The Luxembourg government will join Austria’s legal challenge to the €108 billion Hinkley C subsidy package at the European Court of Justice.

The low-key announcement was released yesterday in Austria’s Parliament, just days before the deadline for other states to join is due to expire on Monday.

“They will not make a huge fuss about it as they do not want angry phone calls from Downing Street”, commented Adam Pawloff, anti-nuclear spokesman for Greenpeace Austria, who has been working closely with Luxembourg colleagues on the issue.

But he said that the move was an important one whose significance should not be underestimated: “In terms of foreign policy and EU solidarity it is quite a statement for one member state to follow up a legal challenge against another and the fact we are seeing further member states joining shows there is a growing front against nuclear power in Europe.

“It is sending a message to all countries involved in building new nuclear power plants that nuclear is not sustainable – environmentally, economically or socially. We are talking about substantial amounts of state aid are going into this nuclear project at a time when nuclear is in normal circumstances not financeable.

“The support of the action by Luxembourg is a major setback for the nuclear lobby. And it sends an important message to governments, nuclear developers and the Commission as well which approved the package. You cannot allow this kind of heavily subsidised market-distorting nuclear development anywhere in Europe without expecting legal challenges by multiple states.”

Speaking in July after Austria launched its legal challenge, Luxembourg Environment Minister Carole Dieschbourg told the Duchy’s parliament: “Further massive sums of public money cannot put into an unsafe and unprofitable technology that will wreck the market price for renewable energy … If we take our anti-nuclear policy seriously, then we must join this lawsuit.”

Commission acts against Hungary nuclear state aid

In a simultaneous move this week, the Commission has taken the first steps in state aid and public procurement infringement proceedings against Hungary over its planned Paks II nuclear plant a little over 100km from the border with Austria.

The €12.5 billion Paks II plant is to be built by Russia’s Rosatom backed by a €10 billion loan from Russia leaving €2.5 billion invested directly by the Hungarian government. Under a deal agreed in January 2014, construction of two VVER-1200 reactors each of 1.2GW was due to begin in 2015 but this is currently scheduled for 2018.

One reason for the Commission’s action is that the project did not go to public tender, in violation of EU public procurement rules. In addition, says Pawloff, Hungary has been slow and obstructive in its dealings with the Commission, keeping it waiting for over a year before delivering key documents. “It’s a highly opaque and bizarre case”, he comments.

The Commission’s is proceedings against Hungary may also have a bearing on the Hinkley C case. The Hinkley package was approved in October 2014 in the dying days of the Barroso Commission in what was seen as a highly politicised decision which went against the advice of officials.

And one of the main points at issue in Hungary – the lack of any open and competitive tender process – also applies to Hinkley C, which was simply offered to the French parastatal EDF. And while the Paks II power plant is due to deliver power at €55 per megawatt hour, Hinkley C will cost about twice as much, £92.50 in 2012 pounds.

The move against Hungary therefore indicates that the Juncker Commission may not be unduly diligent in its defence of the Hinkley C support package when the case comes before the European Court – something that must be causing serious concern in the strongly pro-nuclear UK government.

Hinkley C prospects fade

Pawloff added that other states might also join the challenge to Hinkley C before the Monday deadline. It is no secret that Germany and Sweden, countries that are now in the process of decommissioning their nuclear power legacy and building up renewable energy, are unhappy with the European Commission’s decision to approve the UK’s state aid for Hinkley C.

Opposition to the Hinkley C deal was also voiced this week by Boris Johnson, Mayor of London and a likely future Conservative prime minister who branded the deal as “a disgrace” under questioning by Green Assembly member Jenny Jones.

“I’m totally with you on that one”, he said. “If you ask do I think the deal on nuclear power looks like good value for money at whatever it is £95 per kilowatt hour for 30 years, it just looks like an extraordinary amount of money to spend.”

And in what may have been a deliberate jibe aimed at Energy Secretary Amber Rudd and Chancellor George Osborne – who have slashed support for all forms of renewable energy and solar in particular – he added: “On renewables, which does not include nuclear because its not renewable, on other renewables, solar is very exciting and its great that the costs are coming down.”

A month ago UK Prime Minister David Cameron signed a deal with the Chinese President Xi Jinping for the China General Nuclear Power Corporation (CGN) to pay £6 billion for a 33.5% share in the troubled Hinkley C project. However EDF, which currently owns 100% of NNB Generation Company which will take the project forward, has still made no final investment decision, and indications are that it will not be taken until well into 2016.

Meanwhile works on the Hinkley C site have ground to a complete halt – and The Ecologist has been reliably informed that a team of 65 nuclear engineers working on the project with EDF in Paris has been laid off – with the detailed technical specifications they have been working on for years left unfinished.

Oliver Tickell edits The Ecologist.

Washington Bolivar, an indigenous activist in Peru has received another sinister death threat in the immediate wake of his efforts to challenge the destruction of Amazon rainforest for timber extraction and conversion to oil palm.

In the course of the last month, human rights defender, Mr Bolivar received the following handwritten and explicit notes in quick succession:

“WASHINGTON … WE ARE GOING TO KILL YOU IF YOU KEEP ON SCREWING US. THOSE LANDS ARE NOT YOURS … YOU AND YOUR FAMILY WILL NOT LIVE. LET US WORK IF YOU DO NOT WANT ALL OF YOU TO DIE … ” 

The precise source of the threat is unknown at this time, but local activists and community leaders suspect that it refers to Mr Bolivar’s well publicized support of the struggle of the Shipibo community of Santa Clara de Uchunya in the Ucayali region of Peru.

Over the last year the community has been actively opposing the destruction of over 5,000 ha of their traditional forests for conversion to a palm oil plantation by a Peruvian palm oil company, Plantaciones de Pucallpa (PDP).

PDP is one of many companies known as the ‘Melka group’ – registered in Peru with links to a complex corporate network controlled by Dennis Melka, a businessman who founded the Malaysian agribusiness company Asian Plantations – whose operations have been similarly controversial in Sarawak, Malaysia.

RSPO under fire for deep systemic failures

PDP is also is a member of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO), an industry body that sets standards for ‘sustainable’ palm oil production and works with independent auditors to certify good practice.

However a report published today by the Environmental Investigation Agency and Grassroots exposing serious shortcomings in the RSPO certification and complaints procedures. EIA Forest Campaigner Tomasz Johnson said of the findings:

“The RSPO stands or falls on the credibility of its auditing process but in far too many instances auditors are greenwashing unsustainable practices and even environmental crimes. Many major consumer goods firms now delegate responsibility for their sourcing policies to the RSPO and, by extension, to these auditors.

“If the auditors are engaging in box-ticking and even colluding to cover up unsustainable practices, then products will get to the supermarket shelves that are tainted with human trafficking, rights abuses and the destruction of biodiversity.”

But in this case the community’s struggle has been partly successful. On 2nd September 2015, Peru’s government concluded that the deforestation was illegal and suspended the operations.

And now the Forest Peoples Programme understands that the RSPO will investigate the case. The FPP’s Tom Griffiths welcomed the development, saying the campaign group was “glad RSPO is going to investigate these violations of its standards.” He added:

“We also trust that the RSPO will use all its influence with the concerned companies to ensure that no harm comes to community activists like Mr Bolivar. Mr Bolivar is now very well known internationally. All eyes are closely watching both the behavior of the Government and the Company in Ucayali.”

A wider climate of violence and impunity in Peru

Washington Bolivar’s problems are part of a much wider climate of fear and violence that persists in Peru. Almost 60 human rights and environmental defenders have been killed between 2002 and 2014. These include the well publicized assassinations of Edwin Chota and three other Asháninka leaders from the village of Saweto in Ucayali in 2014.

Mr Bolivar has informed the authorities about the latest threat including the Human Rights Ombudsman and the Ministry of Internal Affairs. But after lodgiing similar complaints in September 2015 after receiving other death threats at that time, the Government has failed to take effective measures to protect him, his family and the community.

“I am concerned but won’t remain silent, the world should know what Melka’s companies are doing to our lands. They destroy our forest and our biodiversity. The Government fails to stop this tragedy and then leaves our human rights defenders exposed to death threats and homicides. The company benefits from this environment while our people and the forests suffer.” 

Robert Guimaraes, President of FECONAU, the indigenous organization that represents the village of Santa Clara de Uchunya has reiterated that behind the violence lies the failure of Peru’s government to address its obligation to provide secure legal recognition for indigenous peoples’ lands and rights and to follow through on its international pledges to protect forests.

“Community lands were issued to the company by the regional government of Ucayali in complete disregard for their legal rights to their traditional lands and with no process of consultation or consent. I am calling on human rights agencies and the international donors supporting Peru’s forest protection plans to insist that the State meet its obligations to protect indigenous peoples’ lands and rights“.

Peru has made ambitious commitments to stop deforestation as part of its climate change mitigation strategy, pledging to reduce net deforestation to zero by 2021. However, as exposed by this case and a 2014 report these promises are undermined by gaping loopholes in Peru’s legal framework and endemic corruption.

Since 2010, Peru’s government has repeatedly recognized the need to secure indigenous peoples’ land rights – and has won financial support from international donors including the World Bank, Norway and Germany. Yet the promises have failed to materialize: some 20 million ha of indigenous lands remain untitled and continue to be issued to mining, oil, gas and agribusiness interests.

In December at the UN’s Climate conference in Paris, Peru will set out its ‘INDC’ commitment to climate change mitigation. The measures include actions to protect forests – but there are no clear commitments to safeguard indigenous lands and protect those defending the forests.

RSPO creates new standard

The RSPO today announced at its 13th annual meeting in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, its new ‘RSPO Next’ voluntary add-on to the RSPO standard to “provide a platform for innovative growers to demonstrate best practice in sustainable palm oil and help buyers deliver on their ‘no deforestation’ commitments.”

The new standard is widely seen as having been created in reaction to damaging allegations that the RSPO has failed to enforce its standards and that auditors have conspired with companies to cover up poor and illegal practice. WWF, which helped to creat the RSPO, said it “welcomed new initiatives to explore ways to improve and maintain the quality of the certification process and outcomes.”

“Continuous improvement was a core design feature of the RSPO, and RSPO Next is a tangible demonstration of this principle being followed”, said Adam Harrison of WWF. At the meeting, the RSPO also focused on how to better deliver on the existing standard.

“While independent third party assessment is at the heart of RSPO’s ethos, this new initiative also enshrines quality control of those assessments as a priority”, said Harrison. “It is not just independence we want from the assessors, but to know they can go to a site and ask the right questions and make good judgements on the adequacy of the answers.”