![[credit: Electricité de France (EDF)]](https://tallbloke.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/edf_power1.jpg)
[credit: Electricité de France (EDF)]
But unlike Germany they will have 50% nuclear, so half a secure system in theory (excluding fossil fuel input). A side-effect of this policy could well be reduced availability of electricity supply from France to the UK.
Phys.org reports:
Lawmakers in France, the world’s most nuclear-dependent country, on Friday voted to cut reliance on the energy source from more than 75 percent to 50 percent within a decade.
The vote comes as part of an ambitious makeover of France’s energy use promised by President Francois Hollande during his 2012 election campaign.
The measure calls for renewables to increase in the energy mix for electricity production, rising from 23 percent in 2020 to 32 percent in 2030.
Use of fossil fuels should drop to around 30 percent.
The measure also sets a goal for a reduction of 40 percent in greenhouse gas emissions from the 1990 levels by 2030 and a 75 percent reduction in 2050.
It also targets a 20-percent reduction in energy consumption by 2030, in line with a draft project EU leaders are set to consider at an October 23-24 summit in Brussels.
France’s conservative opposition sharply criticised Hollande’s anti-nuclear stance as “ideological” and driven by a need to satisfy green parties which helped get him elected.
via phys.org : French parliament votes to cut nuclear power reliance.
Reference: Second France-UK interconnector by 2020
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
Speling misteak:
Thanks Bernd – fixed
It’s just bizarre when you think about it.
If Ferrari announced that they had a growing order book but had decided to cut production, then people might conclude they were insane. In a publicly listed company the CEO would be fired before the markets opened on Monday morning.
‘half a secure system’ should probably say ‘half a secure system without fossil fuels’
Reblogged this on The Sceptic Isle and commented:
Abandoning nuclear power is barmy…
Ben: try telling the Scot Nats they can’t do without nuclear power.
‘There is no room for manoeuvre, and no guarantee that England (which has similar problems of its own) will have the spare capacity to feed power north when Scotland stands in need.’
http://royalscottishgeographicalsociety.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/scotlands-renewable-energy-transition.html
I wrote about this a little while ago. Hollande made a pact with the greens (8%) in order to win power. Part of that deal was to close Fessingheim almost immediately and then to close 20 other stations by 2025. In the meantime, Hollande appointed his first mistress to run the ministry of the environment and energy (they go really well together !!). She then decided that everyone in france will have to drive electric cars (because they refuse to drill) and in order to allow that she is going to erect 7.000.000 electric sockets at the side of the roads.
The only problem I can see (sarc) is that there will be no electricity to power them. All this from a country whose annual debt is running at 4,1% and they “must” bring it down to 3% by 2017. Not a chance. The government that follows these socialists will be in dire doo-doos. Unfortunately, there isn’t anyone, except Le Pen, to follow. Juppé the fellon thinks he should be queen and Sarkozy is chasing the presidency as well. I wish we had a Farage here.
The lunatics really are in charge of the asylum here in france. I am still convinced that the german economy will dive into recession next year and with france and italy already there, protests are likely to break out across europe. Sadly, there are many muslims just waiting to jump on this bandwagon to introduce their war to europe.
The UK just has to get out. It is absolutely vital and to do that UKIP must somehow win a parliamentary majority.
Oh dear! No gas from Russia and no electric from France. Interesting times indeed.
The French are dumber than I thought. Whats the point? There reducing greenhouse emissions already with what appears to be a good system. Why are they going to screw it up?
When the House of Commons passed the Act to Change the Climate (or whatever the official title is) with only 3 voting against it, it persuaded other Parliaments that they too could pass inane and dangerous Acts.
Electricity demand is falling in France largely by a reduction in off take by industry, but is about 510TWh p.a. By my calculations 26% from wind would require installing 27,500 wind turbines (2.5 MW capacity, 22% capacity).
I know France is bigger than the UK but I wonder where they’re going to put all those without causing public protests (peaceful of course in the french manner).
I was about to point my fingers and laugh then I remembered that the people who run the UK are every bit as stupid as the people who run France.
Probably because they’re the same people. The EU commission.
Graeme No.3 says:
October 11, 2014 at 5:36 pm
The socialists have passed a law making it illegal to protest against wind turbines not that I think it will stop us. The estimate to power france with windmills is 250.000 but there are many parts of france, particularly in the middle to SW, where wind energy is very small. Most windmills are sited in the north, along the channel coast. They are even planning on putting some on the WW2 beaches. There have been some protests against that.
Big Al.
The problem the french have with their nuclear power stations is age. De Gaulle instigated their installation realising that there was very little fossil energy available in france at that time. Most of the power stations reach their max age in the next 10 years. France has to rebuild or find another solution. For the French, that other solution appears to (or even has to be) green energy. There is a massive gaz de shiste (non-conventional fuel) field in the Paris basin but the greens (greenpiss) and the socialists, won’t allow allow drilling.
The next major problem is that France has interconnectors to all of CE countries and the UK (2Gw) which rarely flow into france. Once they shut those nuclear stations the whole of europe will very likely suffer.
This catostophe will run it’s course before any of the european countries do anything sensible by then it will be too late.
It’s sad. I love france but their polis and the rest of european polis are just sick communists.
When electricity prices start to go through the roof, watch the French wake up and Hollandes popularity drop to virtually zero. Living in France I can imagine where this is heading. For the first time in their history the FN ( Front Nationale ) have got seats (2) in Parliament and come 2017, Hollande and all his cohorts will be out on their ear and a very, for France, rightwing govt will be in it’s place. Something to note is the ITER project. Whilst commercial Fusion via Tokamac is still a way away, the first plasma is planned for 2020. Scientists and engineers are, according to the ITER web site, already planning the commercial versions. ITER is regarded as important in a lot of political circles ( except Seguline Royale who despite being Brunette is a total Bonde ) and once the E.U. collapses as it must, because it is too large, too disparate and above all too corrupt, idiocy like thid will be flung out and proper forms of clean generation will be brought onto line.
johnnyrvf says:
October 11, 2014 at 6:22 pm
You may be right about the EU collapse but I really don’t think so. There is too much vested interest in keeping it going no matter what it looks like. As for france, I voted Le PEN for the EU elections but for government she is way out there and would be a disaster. If not her then who else ? Well that’s the problem. All parties, as in the UK, support global warming. The french climate unit won’t release any data unless you pay them and fulfil their licence conditions so very few french polis have the first clue about the current world temps.
The collapse of germany is starting right now but they won’t let it continue. They will drag down the rest of europe if they have to in order not to print money. They are the only country to have a “get out of EU clause”. The rest, including the UK will be fined and ordered to stay in. Quite how that will be enforced is of course another problem for the commitsars. I can’t imagine what the brits would do in that situation.
As the Germans already know, ‘planting’ the wind turbines is only the start of your troubles.
There’s the power grid destabilisation, unpredictability/intermittency, expensive new transmission lines and soaring power bills – to name a few.
oldbrew says:
October 11, 2014 at 6:57 pm
As the Germans already know, ‘planting’ the wind turbines is only the start of your troubles.
There’s the power grid destabilisation, unpredictability/intermittency, expensive new transmission lines and soaring power bills – to name a few.
Don’t forget the diesel generators to keep them turning (25000ltrs a week) because they can’t get the grid connection to function correctly.
Stephen Richards:
Whether 27,500 (for 26% of supply) or 250,000 wind turbines are installed doesn’t matter. Neither will guarantee continuous supply, so fossil fuel burning backup would be called on, so french emissions will rise.
The Greens in Denmark parade their “no nuclear here” propaganda ignoring the supply of such from Sweden and Germany. So presumably the equally stupid french Greens will happily accept electricity derived from fossil fuel without acknowledging it. So when the wind farms don’t give out a squawk France will be able to import it from the UK and Belgium…oops.
I feel for your dilemma; 2 years ago we had the same situation with a stupid government being led by the nose by the Greens, and what we were assured by the state media (and hangers-on) was an unelectable right wing opposition. Fortunately people ignored them and the new government has turned out to be far more centralist than many expected (or hoped). I don’t know about Le Pen, has she had experience in running government departments or projects? If not, I point out that Tony Abbott was “no hope” in a challenge to become Opposition Leader, but he represented something different to the government. Agreeing with an incompetent government won’t get Juppé elected, nor many of his followers. It is in the latter’s interests to dump him.
‘an ambitious makeover of France’s energy use’
Translation: ‘turning a reliable system into an unreliable one at massive cost’
Wind energy cartoon at Jo Nova: http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/artwork/cartoons-by-others/hunter/sitting-in-the-dark-600.jpg
@ Stephen Richards. All entities, whether physical or intelectual have a point where there is an opimum equilibrium. In the case of the E.U. it has increased too far and too fast, the former now bring it into conflict with Russia which twice in recent history inflicted huge negative tols on the respective aggressors. In regard to the latter in the last 16 years it has assumed at least 12 countries, poor ones that had been bankrupted under the old Soviet regime, this situation is not like west Germany re vitalizing the east (and there are still big problems for the German govt. to overcome there) , where there is a form of successful reunification. As the discontent grows from all over the E.U.; as it is based on corrupt monetary policy, the Euro and an appalingly limited political vision quite apart from an appaling lack of dexterity in foreign policy and with no real military to be able to back it’s edicts with any authority, I just don’t see how the paper tiger of Brussels can survive for much longer. Even if Merkel was to even try to get tough with Putin, and she can’t as she is in close political league with him, Germanies military would be crushed by the Russian military very quickly as it does not have the numbers or the weaponary to be a viable opponent. The E.U. is in very poor health and it would not take too many unforseen ( but only by the bling europhiles ) events to cause it to terminally fracture. It is only really a matter of if the break up is controlled rather than chaotic.
When was it that the “Iron Curtain” came down? People voting for Socialists in Europe (including UK) have very short memories. Socialism and big brother control leads to despots, poverty, killing fields, and eventual collapse.
Perhaps they’d be better off pouring research into Thorium reactors. A concerted effort could have this largely safe technology in a working commercial format within a couple of years if any of these plonkers pulled a digit out.
We have the opportunity to be the world leaders here, it is so different to PWR technology that NOT having much expertise in PWR is actually a bonus!
For heaven’s sake to potential for this would be for one in every village and no larger than a garage!
China and India are researching thorium, but it’s not straightforward. Also in the UK:
http://www.hud.ac.uk/research/researchcentres/iiaa/impact/thoriumpower/
Thanks for that. Interesting that they seem to be putting Thorium into rods which suggests a modified PWR system substituting Thorium for Uranium. This is not what the nuclear engineer I was talking to was working on. The danger with all PWR systems is and always has been the potential for a loss of coolant thus precipitating a crisis in containment. Also the radioactive nature of the coolant itself.
With a non water cooled system which used molten sodium chloride with thorium added to it, then kick start the reaction with a small pellet of nuclear waste for instance, this is used up completely [and incidentally supplies a method of reprocessing which doesn’t mean buried at the bottom of a mine] during the reaction. Once started the reaction does not need any further stimulus from a neutron emitter. The process operates at around 400c.
It uses a CO2 filled heat exchange system to drive a turbine with enough residual heat in the CO2 to drive a second water heating exchanger which of course would produce clean clear heated water with not radiation at all as well as abundant electricity.
Better still there is no ability to make weapons or threaten us with terrorists -if you stop the reaction by destroying the vessel, the reaction stops and there’s little residual radiation -no Chernobyls. The chamber actually has a sump plug for if it ever became necessary to do a SCRAM equivalent on it.
Anyway this type could be literally in your back yard it could be so compact. Once the initial heat to melt the salt has been supplied and the pellet of spent uranium has been added to start things, it only produces energy and doesn’t take any to maintain, feeding thorium in every now and then is likely the only addition needed.
Simple, which is why the money men won’t like it. Positively engineered to have as few moving parts as possible with almost zero danger if the container failed for some reason, it won’t put mega bucks in their pockets -unless they scale down and make it available to small communities, have a warranty which includes supply of consumables like spent uranium, salt and CO2, a maintenance contract etc………yeah that could be viable and still considerably cheaper than any other generation system around.
Ironically the guy that invented both the Thorium reactor concept and the uranium PWR concept warned against PWR saying it was too, too dangerous. but of course the yanks wanted fissile material for bombs so we don’t need high IQs to work out why things went the way they did.
Italy will become the first country in Europe to legally require “advanced biofuels” in cars and trucks, the BBC has learned.
…
From 2018, all fuel suppliers in the country will have to include 0.6% advanced biofuel in petrol and diesel.
The use of fuels made from crops has been a controversial issue across the EU in recent years.
A Renewable Energy Directive, adopted in 2009, required that 10% of energy used within the transport sector came from renewable sources.
Amid concerns that land was being converted from food production to grow crops for biofuels, the EU ultimately reduced this to 5.75%.
At the same time, the European Parliament voted to require a 2.5% target for advanced biofuels by 2020.
However European Council of energy ministers diluted this to a non-binding goal of 0.5% much to the dismay of the biofuels industry. [!!]
Now the Italian government have given the enterprise a shot in the arm.
A ministerial decree, seen by the BBC, requires 0.6% of all petrol and diesel contain advanced biofuels from 2018. This rises to 1% by 2022.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-29618889
‘It also targets a 20-percent reduction in energy consumption by 2030’
And they want 2 million electric cars by 2020? Does not compute.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/09/30/electriccars-france-idUSLU28944520090930