Bernard Accoyer: "the French nuclear industry has been very weakened"

Bernard Accoyer, former president of the National Assembly from 2007 to 2012, former deputy of Haute-Savoie, heads the association Nuclear Heritage and Climate (PNC)-France.

He publishes

A State Affair - The attempt to scuttle French nuclear power

FIGAROVOX.- In your book,

"

" power stations

Bernard ACCOYER.-

About ten years ago, France had reliable and cheap electricity.

This winter, for the second time in a row, RTE informed the French that in the event of an intense cold wave, rotating power cuts would be possible.

For ten years, the French have seen the price of electricity increase by 50% and for a few months, this price has exploded.

The government, in order to prevent the French from immediately supporting the rise in electricity prices - which should have reached 45% according to the CRE -, has set up a tariff shield.

This shield will have a price of around 16 billion euros;

8 billion will be financed by the State from its budget and another 8 billion that EDF will have to bear.

Having, in a few years, shut down more than 10 Gigawatts of “controllable” installed electrical power, has made our electrical system fragile.

It can no longer meet the peak demands of cold spells, during high pressure periods, when there is no wind, which was the case this winter.

Moreover, the price of electricity depending on the price of gas, the latter having increased considerably, the price of electricity has exploded.

The closure of these "controllable" power plants, that is to say that it is possible to operate them when demand requires it, whether they are coal-fired power plants, called a few hours a year, but especially when it comes to the Fessenheim plant, has weakened the French network and threatens the energy security of the population and our economy.

France is facing a situation that has not been seen for decades: power cuts could really occur in the event of high demand.

Bernard Accoyer

I would add that several reactors in the French nuclear fleet have had to be temporarily shut down or will soon be due to corrosion on safety circuits.

This situation aggravates the precariousness of national electricity production.

It is the consequence of the inattention paid for 10 years by successive governments to the recommendations that have been made very regularly by the Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN), reminding the authorities and network managers that it is always necessary to have safety margins in order to be able to deal with any contingencies or so-called generic incidents.

It happens, for example, that anomalies identified on the power plants require that several reactors be shut down simultaneously.

This safety margin was not respected and this is why today the closure of several reactors can pose a problem in the event of a cold snap.

France is facing a situation that has not been seen for decades: power cuts could really occur in the event of high demand.

Beyond this reality, a general power outage, a blackout, could also happen if the situation continues to worsen and an important demand or an unforeseen event arises.

We are in a situation that is no longer as safe as what we have known in recent years because the management of our "controllable" production capacities did not take into account the warnings of the ASN.

Read alsoIs strengthening nuclear power really the simplest solution for France's energy future?

France, while it had a powerful and comfortable electricity park, changed its energy policy.

It has disinvested in nuclear power to invest, at a forced march, in intermittent renewable energies, such as wind power and photovoltaics.

When the meteorological conditions are not favorable to the production of electricity by these renewable power stations, there is no current, even if the installed powers can in theory supply large quantities of electricity.

This winter, France had to import electricity, mainly from Germany, which comes from coal and is therefore particularly polluting.

If we choose massive recourse to nuclear power, how can uranium supplies be secured?

Is there a risk of addiction?

Nuclear-generated electricity depends very little on uranium supplies for several reasons.

First, France controls its supply in various regions of the world, several of which are without geopolitical risks.

Secondly, France has three years of uranium reserves on its soil.

In addition, the price of uranium is low and accounts for only 2 to 3% of the price of electricity from the operation of nuclear power plants.

The supply of uranium is therefore not a problem.

Finally, if France is developing fast neutron reactors, that is to say the fourth generation, the depleted uranium and the waste, resulting from the operation of the French nuclear fleet since France has had activities in the atomic field, constitute a fuel reserve of several centuries.

However, in 2020 France stopped, with the Astrid program, its R&D work on the fourth generation and the closure of the uranium cycle.

We cannot stop there.

Aren't civil nuclear power and military nuclear power two sides of the same coin?

Furthermore, in order to democratize the use of carbon-free nuclear energy, should the technology be shared with third countries?

None of the countries that have developed military nuclear skills have done so from the knowledge of civilian technology.

The dissemination of operating technologies for nuclear power plants is widely extended; it contributes to the fight against climate change.

Are the development of renewable energies and nuclear energy necessarily in competition?

The priority is to produce electricity without harming the climate.

In other words, we must abandon fossil electricity sources.

The question of developing such and such a technology such as renewable energies therefore depends on the energy situation of the countries.

In Germany, where coal is the source of a large part of the electricity produced, there is interest in developing renewables.

However, its intermittent nature obliges Germany to maintain its coal-fired power stations in working order and to develop at the same time a fleet of gas-fired power stations which is also a fossil fuel.

Gas emits 470 grams of CO2 per KWH, 70 times more than nuclear.

In France, where electricity is already more than 90% carbon-free, the interest in developing renewable energies is much less obvious.

This is very expensive and raises a multitude of problems;

occupation of land and landscapes, construction of a number of new lines, dependence on builders who are all foreign, supply of rare earths.

Bernard Accoyer

In France, where electricity is already more than 90% carbon-free, the interest in developing renewable energies is much less obvious and some consider that it is negligible compared to the electricity production of nuclear and hydraulic origin which constitute the French strengths in the fight against global warming.

Indeed, nuclear and hydraulic are the two controllable and carbon-free sources of electricity.

Developing renewable energies is very expensive and raises a multitude of problems;

land and landscape occupation, the construction of a large number of new lines, dependence on builders who are all foreign, the supply of raw materials: rare earths are held by countries in limited numbers.

In France, the question of the forced march of development of renewable energies has not been settled objectively but in a partisan and ideological way.

Bernard Accoyer

In France, the question of the forced march of development of renewable energies has not been settled objectively but in a partisan and ideological way.

France has not yet drawn any benefit from the development of renewable energies.

On the contrary, the amount of expenditure all combined (private investments and subsidies already allocated or for which the authorities have committed themselves for the years to come), is around 200 billion euros.

This is a colossal sum which, if it had been allocated to nuclear power, would have made it possible to have enough electricity whatever the climatic conditions and to export it in order to act effectively for the climate.

For real effectiveness in the fight against climate change, part of this sum would have been more intelligently used in aid to developing countries.

At the end of 2021, Emmanuel Macron announced that 1.9 billion euros would be devoted to the development of the hydrogen sector as part of the France 2030 investment plan. What do you think?

Europe, in which Germany has a great influence, has supported the development of renewable energies.

To compensate for the intermittency of renewable energies and to decarbonize transport, the use of hydrogen has appeared for Europe as a solution to be developed.

It is therefore a choice that stems in large part from the development of renewable energies.

The question deserves further study, but hydrogen will not solve the electricity supply problems of the French.

With the technologies that can be envisaged today, the handicap is of an economic nature because the overall efficiency of the electrolysis-storage-electricity production chain is very mediocre.

Hydrogen can be a heavy and expensive solution for storing energy, but for it to be a generalizable means for the decarbonization of transport, major research work is still necessary.

If we choose a massive recourse to nuclear energy, what to do with radioactive waste?

All industrial processes produce waste.

Electricity production is an industrial production.

Waste from nuclear activities (energy, research, medical) is monitored more than any other.

They are in minute quantities compared to other industrial and toxic waste.

The nuclear waste produced by France is all identified and stored on the surface in particularly safe conditions.

Furthermore, with regard to very long-lived waste, the radioactivity of which will last for several centuries, France has developed the CIGEO project to store waste 500 meters underground in a layer of clay which has not moved for hundreds of millions of years.

It is the subject of controversy among anti-nuclear, but this procedure is recognized as safe, it has been adopted by very demanding countries on nuclear safety such as Sweden and Finland.

The nuclear industry has lost five years since the start of Emmanuel Macron's five-year term, which came after the five-year loss of François Hollande's five-year term.

Bernard Accoyer

It should also be noted that highly radioactive French waste occupies a volume equivalent to that of an Olympic swimming pool.

This waste has been produced since the beginning of research and development work and operation of the French nuclear industry.

Thursday, February 10, Emmanuel Macron announced his intention to build six new EPR nuclear reactors and 50 offshore wind farms by 2050. What do you think of the Head of State's announcements?

Can we speak of an energetic “at the same time”?

The speech of the President of the Republic in Belfort on nuclear power is a speech that goes in the right direction.

It's never too late to admit your mistakes.

Accepting to affirm from now on that nuclear power is essential to have reliable electricity at an affordable price and “at the same time” to be able to fight against global warming, is a radical change.

Two years ago, it closed the two Fessenheim reactors which could have operated for at least another 10 or even 20 years.

In addition, yesterday we had the speech of the multiannual energy program (PPE) set for 2020 which provides for the closure of 12 reactors, in addition to the two in Fessenheim.

The nuclear industry has unfortunately lost five years since the start of Emmanuel Macron's five-year term, which came after the five-year loss of François Hollande's five-year term.

The sector has been greatly weakened.

France is in a difficult situation in terms of covering electricity needs at all times.

It is on the basis of this deliberate delay that Emmanuel Macron announces "at the same time" the continuation of the forced development of renewable energies which will require the construction of gas-fired power stations to cover demand at all times, which he does not don't say.

Emmanuel Macron announces three pairs of EPRs and an option for 8 pairs thereafter, leading to 14 reactors delivered by 2050, i.e. 1 reactor per year from 2035. Most experts believe that this is insufficient to meet demand, given the expected sharp increase in electricity consumption.

A realistic view of the forecast shows that around thirty EPR2 should be built by 2050, ie 2 units per year.

Faced with the oil crisis of the 1970s, which the electricity crisis we are facing resembles in many respects, France has been able to build more than 50 reactors in 25 years.

Three times more than the 14 announced.

Read alsoNuclear: “Are we heading towards an electricity crisis comparable to the oil shocks?”

This “at the same time” of the electoral campaign, intended to calm concerns from all origins, raises the question of its financial supportability and the response to needs that remain underestimated (over 60% in 2050) compared to the opinions of scientific academies and in comparison with Germany and Great Britain (more than 70 to 80%).

Indeed, on the one hand investments in nuclear power will be heavy, and on the other hand the subsidization of renewable energies weighs on public finances, not to mention their network connection costs exceeding 100 billion euros.

Reducing the share of nuclear power in the French electricity mix remains François Hollande's ideological choice without an impact study, but with the consequences that we are already suffering.

To prolong this choice is to persist in a perilous path.

The presidential speech remains imprecise on research, apart from the SMRs.

He does not say a word about human rearmament at the head of forecasting, regulatory, research and industrial organizations.

To succeed in the relaunch of nuclear power, leaders who are undisputed for their scientific and technical value and experienced practitioners are needed.

If the speech comes from a belated awareness, there is still a lot to do to give France back its autonomy and its security of electricity supply that it should never have lost.

An affair of State - The attempt to scuttle the French nuclear power

, Bernard Accoyer, Hugo Doc, January 2022, €16.95.

Hugo Doc