The (not so) open and shut case of the EU's nuclear split

When Europe's first new nuclear reactor in 16 years came online in Finland, it was hailed by its operator for playing an "important role in the green transition"

- Jon Henley and Kate Connolly

The opening this month of the longdelayed Olkiluoto 3 plant, Europe's largest, means about 40% of Finland's electricity will soon come from nuclear reactors, which the government says will boost energy security and help it achieve its carbon neutrality targets.

Across the Baltic Sea and just hours before the Finnish plant came on stream, Germany was pulling the plug on its last three nuclear plants, Isar II, Emsland and Neckarwestheim II.

Greenpeace, the environmental group at the heart of Germany's antinuclear movement, organised a party at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin. "Finally, nuclear energy belongs to history," it proclaimed.

There are few clearer illustrations of Europe's nuclear divide. One faction, led by Germany, says the costs are too high and the risks from reactor accidents and toxic waste are, as the Green environment minister, Steffi Lemke, put it, "ultimately unmanageable".

Another argument, headed by France, says nuclear power is a reliable, low-carbon alternative to fossil fuels for electricity, and that phasing it out as Europe tries to meet vital green targets is ecologically damaging and economically senseless.