Russian-German coalition demands to stop nuclear waste movement from Germany to Russia

CCB • July 8, 2020

# Russia is not a nuclear waste dump! #

Saint-Petersburg – Berlin, July 2020 – The appeal to the authorities of Russia and Germany was signed by 47 national, regional and municipal non-governmental associations of Russia, Germany and the Netherlands.  The appeal is signed by regional and municipal deputies of the nuclear regions of Russia, as well as by experts and citizens who live along the rail route of dangerous cargo (about 2,500 km) from the port of Ust‑Luga in the Leningrad Region to the Closed Administrative Territorial Unit of Novouralsk (Sverdlovsk Region).

On July 01, 2020 at 05:33 the cargo vessel Mikhail Dudin once again delivered another 600 tons of depleted uranium hexafluoride (UF6). Under the contract, 12,000 tons of UF6 – chemically aggressive radioactive material – may be transferred from Germany to Russia by 2022. 

Olaf Bandt , Chairman of the Organization for Environment Protection and Nature Conservation of Germany (BUND): “The federal government stands by while part of the unresolved nuclear waste problem moves quietly and secretly to Russia. German nuclear waste should not be disposed of in other countries, putting lives of people in danger. Germany must finally complete the nuclear phase-out. Germany must finally complete the abandonment of nuclear energy, but as long as the uranium enrichment plant in Gronau and the fuel cell plant in Lingen are allowed to work, this is out of the question”.

Mathias Eikoff, Muenster Alliance Against Nuclear Facilities: “The federal government allows Urenco and its shareholders RWE and E. ON to take nuclear waste abroad: it’s very cost-effective, but extremely irresponsible – manufacturers and profiteers have no personal responsibility. Therefore, we demand from the federal government a mandatory and complete freeze on the export of uranium waste and enriched uranium from Gronau and fuel cells from Lingen.”

Oleg Bodrov, Chairman of the Public Council of the South Coast of the Gulf of Finland, Decomatom network : “If the German nuclear industry does not have an economically and socially acceptable technology for processing depleted uranium hexafluoride, it means it is waste. According to the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal of 22 March 1989, the German economy must find a solution to safely store these materials in the territory of Germany. Export of depleted uranium hexafluoride to Russia is export of the problem, but not a solution to this problem”.

Aija Caune , Chairperson of the Coalition Clean Baltic – CCB: “ CCB, the network of 24 environmental NGOs from 11 countries of the Baltic Sea Region, throughout its 30 years of work has repeatedly raised concerns about safety of nuclear installations operating in the BSR. We are calling on both governments of the Russian Federation and Germany to stop shipping nuclear waste across the Baltic Sea and gradually phase-out nuclear facilities as posing immediate risk to natural environment ”.

Andrey Talevlin , Chairman of the regional environmental organization ZA PRIRODU (FOR NATURE), Chelyabinsk, Coordinator of Decomatom network: “Russia should sign the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters and ratify the Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context. In this case, it will be possible to ensure equal safety standards for Russia with the countries whose businesses are trying to implement joint nuclear projects in our country”.

Vitaly Servetnik , Co-chair of the Russian Scio-Econlogical Union: “ It is irresponsible and unfair to move such a problem to a country with lower environmental standards and public control. Rosatom must stop increasing their profits by turning a huge Russian territory into a dump. This crime against future generations of Russians must stop immediately”.

Marina Ljubushkina , Head of the public reception office of the Spravedlivaya Rossiya ( Justice Russia) political party in Kingisepp District, Leningrad Region: “ The reloading of toxic radioactive substances to rail cars in the port of Ust-Luga and their transportation through the radiation-contaminated “Chernobyl” territories of the Leningrad region creates additional health risks for thousands of residents along the train route. This is illegal and not fair! Public discussions should be organized with participation of the public concerned and the municipality of Kingisepp District to justify the license for handling radioactive materials during the transshipment in the port of Ust-Luga!”

Nikolay Kuzmin, Chairman of the Permanent Commission on Ecology and Nature Management of the Legislative Assembly of the Leningrad Region, Sosnovy Bor, Leningrad Region: “A dditional regional legislative norms should be adopted in order to ensure the radiation safety of the inhabitants of the Leningrad region and provide for the real participation in decision-making of the elected deputies and the interested public representatives”.

Russian environmental and human rights organizations speak out against the import of uranium radioactive waste into Russia. More than 30 organizations signed a collective statement in November 2019.

In January 2020, environmentalists the signatures of 70,000 Russians against the importation of uranium radioactive waste to the German Ministry of the Environment.

In March 2020, residents of the coast of the Gulf of Finland who live in close proximity to the transshipment and transport facilities of hazardous cargo near the port of Ust-Luga expressed their protest against transportation of nuclear waste through the Leningrad region.  

The text of the PR and the Public Appeal to German and Russian authorities are available here.

We thank our colleagues from Germany and the Russian Socio-Ecological Union for their effective cooperation and support.

Contacts:
Oleg Bodrov
Tel. +7 921 74 52 631
bodrov@greenworld.org.ru

Don't reopen the EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). Implement it.

By CCB • June 15, 2026
The European Commission's evaluation confirms what environmental NGOs across Europe have long argued: the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP)'s challenge is not its design, but its implementation.

Joint NGO recommendations on Baltic Sea fishing opportunities for 2027

By CCB • June 10, 2026
The poor status and decline of many Baltic Sea fish populations have been thoroughly documented over several decades, indicating that the entire ecosystem is in great distress. So far, policy interventions have not reversed, or even halted, the negative trend concerning many of these populations. The European Commission itself recently recognised in its Common Fishery Policy (CFP) evaluation report that progress on stock rebuilding is lacking and the number of stocks “ threatened by collapse due to impaired recruitment has increased during the reporting period ”. Fish populations that once formed the cornerstone of the Baltic Sea fishery, such as the eastern and western Baltic cod and the western Baltic herring, are now doing so poorly that the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) is advising zero catch for these stocks. Yet, even with the targeted fishery being closed for some years now, none of these three stocks are showing sufficient signs of recovery. The condition (such as size and weight-at-age) of many flatfish populations, such as plaice, also raises alarm bells. The salmon spawning migration has fallen short of the target level in the past three years5. As a result, even the healthiest salmon stocks are now unlikely to produce enough smolts corresponding to sustainable levels in the coming years. To address the crisis facing Baltic populations and the broader ecosystem, political will and ambition to improve fisheries management, alongside full implementation of the CFP provisions, are needed. The recent INI report on the Baltic Sea Multi-Annual Plan shows that the European Parliament recognises the importance of ecosystem-based fisheries management as well as the need for consideration of environmental legislation when making decisions on fishing opportunities.6 Fisheries managers must now act swiftly and decisively on the commitment the Commission and Baltic Sea Member States made at last year’s October Agrifish Council to rebuild Baltic Sea stocks. This document presents the joint NGO recommendations regarding Baltic Sea fishing opportunities for 2027, prioritising long-term ecosystem health and sustainable fisheries management over short-term economic interests. The recommendations are based on the ICES advice, the objectives and requirements of the CFP8 and the Baltic Multiannual Plan (MAP), specifically to apply the precautionary approach and implement an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management, and the objective of achieving Good Environmental Status (GES) under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). Last year’s overarching joint Briefing Series on TAC-setting, co-signed by almost 30 organisations across the EU and the UK, including environmental NGOs, recreational fishers, and fishing rights owners, remains valid and provides further context, background and detailed explanations on the cross-cutting issues raised in this document. Read the Joint NGO recommendations on Baltic Sea fishing opportunities for 2027 here .