| Takoma Park, Maryland: Un nouveau
rapport, Low-Carbon Diet without Nukes in France (Faibles émissions
de dioxyde de carbone sans nucléaire), montre que dans les prochaines
décennies, il est possible, pour la France, de sortir du nucléaire
tout en diminuant les émissions de dioxyde de carbone de 40%.
Pour les partisans du nucléaire, la France est souvent présentée
comme l'exemple à suivre puisqu'elle produit presque 80% de son
électricité à partir du nucléaire, lequel produit
une quantité négligeable de gaz à effet de serre.
Le rapport de l'Institute for Energy and Environmental Research
(IEER) est le premier à présenter les technologies et la
politique énergétique qui permettent de respecter les mêmes
choix de mode de vie et les mêmes options économiques qu'une
politique énergétique basée sur la poursuite d'une
forte production nucléaire et de fortes émissions de carbone,
mais sans énergie nucléaire et avec une réduction
substantielle des émissions de dioxyde de carbone.
«L'industrie nucléaire met en avant l'énergie nucléaire comme une des solutions pour lutter contre le réchauffement de la planète» déclare Annie Makhijani, coauteur du rapport et responsable scientifique à l'IEER. «Mais l'énergie nucléaire est, à long terme, à l'origine de graves problèmes par les risques liés à la prolifération, par les accidents nucléaires graves et par la vulnérabilité vis-à-vis du terrorisme. C'est un compromis qui n'est pas souhaitable. L'analyse de l'IEER montre qu'il est possible, même en France, d'envisager un avenir avec de faibles émissions de dioxyde de carbone, sans recourir à l'énergie nucléaire.»
France Can Phase Out Nuclear Power and Achieve Low Carbon Dioxide Emissions
French Greenhouse Gas Emissions Rising Despite Nuclear Power, New Study Finds
Takoma Park, Maryland: A new report, Low-Carbon
Diet without Nukes in France, examines the feasibility of phasing out
nuclear power in France while reducing carbon dioxide emissions by about
40% in the next few decades. France is considered as exemplary by advocates
of nuclear power, which provides almost 80% of French electricity generation,
because the use of that energy source has been crucial to its relatively
low greenhouse gas emissions. The Institute for Energy and Environmental
Research (IEER) report is the first to detail technologies and policies
that could meet the same lifestyle and economic choices as a high-nuclear,
high carbon emissions future without nuclear energy and significantly reduced
carbon dioxide emissions.
| Nuclear power has not been the solution to
eliminating greenhouse gas emissions in France, however. Low-Carbon Diet
without Nukes in France shows that, despite the essential elimination of
the use of oil in the French electricity sector since 1973 and the reduction
of coal use, greenhouse gas emissions are high and have been rising. This
is because the main greenhouse gas emissions come from the transportation
sector as well as from the use of oil and natural gas in the residential,
commercial, and industrial sectors.
According to the report, the constraint is not a lack of carbon-free energy sources energies but that existing resources are devoted disproportionately to nuclear energy to the detriment of other sources. Official studies of the use of plutonium as a fuel in 20 nuclear reactors in France indicate that this aspect of nuclear power alone gets about $1 billion per year in subsidies. Yet, until the past few years total investment in wind energy in France had not even reached the annual plutonium subsidy.
"It is not possible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in France significantly without large efficiency increases in the transportation sector and in residential and commercial heating," said Dr. Arjun Makhijani, president of IEER and co-author of the report "The technologies are commercial or nearly so. But the official devotion to nuclear energy, including heavy subsidies for plutonium fuel production, has sidelined other aspects of energy policy."
IEER presents two scenarios that use official economic projections of high energy use to show that nuclear power would be phased out over a period of 30 to 40 years while setting a path to much reduced carbon dioxide emissions. The scenarios use existing technology or more advanced technology to achieve 20 percent and 40% CO2 reductions with a simultaneous phase out of nuclear power. It acknowledges that nuclear power must be phased out gradually rather than abruptly, because it is such a large part of France's electricity sector and because abandoning existing plants prematurely would divert resources that could be used for investments in efficiency and renewable energy sources, notably wind energy.
"There is no question that France will have to dig deeper into the advanced technology basket to produce the same percentage of reductions in carbon dioxide emissions as the United States," said Dr. Arjun Makhijani. "But the country that invests in that future can grab future technological and economic leadership on reducing greenhouse gas emissions."
"France has unfortunately chosen its technological leadership in the energy sector to be in nuclear technology," noted Annie Makhijani. "But France and the world are ignoring warning signs, like the statement of Ichiro Ozawa, the Japanese Labor Party leader, that the commercial nuclear energy sector could provide plutonium for nuclear weapons."
The French company AREVA, which is majority-owned by the French government, provides reprocessing services to Japanese utilities. Japan has a large stock of separated plutonium as a result, stored partly in Japan and partly in France.
The report notes that a low carbon, zero-nuclear-power future for France by the middle of the 21st century will involve significant technical and policy changes, including
* Regulations requiring new cars to achieve an average fuel efficiency of 100 miles per gallon by the year 2020 and improvements in efficiency of delivery vehicles and trucks.
* Improvements in heating and cooling in the residential and commercial sector that use existing technologies like co-generation and earth-source heat pumps.
* Government procurement of advanced technologies to stimulate innovation, in place of tax breaks for existing technologies.
* Abandonment of reprocessing and retirement of nuclear power plants when they reach the end of the licensed lifetime (40 to 45 years after start up).
* National policies to put wind, pumped hydro, and natural gas and, in the more advanced technology scenario, solar photovoltaic cells, at the center of the electricity sector.