Triodos and the nuclear debate

06-06-2011 | Nuclear power is often presented as a solution to climate change and as a way to relieve the increasing dependence on oil and gas delivery. Following the disaster in Japan, nuclear power safety is back on the agenda.

Impact on world policy

Until the recent Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster in Japan, the nuclear disaster at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine, more than 25 years ago, was the last major nuclear power incident.

Many countries that have nuclear power plants or plan to build new ones, have announced a variety of steps against nuclear power, ranging from stopping with nuclear power all together, establishing a moratorium on new power plants, undertaking stress tests or undertaking reviews of policy. With the Fukishima crisis still continuing, it is too early to draw conclusions about its impacts. What we do know already is that the Fukishima-disaster was rated level 7 on the International Nuclear Event scale. This scale, coordinated by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), measures the severity of accidents. Level 7 is the highest level on the scale: a major accident. The Chernobyl accident was the only other disaster that received this rating.The Chernobyl disaster marked a clear change in attitude towards nuclear power on a global scale. Of the 443 nuclear power reactors that are operational worldwide, about two thirds were built prior to the Chernobyl disaster, and only one third after Chernobyl. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, there are around 65 reactors currently under construction. Only four of these are in Europe: one in France, one in Finland and two in Slovakia. The major nuclear power developers today are China with 27 reactors pending and many more planned, Russia with 11 pending and India and Korea with five reactors each under construction.

Zero tolerance

Triodos Bank does not invest in companies that are active in the nuclear power industry, including uranium mines, companies that are involved in constructing nuclear power plants, companies that transport nuclear material, retailers of nuclear energy and companies involved in the treatment or storage of nuclear waste. Our position is based on three key reasons. Firstly, we see nuclear power plants as inherently unsafe and the consequences of accidents as unacceptable. Secondly, we have concerns about the unresolved issue of nuclear waste. And lastly, the civil use of nuclear power often proves to be a small step away from the use of nuclear technology for defence or terrorist purposes.

We apply in-depth research to maintain our sustainable investment universe without nuclear power. And our results speak for themselves. In 2010, 15 of the 296 companies screened by Triodos Sustainability Research were not selected for potential investment due to involvement in nuclear power. Examples are electric utility companies Fortum, Iberdrola and EDP; construction companies Bouygues and Fluor Corp; industrial conglomerates Siemens and General Electric; and financial company Royal Bank of Scotland.

Triodos Bank will maintain its critical attitude towards nuclear power. We will continue to evaluate companies on the issue, and will express our position when we engage with them during the research and monitoring of our sustainable investment universe.

To learn more about the Triodos position on nuclear power, download our paper Why Triodos Bank is not financing nuclear power .

Note: The issues explored in this article are relevant for sustainable investments on the stock market. Triodos Bank believes that our socially responsible investments are a powerful means of promoting our values and working for greater sustainability, while enabling us to offer a complete range of attractive investment options to customers who choose to invest on the stock market.