky is a Spanish-Argentine entrepreneur known for founding several successful technology and infrastructure ventures, including in the renewable energy sector. He co-founded Eolia Renovables, a large-scale wind and solar power company in Spain, which was sold for €1.1 billion. After Eolia, he went on to co-found Barter Energy, which focused on solar energy communities and rooftop solar installations. Barter Energy was also successfully exited, with the sale announced in May 2025.

From the heights of Spain’s energy revolution, Varsavsky watched solar and wind power go from vision to reality—only to become, in his view, a cautionary tale. In his May 9th post on X, Varsavsky (after cashing out billions, no less) criticized the high environmental cost of large-scale renewables: olive groves uprooted, landscapes marred, ecosystems disrupted. He condemned the dependence on government subsidies, the inefficiency of intermittent sources, and the fragility of Europe’s energy grid.

To Varsavsky, rooftop solar paired with battery storage is the only renewable worth keeping. His newfound allegiance? New nuclear—compact, clean, and capable of delivering baseload power without scarring the Earth. Environmentalists know that nuclear is a dangerous path forward because the local and environmental risks are too great. The Fukushima disaster in Japan was only just in 2011!

He also blasts what he calls “climate alarmism”, suggesting that exaggerated doomsday predictions of the early 2000s justified energy policies that have “impoverished” Europeans while failing to significantly reduce emissions. Germany’s green push, he argues, has become an industrial suicide note. The same alarmism also caused suicide. 

David Anthony, founder of 21Ventures, was a pioneering American investor in Israeli solar energy startups during the late 2000s, partnering with groups like the Quercus Trust to fund early-stage cleantech. He played a key role in shaping Israel’s solar innovation scene but tragically died by suicide in 2012 after what was reported as personal family trauma. His death came at a time when optimism around solar peaked—before global investment slowed and many early-stage companies struggled to scale amid policy uncertainty and falling technology costs. We interviewed David on Green Prophet and he gave us some great tips on how to find innovation to invest in before the rest step in.

But at Ivanpah, Moshe Luz sees a different story unfolding than Varsavsky.

In our recent Green Prophet interview, engineer Moshe Luz emphasized solar thermal’s promise not only for emissions reduction, but for empowering local resilience and economic opportunity. Luz doesn’t pretend Ivanpah is perfect—it has faced challenges, from initial bird mortality to integration issues—but he sees it as a living laboratory, showing how we can move toward decarbonization without waiting decades for nuclear fusion or succumbing to fossil fallback plans.

Where Varsavsky sees environmental destruction, Luz points to carefully managed desert ecosystems, job creation in rural areas, and the profound symbolism of powering millions of homes with focused beams of sunlight. He emphasizes hybrid systems, storage innovation, and smarter grid planning—not abandoning renewables, but evolving them. And government roles in supporting this evolution is important.

Varsavsky’s critique of large-scale renewables as land-hungry and subsidy-dependent is not new. Nor is his appeal to nuclear energy as a clean, scalable alternative. What’s striking is that someone who once built these systems is now disavowing them, adding weight to long-standing criticisms from environmentalists concerned about industrial-scale “green” projects that harm more than they help.

But to lump Ivanpah, or the global community solar movement, into the same basket as Spain’s bulldozed olive groves misses nuance. Ivanpah did not destroy forests. It sits in the Mojave, a place Luz argues is uniquely suited for solar concentration. Its storage and dispatch capabilities, evolving since launch, challenge the very “intermittency” Varsavsky condemns.

And while new nuclear has promise, it remains years away from scale, with unresolved issues around waste, cost, and political will. Even the smallest modular reactors are deeply controversial and the human and environmental cost can be catastrophic when systems fail.

Rather than pit nuclear against solar, or rooftop against grid-scale, what if we designed an energy ecosystem with layers?

Rooftop solar like Powerwall’s home backup reduce grid stress and democratize energy.

Large-scale renewables, thoughtfully deployed, can replace coal and gas at scale.

Next-generation nuclear, if and when it arrives, can fill in the baseload gaps.

The real danger isn’t solar or nuclear—it’s polarization, where each camp is so convinced of its own truth that collaboration becomes impossible.

Varsavsky ends his piece by urging a shift from fear-based policymaking to pragmatic energy design. It’s a sentiment Luz would likely echo. But where Varsavsky sees solar as the problem, Luz sees it as part of the solution. Both are right. Both are wrong. The future will likely need the sun, the atom, the battery, and the commonsense human decision-making.

The post The Future of Energy: Nuclear Realism vs. Solar Idealism appeared first on Green Prophet.

Thousands of hectares of Chornobyl-affected farmland, long deemed too dangerous for cultivation in northern Ukraine can safely return to production, according to new research.

The study, led by the University of Portsmouth and the Ukrainian Institute of Agricultural Radiology, developed a method for the safe reassessment of farmland abandoned after the 1986 nuclear accident.

Published in the Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, the research opens the door to potentially reclaiming large areas land for agricultural use – land that has remained officially off-limits for over three decades due to radioactive contamination.

Since the Chornobyl disaster, large regions of northern Ukraine were designated as too hazardous for farming. The 4200 square kilometre “Chornobyl Exclusion Zone” around the nuclear site remains uninhabited and is now one of Europe’s largest nature reserves.

Related: The radioactive church in Japan

A second 2000 square km area – the “Zone of Obligatory Resettlement” – was never fully abandoned. The area is home to thousands of people, has schools and shops but no official investment or use of land is allowed.

Since the 1990’s scientists in Ukraine and overseas have been saying that the land can be safely used again despite contamination by radiocaesium and radiostrontium. But political complexities have meant that the land remains officially abandoned. That hasn’t stopped a few farmers taking matters into their own hands and beginning unofficial production in some areas. The new study has confirmed that the farmers were right – crops can be grown safely in most areas.

Using a 100-hectare test site in the Zhytomyr region, the researchers developed a simple yet robust protocol to evaluate contamination levels and predict the uptake of radioactive substances by common crops such as potatoes, cereals, maize, and sunflowers.

By analysing soil samples and measuring external gamma radiation, the researchers confirmed that the effective radiation dose to agricultural workers is well below Ukraine’s national safety threshold, and significantly lower than background radiation levels experienced naturally all over the world.

The findings show that, with proper monitoring and adherence to Ukrainian food safety regulations, many crops can be safely grown in these previously restricted zones.

Professor Jim Smith from the University of Portsmouth was lead author of the study. He said: “This research is important for communities affected by the Chornobyl disaster. Since 1986 there has been a lot of misinformation about radiation risks from Chornobyl which has negatively impacted on people still living in abandoned areas. We now have a validated, science-based approach for bringing valuable farmland back into official production while demonstrating safety for both consumers and workers.”

The team hopes this protocol can serve as a model for other regions worldwide dealing with long-term radioactive contamination. With careful implementation and community involvement, the researchers believe Ukraine could safely reclaim up to 20,000 hectares of agricultural land, contributing to food security and rural development.

“This isn’t just about Chornobyl”, said Professor Smith. “It’s about applying science and evidence to ensure people are protected, while making sure land isn’t needlessly left to waste.”

The post Bringing back the farm after a nuclear meltdown appeared first on Green Prophet.

On April 28, 2025, Spain and Portugal experienced a massive power outage that disrupted daily life for tens of millions. The blackout, which began around 12:30 p.m., led to halted transportation, communication failures, and significant economic losses. This event has sparked a critical examination of the challenges associated with the integration of renewable energy sources into national power grids.​

According to Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, the country experienced a sudden loss of 15 gigawatts of power—approximately 60% of its electricity demand—in just five seconds. This abrupt drop overwhelmed the remaining supply and led to a cascading failure that affected Portugal due to the interconnected nature of their power grids. The blackout was one of the most significant in recent European history, affecting around 60 million people. ​

Investigations and Potential Causes

While the exact cause of the blackout remains under investigation, several factors are being considered:​ Grid Inertia: The lack of inertia in renewable energy systems, particularly solar and wind, may have contributed to the instability. Unlike traditional power plants, renewable sources do not provide the kinetic energy needed to stabilize the grid

Preliminary reports suggest that a series of disconnection events in southwestern Spain, a region rich in solar power, may have triggered the collapse. ​

Authorities have ruled out cyberattacks but are investigating other possibilities, including equipment failures and potential sabotage. ​

Spain’s Prime Minister Sánchez has called for a thorough investigation into the blackout’s causes and emphasized the need for collaboration between the government and private energy firms. He stated, “All the necessary measures will be taken to ensure that this does not happen again.” ​

The Spanish government has convened meetings with major energy operators, including Red Eléctrica and Iberdrola, and announced the creation of a commission to investigate the incident. ​

Implications for Renewable Energy Integration

The blackout has raised concerns about the resilience of power grids heavily reliant on renewable energy. While renewable sources are essential for reducing carbon emissions, their intermittent nature and lack of inertia pose challenges for grid stability.​

Related: Germany powers down its nuclear power plants as Turkey fires up its first

Experts suggest that integrating advanced energy storage systems and enhancing grid infrastructure are crucial steps toward mitigating such risks. Investments in technologies that can provide synthetic inertia and rapid response capabilities are also being considered. ​

As Europe continues its transition toward renewable energy, the Iberian blackout serves as a stark reminder of the importance of grid modernization and resilience. Ensuring a stable and reliable power supply will require a balanced approach that combines renewable energy integration with robust infrastructure and advanced technologies.​

The incident underscores the need for comprehensive planning and investment to support the continent’s ambitious climate goals without compromising energy security.​

Energy resilience at home – what you can do

At the household level, energy storage systems like Tesla’s Powerwall can be game-changers. These units store solar energy and automatically provide backup power during outages. Tesla’s Storm Watch feature even preps the system in advance of predicted grid instability, making homes part of the solution—not the problem.

SolarEdge and Enphase inverters with smart load balancing.

Sonnen batteries, which allow home-to-grid energy sharing in cooperatives.

Heat pumps with built-in thermal storage, now subsidized across much of Europe. When Green Prophet was invited to tour Finland 15 years ago we met some of the leading heat pump companies. It’s normal there.

Clean Tech Companies to Support

There are several clean technology companies working to solve precisely these challenges:

Neoen (France): Developers of large-scale battery storage like the Hornsdale Power Reserve in Australia. Their solutions are designed to provide the kind of grid stability Spain and Portugal lacked during the blackout.

Moixa (UK): A pioneer in smart home batteries and virtual power plant technology, enabling homes to store and share solar energy efficiently.

GridBeyond (Ireland): Uses AI to manage grid demands in real time, helping to smooth out variability in renewables.

CorPower Ocean (Sweden): Developing wave energy as a consistent, grid-friendly complement to wind and solar.

The post Spain and Portugal’s Renewable Energy Blackout: A Wake-Up Call for Europe’s Green Transition​ appeared first on Green Prophet.

As Germany shut its last nuclear plant last year, the oil-rich country the United Arab Emirates has completed firing up its first.

The post The UAE goes nuclear – complete’s first nuclear plant in the Arab world appeared first on Green Prophet.

Australia has just approved to build the world’s largest solar energy and battery farm in order to export energy to Singapore. The project, which will include an array of panels, batteries and, over time an undersea cable linking Australia with Singapore, is backed by tech billionaire and eco activist Mike Cannon-Brookes.

SunCable‘s US$24 billion project is slated for Australia’s remote north and will power three million homes in the first stage of deployment.

“It will be the largest solar precinct in the world –- and heralds Australia as the world leader in green energy,” said Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek. Energy production is expected to start in 2030 with four gigawatts of energy for domestic use.

Two extra gigawatts would be sent to Singapore via an undersea cable, supplying about 15 percent of the city-state’s needs.

SunCable Australia’s managing director Cameron Garnsworthy said the approval was “a landmark moment in the project’s journey”.

SunCable’s first project, AAPowerLink, will harness and store renewable energy from one of the most reliably sunny and windy places – Australia’s Northern Territory –for 24/7 transmission to Darwin and Singapore.

This new project is a sign of the times as countries around the world move away from oil-based and polluting fossil fuels. Germany, for instance, decommissioned its last nuclear reactor last year in 2023 as nuclear is very problematic due to the radioactive energy it emits. Even oil-leaders such as Saudi Arabia says it wants to transition away from fossil fuels.

The post Australia to build world’s largest solar hub appeared first on Green Prophet.

“While countries like Germany have decommissioned the last of their nuclear reactors Communist and autocratic regimes are just getting started.”

As Turkey houses Hamas and gives up its hope of joining the European Union it ramps up its collaborations on energy with Russia on nuclear power plants, and now in the news ––  with China. Ankara and Beijing said they will finalize a deal on a new nuclear power plant in Turkey “in a few months,” says Turkish Energy and Natural Resources Minister Alparslan Bayraktar who told a Chinese broadcaster during his visit to the country.

While countries like Germany have decommissioned the last of their nuclear reactors Communist and autocratic regimes are just getting started.

Collaboration between Turkey and China in nuclear energy started in 2016, and since then negotiations have taken place to build nuclear reactors in Turkey, one of which will be located in the Thrace region in the northwest of the country. Local turks have tried to stop the developments but to no avail.

Bayraktar said the “landmark project” will be finalized with the unknown company and China’s National Energy Administration (NEA).

Read related: Russia builds nuclear power plants with Uzbekistan 

Nuclear energy plays an important role in reaching Turkey’s 2053 net zero emission target, according to Turkey. To this end, the country is planning to build nuclear power plants in two other locations after the first plant at Akkuyu, which is under construction in the Mediterranean province of Mersin.

Bayraktar considers three major issues that the country faces in tackling energy markets: security of supply, excessive import dependency, and climate change challenges.

A recent study showed how most young people would accept a higher rate of power if it were supplied by renewable energy. Nuclear energy is not a renewable energy. It is dangerous energy for people and planet.

He explained that security of supply is essential to meet the growing demand in the country, and much investment is welcomed in various sections of the energy supply chain to cope with this demand growth.

Turkey currently imports almost 70% of its primary energy resources, and the country’s energy policy is actively addressing this issue by promoting local resources, particularly renewables.

Bayraktar said that renewables are the key to addressing all of these issues, along with the addition of nuclear power to the energy mix. Ecological organizations like Greenpeace do not consider nuclear energy to be a renewable energy source.

The post China is building nuclear power plants in Turkey appeared first on Green Prophet.

At a recent forum in Sochi, Russia, Turkey’s Energy and Natural resources minister Alparslan Bayraktar announced that nuclear energy would play a “critical role” in Turkey’s journey towards achieving net-zero emissions by 2053. Like Greta Thunberg, Turkey and Russia consider nuclear energy renewable energy.

“We aim to reach a total of 12 reactors and a nuclear power of 15,000 megawatts, with probably four reactors in three different locations in Turkey,” he said.

Bayraktar said the country’s aim was to install two additional nuclear plants alongside the Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant, currently under construction in the Mersin province. Environmentalists in Turkey have been against the plant, built in collaboration with Russia, from the outset.

Funny that the true renewable energy leader Germany shut down its last reactor in 2023, while Turkey starts up its first.

The Turkish Government view nuclear energy as renewable energy. Nuclear is not a renewable energy source, but it is an alternative to fossil fuels because it does not emit greenhouse gases. Environmental groups usually consider nuclear as a non-renewable energy source.

The Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant is a large nuclear power plant in Turkey under construction located in Akkuyu, Büyükeceli, Mersin Province. It is expected to generate around 10% of the country’s electricity when completed.

“We have a great potential for renewables and energy efficiency, but we absolutely need to add nuclear energy into our energy mix,” Bayraktar said.

Some thought leaders at the Dayan Center believe that while Turkey has agreed as part of NATO to be a non-nuclear state, the use of nuclear as domestic energy will give Turkey an easy in for developing nuclear weapons. Erdogen said in 2019 said, “Some countries have missiles with nuclear warheads, not one or two. But I can’t have missiles with nuclear heads. I cannot accept this.”

Is nuclear energy renewable energy?

Has Turkey misread the room by calling nuclear energy renewable energy? The proposed expansion aims to reach 7.2 gigawatts (GW) of nuclear capacity by 2035 and up to 20GW by 2050.

Bayraktar has described plans for incorporating small modular reactors, which could potentially contribute some 5GW over the next few decades.

The minister also expressed the necessity of developing a balanced energy mix, combining renewable sources with stable base load power, particularly citing the intermittent nature of solar and wind energy.

Turkey’s sunny climate offers a high solar energy potential, specifically in the South Eastern Anatolia and Mediterranean regions. Solar power is a growing part of renewable energy in the country, with 12 gigawatts (GW) of solar panels generating 6% of the country’s electricity.

Wind power generates about 10% of Turkey’s electricity, mainly in the west in the Aegean and Marmara regions, and is gradually becoming a larger share of renewable energy in the country. As of 2024, Turkey has 12 gigawatts (GW) of wind turbines.

Turkey has a problematic environmental track record. Consider the environmentalists who were murdered over the construction of a stone quarry in their forest.

Being on the side of the planet doesn’t pay in Turkey. You can go to jail for speaking up against pollution or high cancer rates in children. Turkey’s leader supports Hamas and terror groups publicly. Are these the kind of society you want using nuclear power?

Just a reminder to Turkey:

1. Chernobyl Disaster (1986): The Chernobyl nuclear power plant explosion in Ukraine remains one of the worst nuclear accidents in history. A combination of design flaws and operator errors led to a catastrophic explosion in reactor 4, releasing a massive amount of radioactive materials into the atmosphere. The disaster resulted in immediate deaths, widespread radiation exposure, and long-term health effects for thousands of people. The affected area remains largely uninhabitable to this day.
2. Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Disaster (2011): Following a devastating earthquake and tsunami in Japan, the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant experienced multiple reactor meltdowns, hydrogen explosions, and the release of radioactive materials. The disaster led to widespread evacuations, contamination of soil and water, and long-term health concerns for residents and workers. It reignited global debates on nuclear safety and prompted a reassessment of nuclear power policies worldwide.
3. Three Mile Island Accident (1979): The partial meltdown of a reactor at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania, USA, marked a significant nuclear accident in history. Equipment malfunctions and human errors led to a loss of coolant and partial core meltdown in reactor 2. While the incident resulted in limited off-site radiation releases and no immediate fatalities, it caused public panic, raised safety concerns, and led to stricter regulations for nuclear power plants in the United States.

Want to reach out to the Turkish energy ministry. Contact them here.

The post Turkey thinks nuclear energy is renewable energy. Who’s going to tell them? appeared first on Green Prophet.

In a desert region full of oil, and well unlimited sunshine, Abu Dhabi still plans to go ahead and build a nuclear energy site despite the risks. Remember Japan? And Greenpeace, which runs an active unit in the Arab world and Middle East, called Greenpeace MENA, isn’t thrilled about the development. (They weren’t thrilled about Jordan going nuclear as well, in 2011. That seems to be off the table for now.)

After seeing the lack of Middle East oversight of dangerous chemicals in Beirut, some groups like Greenpeace worry about the dangers of a nuclear Arab world. The United Arab Emirates  will become the first Arab country to produce nuclear energy when commercial operations start at the $24.4 Billion USD Barakah nuclear power plant in 2020.

Until 2006, the six oil-producing states of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) had been vocally opposed to nuclear power in the Gulf, however, as Iran’s nuclear ambitions advanced, the position changed.

Once all four of Barakah’s reactors are operational in 2025, the plant will provide the UAE with 5.6GW of power generation capacity – about one quarter of the country’s anticipated energy requirements.

Greenpeace believes that this action will further deplete natural resources such as water, which is very scarce in the United Arab Emirates.

Currently desalination is looked to as a viable option, but creating it is energy intense. Creating a nuclear reactor to run desalination is much like a snake biting its own tail.

The plant in Abu Dhabi was set to open in 2017 but its start-up was delayed for what officials say were “safety requirements” according to the BBC.

The UAE is oil rich but despite that plans for Barakah to meet ts energy needs, as the region of seven emirates adopts more sustainable energy sources.

Two weeks ago the UAE sent a mission to Mars, another scientific first for the Gulf nation.

A threat to peace? 

The UAE also has plans to invest in solar, putting into question the logic of the Barakah nuclear plant. Solar power is cleaner, cheaper, 100% renewable and makes a lot more sense in a region plagued by terrorism and political problems over oil and wealth. See solar energy at Masdar City.

The BBC reports that “last year Qatar called the Barakah plant a flagrant threat to regional peace and environment. Qatar is a bitter regional rival of the UAE and Saudi Arabia.”

Greenpeace says they “condemn the start-up of unit 1 of the Barakah Nuclear Energy Plant, located in the Al Dhafrah Region of Abu Dhabi, as a wasteful investment in the wrong technology that will only deplete the scarce water resources of the Emirates.

Established in 2016, the Nawah Energy Company plans on running 4 nuclear energy units, the first nuclear energy plant in the United Arab Emirates.

Nawah will generate up to 5,600 megawatts of energy from the 4 units at Barakah, supplying approximately 25% of the UAE’s electricity requirements.

Julien Jreissati, programme manager at Greenpeace Middle East and North Africa, commented: “Nuclear energy is not the energy of the future, and definitely not the solution. With it we are leaving our future generations with nothing but a toxic legacy of radioactive and dangerous nuclear waste”.

He continued: ”The UAE has been a regional leader in developing and investing in cheap, safe and green renewable energy such as solar. This innovative country should keep its focus on capitalising on its abundant and generous sun instead of “betting” on the nuclear race. After the legacy of Fukushima and the high price Japan had to pay for relying on nuclear power, countries around the world – like Germany-  are opting for phasing-out nuclear energy not the other way around.”

Building new nuclear plants is more expensive and takes longer than building renewable energy plants, Greenpeace argues.

Building a nuclear plant in a water scarce country is just a bad and dangerous investment that will compete with the UAE people on accessing much needed water resources, the organization points out. In a region that has been prone to conflicts, the reactor also poses considerable safety risk to the people. 

The post Greenpeace against Arab world’s first nuclear power plant appeared first on Green Prophet.