Fabien Bouglé is an expert in energy policy and author of
Nuclear.
Hidden Truths
(Editions du Rocher)
President Emmanuel Macron has just announced, Tuesday, October 12, the start of his French nuclear revival plan providing for a budget of one billion euros for the acceleration of the development in France of small modular reactors (PRM) while considering the financing of innovations in the field of safety and waste treatment. During this presentation, he should also specify that he had asked RTE - responsible for the transmission of electricity - for a study on this nuclear plan, which is paradoxical to say the least insofar as this company is managed by highly connected personalities. the development of the wind power sector in France.
In doing so, Emmanuel Macron accelerated his agenda, which initially provided for postponing this highly sensitive issue until the end of the 2022 presidential elections.
The gas shock with an explosion in gas prices and the timely interventions of many presidential candidates on the subject will probably have led the Head of State to urgently consider a plan to revive French nuclear energy, taking them by surprise. observers amazed at the speed of this presidential flip-flop, placing this issue as a major issue in future presidential elections.
At a time of this new European gas and electricity shock, believing in a dogmatic and thoughtless way that the multiplication of wind turbines could save the planet as a replacement or in addition to nuclear power is a perfect illusion.
Fabien Bouglé
Already in 1981, during the televised duel for the second presidential round between Valéry Giscard d'Estaing and François Mitterrand, two great visions were opposed on the subject, the first supporting the Messmer plan at the origin of the deployment of nuclear power plants on our ground and guaranteeing our energy independence in particular vis-à-vis oil and the future president advocating a mix of nuclear, renewable energies and coal.
Forty years later, the political divide remains the same.
And yet the issue of greenhouse gas and fine particle emissions from gas and coal fossil fuels denounced since then by the IPCC in its various reports has completely reshuffled the cards in favor of carbon-free nuclear electricity.
The challenge now is to fight against the excessive and unrestricted use of fossil fuels which pollute our environment and are used in addition to renewable energies.
Read also Emmanuel Macron chooses to display himself as a defender of nuclear power
And, in this matter, which the Head of State did not fail to remind you, France is the world champion in carbon-free electricity with its nuclear power and its dams which represent 85% of its mix, not producing in average that 50 grams of CO2 equivalent per kilowatt-hour is 10 times less than its German neighbor with an average of 400 to 600, which, with a mix in 2019 of 47% fossil energy and 32% renewable energy , places our neighbor in the position of a very poor student of the European Union.
Moreover, the announcements of the President of the Republic remain particularly disappointing given the importance of the stakes linked to our energy independence. That weighs 1 billion euros of investment in a nuclear sector which produces 70% of our electricity and consolidates 400,000 jobs in the face of the 250 billion squandered for the installation and connection of renewable energy sources such as wind turbines which produce less 10% of our total electricity for 20,000 jobs claimed by the sector on our soil?
Faced with this gas shock, the Minister of Ecological Transition Barbara Pompili seems to have found the solution, she announces on Europe 1 that it is necessary to accelerate the installation of wind turbines, forgetting the report of her own ministry published in March 2020 - " National low carbon strategy ”- which reveals that the reduction to 50% of nuclear power would require the construction in France of 20 gas power stations by 2027 with the consequence of a notable increase in greenhouse gas emissions. As a replacement for or in addition to nuclear power, wind turbines, with an actual production of 25% of their maximum capacity, lead to the need to open gas power stations that emit highly greenhouse gases.
To compensate for the production of the shutdown Fessenheim plant alone, 2,500 2-megawatt wind turbines would have to be installed, which, according to the wind industry's own figures, would represent a minimum total investment of 7 billion euros.
Fabien Bouglé
It is therefore illusory to believe that we can replace nuclear power plants in France or supplement them with so-called renewable energy sources such as wind turbines.
To compensate for the only production (2.2% of French electricity) from the shutdown Fessenheim power plant, theoretically 2,500 2-megawatt wind turbines (or 5,000 megawatts) would have to be installed, which, according to own figures of the wind sector, would represent a minimum total investment of 7 billion euros.
This senseless decision consisted in closing a plant whose cost was amortized and which would still be operational for at least 20 years while the 450 wind turbines of the 7 plants planned off the French coast over 500 km2 will have an installed capacity of 3600 megawatts sufficient to hardly compensate for the shortage of production from this plant.
Recall that, since its closure, Germany has for its part opened a coal-fired power station in Datteln to compensate for the closure of Fessenheim.
A shame!
Read also Energy crisis: the shock book that rehabilitates nuclear power in the face of wind power
At a time of this new European gas and electricity shock, believing in a dogmatic and thoughtless way that the multiplication of wind turbines on land and at sea could save the planet as a replacement or in addition to nuclear power is today a perfect illusion and leads us to to a new dependence on gas of Russian origin under German control. The chance we have compared to other European countries is to have this nuclear heritage resulting from the initial salutary decision of President Pompidou which will allow more than elsewhere to withstand the shock of energy inflation due to this systemic crisis.
Also, before seriously considering a Messmer 2 plan which should integrate all possible innovations financed by the end of renewable energy subsidies, in the short term and in the face of the urgency of the situation, we have this opportunity to significantly increase our electricity production capacity by reactivating the Fessenheim plant shut down more for political reasons than for technical reasons.
This decision, which appears inevitable in the current context, must be initiated as quickly as possible in order to create the conditions for an effective restart.
The question now is to know when the technicians should initiate the restart operations!
It is very regrettable that this announcement was not made by the president during the presentation of his recovery plan when he himself admitted with a certain humility to having made mistakes.
Today it would be a very serious political error not to announce the restart of the Fessenheim plant.