Editing Greenpeace (section)

===Nuclear power===
{{Anti-nuclear movement sidebar}}
Greenpeace is opposed to [[nuclear power]] because it views it as "dangerous, polluting, expensive and non-renewable". The organization highlights the [[Chernobyl disaster|Chernobyl nuclear disaster of 1986]] and [[Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster|Fukushima nuclear disaster of 2011]] as evidence of the risk nuclear power can pose to people's lives, the environment and the economy.<ref>[http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/climate-change/Solutions/Reject-false-solutions/No-to-nuclear/ Nuclear power is part of the problem] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170205181849/http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/climate-change/Solutions/Reject-false-solutions/No-to-nuclear/ |date=5 February 2017 }}. Greenpeace. Published 1 July 2016. Retrieved 5 February 2017.</ref> Greenpeace views the benefits of nuclear power to be relatively minor in comparison to its major problems and risks, such as environmental damage and risks from [[uranium mining]], nuclear weapons proliferation, and unresolved questions concerning [[nuclear waste]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/nuclear/problems |title=Nuclear Problems |publisher=Greenpeace.org.uk |access-date=23 November 2012 |archive-date=20 June 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120620200301/http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/nuclear/problems |url-status=live }}</ref>

The organization argues that the potential of nuclear power to [[Mitigation of global warming|mitigate global warming]] is marginal, referring to the [[International Energy Agency|IEA]] energy scenario where an increase in world's nuclear capacity from 2608&nbsp;TWh in 2007 to 9857&nbsp;TWh by 2050 would cut global greenhouse gas emissions less than 5% and require 32 nuclear reactor units of 1000&nbsp;MW capacity built per year until 2050. According to Greenpeace, the slow construction times, construction delays, and hidden costs all negate nuclear power's mitigation potential. This makes the IEA scenario technically and financially unrealistic. They also argue that binding massive amounts of investments on nuclear energy would take funding away from more effective solutions.<ref name="greenpeace1"/> Greenpeace views the construction of [[European Pressurized Reactor#Olkiluoto 3 pilot power plant|Olkiluoto 3]] nuclear power plant in [[Finland]] as an example of the problems on building new nuclear power.<ref name="waste of time">{{cite web |url=http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/international/press/reports/nuclear-power-a-dangerous-was.pdf |title=Greenpeace International: 'Nuclear Power: a dangerous waste of time' |access-date=21 February 2011 |archive-date=15 February 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100215124620/http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/international/press/reports/nuclear-power-a-dangerous-was.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref>

In 2022, Greenpeace threatened to sue the European Union after it proposed to categorize nuclear power as a "green" technology that helps countries reduce {{CO2}} emissions.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Abnett |first=Kate |date=2023-02-09 |title=Greenpeace to sue EU over 'green' label for gas and nuclear |language=en |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/greenpeace-sue-eu-over-green-label-gas-nuclear-2023-02-09/}}</ref>

Greenpeace celebrated the phaseout of nuclear power in Germany in 2023.<ref>{{Cite web |title= Greenpeace celebrates end of Germany's nuclear era with T.Rex dinosaur |url=https://www.euronews.com/video/2023/04/15/greenpeace-celebrates-end-of-germanys-nuclear-era-with-trex-dinosaur |website=euronews |format=Video|date=15 April 2023 |language=en}}</ref> At the time, Germany was experiencing an energy crisis and relying heavily on coal and gas for power generation.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-04-16 |title=Climate activists in Germany rejoice at wind-down of nuclear plants |url=https://www.euronews.com/2023/04/16/climate-activists-in-germany-rejoice-at-wind-down-of-the-last-nuclear-plants |website=euronews |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Kappeler |first=Laura Paddison Nadine Schmidt Inke |date=2023-04-15 |title='A new era': Germany quits nuclear power, closing its final three plants |url=https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/15/europe/germany-nuclear-phase-out-climate-intl/index.html |website=CNN |language=en}}</ref>

====Anti-nuclear advertisement====
In 1994, Greenpeace published an anti-nuclear newspaper advert which included a claim that nuclear facilities in [[Sellafield]] would kill 2,000 people in the next 10 years, and an image of a [[hydrocephalus]]-affected child said to be a victim of [[Semipalatinsk Test Site|nuclear weapons testing in Kazakhstan]]. [[Advertising Standards Authority (United Kingdom)|Advertising Standards Authority]] viewed the claim concerning Sellafield as unsubstantiated, lacking any scientific base. This resulted in the banning of the advert. Greenpeace did not admit fault, stating that a Kazakhstan doctor had said that the child's condition was due to nuclear testing even though no nuclear weapons testing is performed in Sellafield.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/greenpeace-accused-of-telling-lies-in-advert-watchdog-bans-antinuclear-image-1447196.html |title=Greenpeace accused of telling lies in advert |newspaper=The Independent |date=7 September 1994 |access-date=13 December 2009 |location=London |first=Rhys |last=Williams |archive-date=25 September 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150925161915/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/greenpeace-accused-of-telling-lies-in-advert-watchdog-bans-antinuclear-image-1447196.html |url-status=live }}</ref>

====EDF spying conviction and appeal====
In 2011, a French court fined [[Électricité de France]] (EDF) €1.5m and jailed two senior employees for spying on Greenpeace, including hacking into Greenpeace's computer systems. Greenpeace was awarded €500,000 in damages.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15683090 |title=EDF fined for spying on Greenpeace nuclear campaign |first=Richard |last=Black |work=BBC |date=10 November 2011 |access-date=11 November 2011 |archive-date=28 November 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201128194211/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15683090 |url-status=live }}</ref> Although EDF claimed that a security firm had only been employed to monitor Greenpeace, the court disagreed, jailing the head and deputy head of EDF's nuclear security operation for three years each. EDF appealed the conviction, the company was cleared of conspiracy to spy on Greenpeace and the fine was cancelled.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/net-us-france-edf-hacking-idUSBRE9150YH20130206 |title=French court throws out EDF guilty verdict in hacking case |agency=Reuters |work=Reuters |date=6 November 2013 |access-date=27 August 2013 |archive-date=15 October 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151015231129/http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/06/net-us-france-edf-hacking-idUSBRE9150YH20130206 |url-status=live }}</ref> Two employees of the security firm, Kargus, run by a former member of France's secret services, received sentences of three and two years respectively.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/nov/10/edf-spying-greenpeace |title=EDF fined €1.5m for spying on Greenpeace |first=Hanna |last=Gersmann |newspaper=The Guardian |date=10 November 2011 |access-date=11 November 2011 |location=London |archive-date=23 December 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131223194429/http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/nov/10/edf-spying-greenpeace |url-status=live }}</ref>