#EnergyTransition: Ambitious targets and impossible goals

In November Nicolas Hulot gave up the goal of the reduction of nuclear power share to 50% by 2025. For the masses this seemed to be a breach of election promises, but promises only bind those who believe in them. Nuclear experts knew from the beginning that such a reduction of nuclear share by 2025 was technically impossible. We cannot shut down between 17 and 20 reactors within such a short time. This is exactly what the report of the "Energies 2050" Commission was saying. This commission, which I was chairing at the time, was intended to examine several energy scenarios in France (nuclear scenarios, in particular). Our report was submitted in February 2012 to the Energy Minister Eric Besson, writes Jacques Percebois, Emeritus Professor at Montpellier University, Director of the Energy Economics and Law Research Center (CREDEN).

On the other hand, the goal stated by Jean-Bernard Lévy to "build 30, 35, or 40 new EPR" by 2050 seems very ambitious to me, but not impossible if two conditions are met:

• Several NPPs shutdown; over this period it becomes possible since if we extend the reactors' life for 20 years, by 2050 they will all have reached or exceeded the 60 years functioning limit.
• if the EPR being under construction is a technical and economic success, which has yet to be proved. The question is whether the option selected will be the EPR or a new type of reactors (eg SMR standing for small modular reactors).

In addition to the EPR and SMR, there is another type of Generation IV reactors, which was already developed in France under the name «Superphénix», but was later abandoned. Today this model only works in Russia in Beloyarsk. For now, there is the ASTRID project in France - a sodium-cooled fast experimental reactor. It is an improved version of the former breeder «Superphénix». The advantage of this project is the possibility of using the plutonium as nuclear fuel and thus reducing the dependence on the uranium supply. The prototype, however, will not be ready until 2030. France, no longer having fast-neutron reactors, is experimenting on its breeder via the cooperation with Russia and the countries discuss the prospects of this technology in the framework of the Generation IV International Forum.

Regarding renewables, the target of doubling their capacity is also an ambitious one, but not impossible. In fact, the main uncertainty in the development of renewables is linked to changing electricity demand. This demand is relatively low today but it can increase with new uses like the electric vehicle.

France, in its turn, is a virtuous country in relation to CO² emissions, on the ground that its electricity production is highly (more than 92%) decarbonized, basing on nuclear, hydro, solar and wind sources. Currently, the government wants to increase the tax on CO² discharge and strengthen the standards for greenhouse gas emissions in the building and transport sectors. In my opinion, it's a very good choice. The problem is that in the European Union market the CO² emissions quota is too low (7 euros per tonne of gases). If we succeed in setting a CO2 floor price, the significant achievements could be made, but Germany and Poland are to hamper the progress towards this goal because they heavily depend on coal.

I am certain that only one country of the EU will abolish the use nuclear power for cultural reasons - Germany. But I do not think Switzerland will completely abandon nuclear energy.

In November 2016 in Switzerland the referendum on the new NPPs construction renunciation and the existing plants dismantling by 2050 was held. This time the initiative was rejected by the population, but in May 2017 the same initiative passed. This indicates that the referendum is not an immaculate option because public opinion changes quickly and is not always based on scientific knowledge. That is the spirit of our the times: we criticize nuclear power but if tomorrow there is an electric blackout in Europe (especially in Switzerland), the population will change its mind again. The main problem of politics is that decision-makers shouldn't follow the opinion polls to develop a long-term policy but should pursue the general good.

Share this article: