DOCSLIB.ORG

Nuclear Power in France

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

A ALITANY LITANYA LITANY OF OF SECRECY, SECRECY,OF SECRECY, LIES LIES ANDLIES AND DISASTERSAND DISASTERS DISASTERS A ACOSTLY COSTLY A COSTLY MISTAKE MISTAKE MISTAKE A ALITANY LITANY OF OF SECRECY, SECRECY, LIES LIES AND AND DISASTERS DISASTERS A COSTLY A COSTLY MISTAKE MISTAKE ŹŹAtŹ AttheŹ Atthe Attime the timethe timeof time ofthe theof Chernobylof the Chernobylthe Chernobyl Chernobyl accident, accident, accident, accident, the the French the Frenchthe French French Ź ŹA FrenchA Ź ŹFrench A A FrenchFrench government government governmentgovernment study study foundstudy found thatfound that the thatthe choice choicethe choice choice ŹŹAt Atthe the time time of theof the Chernobyl Chernobyl accident, accident, the theFrench French Ź A Ź French A French government government study study found found that thethat choice the choice governmentgovernmentgovernmentgovernment told told itstold itstold people itspeople its people people the the radiation the radiationthe radiation radiation cloud cloud cloud wouldcloud would would would to to use useto toMOX useMOXuse fuel MOXMOX fuel has fuelhasfuel cost hascosthas ratepayers cost costratepayers ratepayers $800 $800 million $800 million millionmillion NuclearNuclearNuclear Power Power Power governmentgovernment told told its itspeople people the the radiation radiation cloud cloud would would to useto useMOX MOX fuel fuelhas hascost cost ratepayers ratepayers $800 $800 million million NuclearNuclear Power Power notnot crossnot crossnot cross thecross the border. the border.the border. border. The The FrenchThe TheFrench French French public public public publictook took notook tookno no no more more morepermore per year. peryear.per year.year. notnot cross cross the the border. border. The The French French public public took took no no moremore per peryear. year. protectiveprotectiveprotectiveprotective measures measures measures measures against against against against the the radioactive the radioactivethe radioactive radioactive fallout. fallout. fallout. fallout. protectiveprotective measures measures against against the the radioactive radioactive fallout. fallout. ŹŹTheThe breeder breeder reactor reactor ± on± on which which the the French French nuclear nuclear ŹTheŹŹThe Thebreeder breederbreeder reactor reactorreactor ± on ± which on which the Frenchthe French nuclear nuclearnuclear ŹŹFranceFrance has has exported exported tons tons of ofnuclear nuclear wastes wastes to to hopes hopesŹ wereThe were basedbreeder based ± wasreactor± was an an expensive± expensiveon which gamble. the gamble. French The The nuclear inin France France ŹŹFranceŹFranceFrance has has exportedhas exported exported tons tons tons of nuclearof of nuclear nuclear wastes wastes wastes to to to hopes hopeshopes were werewere based basedbased ± was ±± wasan expensive an expensive gamble. gamble. The TheThe inin inFrance France France RussiaRussiaŹ Francethat that will will hasremain remain exported deadly deadly tons for for thousandsof thousands nuclear ofwastes ofyears. years. to Superphenix Superphenix hopes werebreeder breeder based averaged averaged ± was aan 7%a expensive 7% capacity capacity gamble.factor factor The in France RussiaRussiaRussia that that thatwill will remainwill remain remain deadly deadly deadly for forthousands for thousands thousands of years. of of years. years. SuperphenixSuperphenixSuperphenix breeder breederbreeder averaged averaged a 7% a capacity7% capacity factor factorfactor Russia that will remain deadly for thousands of years.over over itsSuperphenixover its 14 14 yearsits years 14 ofyears breederofoperation. operation. of operation. averaged a 7% capacity factor ŹŹ)UDQFH¶VFLYLOQXFOHDUSURJUDPZDVFUHDWHGVSHFLIL)UDQFH¶VFLYLOQXFOHDUSURJUDPZDVFUHDWHGVSHFLIL overover its 14 its years14 years of operation. of operation. settingsettingsetting the the therecord record record straight straight straight ŹŹ)UDQFH¶VFLYLOQXFOHDUSURJUDPZDVFUHDWHGVSHFLILŹ)UDQFH¶VFLYLOQXFOHDUSURJUDPZDVFUHDWHGVSHFLIL)UDQFH¶VFLYLOQXFOHDUSURJUDPZDVFUHDWHGVSHFLIL over its 14 years of operation. settingsetting the therecord record straight straight callycally Źto to)UDQFH¶VFLYLOQXFOHDUSURJUDPZDVFUHDWHGVSHFLILgenerate generate plutonium plutonium for for French French nuclear nuclear weapons. weapons. Ź ŹFranceFrance has has a governmenta government-imposed-imposed dependence dependence setting the record straight callycallycally to togenerate to generate generate plutonium plutonium plutonium for forFrench for French French nuclear nuclear nuclear weapons. weapons. weapons. Ź FranceŹŹFranceFrance has hasahas government aa governmentgovernment-imposed-imposed dependence dependencedependence cally to generate plutonium for French nuclear weapons.onon electrical electricalŹonFrance electrical heating heating has heating toa governmenttojustify justify to itsjustify its reliance reliance- imposedits reliance on on nuclear dependence nuclear on nuclear ³7KHDWRPRUOLIH"7KHFKRLFHLV\RXUV´³7KHDWRPRUOLIH"7KHFKRLFHLV\RXUV´ on electricalon electrical heating heating to justify to justify its reliance its reliance on nuclear on nuclear ³7KHDWRPRUOLIH"7KHFKRLFHLV\RXUV´ ³7KHDWRPRUOLIH"7KHFKRLFHLV\RXUV´³7KHDWRPRUOLIH"7KHFKRLFHLV\RXUV´ ŹŹOnlyOnlyŹ now,Only now, 50 now, 50 years years 50 afteryears after the after the first firstthe of offirstits its 210 of 210 its atomic 210atomic atomic generated generatedon electrical electricity. electricity. heating Instead, Instead, to justify nuclear nuclear its cannot reliance cannot meet onmeet nuclear ³7KHDWRPRUOLIH"7KHFKRLFHLV\RXUV´ ŹŹOnlyOnly now, now, 50 50years years after after the the first first of itsof 210its 210 atomic atomic generatedgeneratedgenerated electricity. electricity.electricity. Instead, Instead, nuclear nuclear cannot cannot meet meetmeet FRENCH FRENCH CORPORATIONS CORPORATIONS IN IN THE THE U.S. U.S. tests,tests,Ź hastests,Only has the thehasnow, French Frenchthe 50 French yearsparliament parliament afterparliament passedthe passed first passed aof lawa its law 210a law atomic generated electricity. Instead, nuclear cannot meet FRENCHFRENCH CORPORATIONS CORPORATIONS IN THE IN THE U.S. U.S. tests,tests, has has the the French French parliament parliament passed passed a law a law this this demand demandthis demand and and France andFrance France has has to hastopurchase purchase to purchase coal coal-fired -coalfired -fired FRENCH CORPORATIONS IN THE U.S. recognizingrecognizingtests,recognizing has the the the veterans veterans theFrench veterans of parliament ofthe the testsof teststhe and testspassed and the andthe a the law this thisdemand demand and andFrance France has hasto purchase to purchase coal -coalfired- fired recognizingrecognizing the the veterans veterans of theof the tests tests and and the the electricity electricitythiselectricity demandfrom from Germany from Germany and Germany France in inwinter winter hasin wintertime totime purchase. time. coal-firedŹ ŹTwoTwoŹ majority Twomajority majority French French French-government-government-government-owned-owned-owned physiologicalphysiologicalrecognizingphysiological and and the psychological andpsychological veterans psychological of effects the effects tests effects they they and endured. they endured.the endured. electricityelectricity from from Germany Germany in winter in winter time time. ŹTwoŹ Twomajority majority French French-government-government-owned-owned physiologicalphysiological and and psychological psychological effects effects they they endured. endured. electricity from Germany in winter time. corporationscorporationscorporationsŹTwo ± majorityAreva± Areva ± Arevaand Frenchand Électricité andÉlectricité-government Électricité de de France France de-owned France ± ± ± physiological and psychological effects they endured.AREVA AREVA IN IN AFRICA AFRICA corporationscorporations ± Areva ± Areva and Électricité and Électricité de France de France ± ± AREVAAREVA IN AFRICA IN AFRICA wouldwould wouldreapcorporations reap huge reap huge U.S. huge U.S. ± Arevataxpayer U.S. taxpayer taxpayerand funds Électricitéfunds iffunds nuclearif nuclear deif nuclear Francepower power power ± ŹŹ7KH)UHQFKQXFOHDUSURJUDPLVQ¶WHYHQ)UHQFKRI7KH)UHQFKQXFOHDUSURJUDPLVQ¶WHYHQ)UHQFKRIŹ7KH)UHQFKQXFOHDUSURJUDPLVQ¶WHYHQ)UHQFKRI AREVA IN AFRICA wouldwould reap reaphuge hugeU.S. taxpayerU.S. taxpayer funds funds if nuclear if nuclear power power ŹŹ7KH)UHQFKQXFOHDUSURJUDPLVQ¶WHYHQ)UHQFKRI7KH)UHQFKQXFOHDUSURJUDPLVQ¶WHYHQ)UHQFKRI AREVA IN AFRICA is isexpanded expandedwould in reap inthe the hugeU.S. U.S. U.S. taxpayer funds if nuclear power itsits 58 Ź58 reactorsits7KH)UHQFKQXFOHDUSURJUDPLVQ¶WHYHQ)UHQFKRI reactors 58 reactors are are the theare American Americanthe American Westinghouse Westinghouse Westinghouse design. design. design. ŹŹ Areva ArevaŹ Arevahas has mined minedhas mineduranium uranium uranium in inNiger Niger in forNiger for more more for than more than than is expandedis expanded in the in U.S.the U.S. its its58 58 reactors reactors are are the the American American Westinghouse Westinghouse design. design. Ź ArevaŹ Areva has hasmined mined uranium uranium in Niger in Niger for more for more than than is expanded in the U.S. its 58 reactors are the American Westinghouse design.4040 years yearsŹ Arevawhere where has ± as± minedas in inmany many uranium countries countries in Niger ± it± hasit for has more than is expanded in the U.S. 40 years40 years where where ± as ±in as many in many countries countries ± it has± it has Ź ŹTheTheŹ French TheFrench French national national national nuclear
Recommended publications
  • Nuclear New Build Must Be Part of the French Economic Recovery Plan

    Nuclear New Build Must Be Part of the French Economic Recovery Plan

    SFEN Position Paper 13.05.2020 Nuclear new build must be part of the French economic recovery plan Introduction Whilst the primary concern remains the management of the COVID-19 health crisis, and successful easing of lockdown measures, recovery of a severely impacted economy is also of major national concern. During the crisis, the French nuclear industry (through its representatives, the CSFN1 and GIFEN2) encouraged an ongoing dialogue with the Government. The objective was to ensure the continuity of the public service of electricity provision, essential both for supplying hospitals and emergency service communications, as well as making teleworking for millions of French people and maintenance of essential services possible. It was also a question of guaranteeing, within the industry itself, the safety of employees, and the economic health of many small companies across the supply chain. As the economy exits from lockdown, it is essential that the economy recover, and governments are preparing ambitious recovery plans. Many economists3,4, several international organisations (World Bank5, International Energy Agency) and expert committees (French High Council for Climate6), have started discussing the criteria that these recovery plans must meet, including objectives to limit the economic and social consequences of the crisis, as well as paving the way for a ‘New World’. If this ‘New World’ is to align economic growth with climate objectives, nuclear power has a central role to play. As the third largest national industrial sector in France, well-established regionally and a strong exporter, the French nuclear industry is one of the engines of recovery. This is particularly true of EDF’s maintenance and investment programme for long-term operation of the nuclear fleet, known 1 CSFN: French Nuclear Industry Strategy Committee 2 GIFEN: French Nuclear Industry Association 3 Thinking post-crisis: reconstruction rather than recovery.
  • Nuclear France Abroad History, Status and Prospects of French Nuclear Activities in Foreign Countries

    Nuclear France Abroad History, Status and Prospects of French Nuclear Activities in Foreign Countries

    Mycle Schneider Consulting Independent Analysis on Energy and Nuclear Policy 45, allée des deux cèdres Tél: 01 69 83 23 79 91210 Draveil (Paris) Fax: 01 69 40 98 75 France e-mail: [email protected] Nuclear France Abroad History, Status and Prospects of French Nuclear Activities in Foreign Countries Mycle Schneider International Consultant on Energy and Nuclear Policy Paris, May 2009 This research was carried out with the support of The Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada (www.cigionline.org) V5 About the Author Mycle Schneider works as independent international energy nuclear policy consultant. Between 1983 and April 2003 Mycle Schneider was executive director of the energy information service WISE-Paris. Since 2000 he has been an advisor to the German Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Reactor Safety. Since 2004 he has also been in charge of the Environment and Energy Strategies Lecture of the International Master of Science for Project Management for Environmental and Energy Engineering at the French Ecole des Mines in Nantes, France. In 2007 he was appointed as a member of the International Panel on Fissile Materials (IPFM), based at Princeton University, USA (www.fissilematerials.org). In 2006-2007 Mycle Schneider was part of a consultants’ consortium that assessed nuclear decommissioning and waste management funding issues on behalf of the European Commission. In 2005 he was appointed as nuclear security specialist to advise the UK Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM). Mycle Schneider has given evidence and held briefings at Parliaments in Australia, Belgium, France, Germany, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland, UK and at the European Parliament.
  • Future Prospects for Nuclear Power in France ⇑ Nadia Maïzi , Edi Assoumou

    Future Prospects for Nuclear Power in France ⇑ Nadia Maïzi , Edi Assoumou

    Applied Energy 136 (2014) 849–859 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Applied Energy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy Future prospects for nuclear power in France ⇑ Nadia Maïzi , Edi Assoumou MINES ParisTech, Center for Applied Mathematics, 1 rue Claude Daunesse, CS 10207, 06904 Sophia-Antipolis cedex, France highlights Applies a bottom-up energy system optimization model to define future energy choices. Derive scenarios to explore different combination of nuclear policy and emission target up to 2050. Underline the resulting challenges in term of power capacity renewal rate and flexibility. article info abstract Article history: Taking different nuclear policy options from a French perspective, we look at the issues that we were able Received 15 October 2013 to pinpoint thanks to the TIMES-FR model. The technico-economic analysis supported by the TIMES-FR Received in revised form 5 March 2014 model brings robust lessons, whichever technological options are selected: Accepted 25 March 2014 Available online 9 May 2014 The cliff effect puts the French system ‘‘up against the wall’’: sustained investments must be made to renew electricity production facilities coming to the end of their lives. Keywords: This situation opens up opportunities to all industrial channels, with the main challenge being to sus- Power generation tain an ambitious pace of constructing new capacities and answering specific questions for each of Environment them, such as acceptability and reliability. Climate change In parallel, the current paradigm of increasing electricity consumption is likely to be challenged over the coming decades if environmental issues are still part of public policy. These factors make it possible to consider that the question of political options in terms of long-term energy cannot be restricted to a technological choice and must go beyond pro- or anti-nuclear lobbying.
  • Public Opinion, Party Politics and the French Pro-Nuclear Energy Policy Sylvain Brouard, Isabelle Guinaudeau

    Public Opinion, Party Politics and the French Pro-Nuclear Energy Policy Sylvain Brouard, Isabelle Guinaudeau

    Policy beyond politics? Public opinion, party politics and the French pro-nuclear energy policy Sylvain Brouard, Isabelle Guinaudeau To cite this version: Sylvain Brouard, Isabelle Guinaudeau. Policy beyond politics? Public opinion, party politics and the French pro-nuclear energy policy. 2013. halshs-00911445 HAL Id: halshs-00911445 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00911445 Preprint submitted on 29 Nov 2013 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Sciences Po Grenoble working paper n.6 Policy beyond politics? Public opinion, party politics and the French pro-nuclear energy policy Sylvain Brouard, Centre Émile Durkheim – Sciences Po Bordeaux Isabelle Guinaudeau, Univ. Grenoble-Alpes, Sciences Po Grenoble, PACTE November 2013 Partners // 1 2 September 2013 Policy beyond politics? Public opinion, party politics 1 and the French pro-nuclear energy policy. Sylvain Brouard, Centre Émile Durkheim – Sciences Po Bordeaux [email protected] Isabelle Guinaudeau, Pacte – Sciences Po Grenoble [email protected] Abstract: At first sight, French nuclear energy policy offers a textbook example of how technical, constitutional and economic restrictions, powerful interest groups, and path dependence, constrain democratic responsiveness. This paper uses what might seem to be an unlikely case in order to question explanations of policy choices in terms of technocracy, path dependence, and interest groups, against the background of an underestimated factor: party and coalition strategies.
  • Nuclear Power in France

    Nuclear Power in France

    1 Nuclear Energy in France Current Trends and Impact on the Bilateral Ties with Japan Dr Sunil Félix Nuclear Counsellor French Embassy in Tokyo Seminar on Nuclear Power Industry and WNE April 25, 2017 2 1. Current trends in France 1.1 The Past: Dismantling / Decommissioning 1.2 The Present: Gen III reactors 1.3 The Future: Generation IV reactors 1.4 The restructuring of the French nuclear industry 2. Impact on bilateral ties with Japan 2.1 Dismantling / Decommissioning 2.1.1 Fukushima 2.1.2 Monju 2.2 Generation III Reactors 2.2.1 ATMEA-1 reactor 2.3 Generation IV Reactors 2.3.1 Fast Breeder Reactors: ASTRID 2.4 Japanese participation in the new structure of the French nuclear industry 3. Conclusion 3 Today’s Nuclear Fleet One operator 19 stations 58 PWRs + 1 under construction 63 GWe 406 TWh/year* * 2012, EDF 4 The Past: Nuclear sites currently being dismantled Cooperation in the field of Dismantling / Decommissioning 5 Dismantling / Decommissioning Fukushima With JAEA, MEXT, NDF, TEPCO For e.g.: -conditioning of slugs resulting from contaminated water -decontamination of sites -retrieval of fuel debris -soil decontamination MONJU Non accidented plants : post-Fukushima 6 EDF a long experience in decommissioning and waste management EDF plants under decommissioning 1 Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) More than 15 years experience on its own fleet decommissioning 1 Heavy Water Reactor (HWR) EDF has taken 9 units from 6 Natural Uranium Graphite Gas reactors (UNGG) operating to decommissioning More than 15 years in waste treatment through Socodei : melting, incineration, onsite waste treatment operations 1 Fast Neutron Reactor (RNR) EDF is also preparing AGR EDF Main storage facilities decommissioning in the UK that will begin by mid 2020s Through the French regulation context, EDF is the owner and the operator of its own fleet.
  • Nuclear Power in France

    Nuclear Power in France

    Nuclear Power in France Dr. Luc H . Geraets Vice President, GDF SUEZ Nuclear Activities May 13, 2010 1 Nuclear Power in France (and Belgium) Dr. Luc H . Geraets Vice President, GDF SUEZ Nuclear Activities May 13, 2010 2 Agenda 1. Nuclear in France ()(and Belgium) in a nutshell 2. Early steps 3. From GCR to PWR 4. Fuel cycle 5. Wastes 6. Decommissioning 7. Research & Development 8. Nuclear capacity maintenance and growth 9. Economics 10. Human Resources & Public Acceptance 11. Risks Conclusions 3 Agenda 1. Nuclear in France ()(and Belgium) in a nutshell 2. Early steps 3. From GCR to PWR 4. Fuel cycle 5. Wastes 6. Decommissioning 7. Research & Development 8. Nuclear capacity maintenance and growth 9. Economics 10. Human Resources & Public Acceptance 11. Risks Conclusions 4 Nuclear Power in France in a nutshell 75% o f Frenc h e lec tr ic ity from nuc lear or ig in France world largest net exporter of power 9 Low cost of generation 9 Huge benefit on the trade balance (MEUR 3,000/year) Development of nuclear technology and exports 9 Reactors 9 Fuel products and services New build of Generation III under way 5 Nuclear in Belgium: GDF SUEZ nuclear legacy and legitimacy Stakeholder in Western first commercial PWRs 9 BR 3 (1962-1987) 9 Chooz A (1967-1991) Operato r o f 7 reacto r s in B el gi um (3 at Tihange and 4 at Doel) Tihange The Group capacities : 5 930 MW 9 Belgium 4 060 MW 9 France 1 170 MW (ChoozB and Tricastin) 9 Germany 700 MW (Unterweser, Gundremmingen B&C, Krümmel) Stre ngt hs 9 Independent from suppliers & vendors.
  • THE FUTURE of NUCLEAR ENERGY to 2030 and ITS IMPLICATIONS for SAFETY, SECURITY and NONPROLIFERATION Part 1 – the Future of Nuclear Energy to 2030

    THE FUTURE of NUCLEAR ENERGY to 2030 and ITS IMPLICATIONS for SAFETY, SECURITY and NONPROLIFERATION Part 1 – the Future of Nuclear Energy to 2030

    THE FUTURE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY TO 2030 AND IT’S IMPLICATIONS FOR SAFETY, SECURITY AND NON PROLIFERATION: PART 2 – THE FUTURE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY TO 2030 TO THE FUTURE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY 2 – PART AND NON PROLIFERATION: SECURITY FOR SAFETY, AND IT’S IMPLICATIONS 2030 TO THE FUTURE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY THE FUTURE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY TO 2030 AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR SAFETY, SECURITY AND NONPROLIFERATION Part 1 – The Future of Nuclear Energy to 2030 57 Erb Street West TREVOR FINDLAY Waterloo, Ontario N2L 6C2, Canada tel +1 519 885 2444 fax +1 519 885 5450 www.cigionline.org CIGIONLINE.ORG Addressing International Governance Challenges The Future of Nuclear Energy to 2030 and its Implications for Safety, Security and Nonproliferation Part 1 – The Future of Nuclear Energy to 2030 Trevor Findlay CIGI’s Nuclear Energy Futures Project is conducted in partnership with the Canadian Centre for Treaty Compliance (CCTC) at the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University, Ottawa. The project is chaired by CIGI Distinguished Fellow Louise Fréchette and directed by CIGI Senior Fellow Trevor Findlay, director of CCTC. CIGI gratefully acknowledges the Government of Ontario’s contribution to this project. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Centre for International Governance Innovation, its Board of Directors and/or Board of Governors, or the Government of Ontario. Copyright © 2010 The Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI), Waterloo, Ontario, Canada (www.cigionline.org). This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution — Noncommercial — No Derivatives License.
  • France's Nuclear Failures

    France's Nuclear Failures

    France’s Nuclear Failures The great illusion of nuclear energy greenpeace.org Catalysing an energy revolution The French nuclear Contents industry’s key players: 3 Introduction The Commissariat à l’Énergie Atomique (CEA – Atomic Energy 4 France’s nuclear ‘success story’: Commissariat) was established as a public corporation in 1946 and charged with overseeing research and development, up to a 50-year history of failures the industrial stage, of all processes necessary for the military 6 Climate change and energy security: programme and subsequently for nuclear electricity generation, including uranium extraction, fuel manufacture and nuclear power’s marginal contribution management of spent fuel and waste. Currently, CEA is a large French research organisation working mainly on energy and 8 Economics: defence technology. the underestimated costs of nuclear power A branch of the CEA was created to manage all its industrial 10 Safety: activities, mainly through the Compagnie Générale des Matières lessons learned or lessons still to come? Nucléaires (Cogema – General Company for Nuclear Materials), a private company established in 1976. In 2001, this merged 12 Security: with Framatome, the nuclear reactor builder, to create the Areva secrecy and unpredictable scenarios group. Currently, 96% of the share capital of the Areva group is held by the French state and large French industries. 14 Waste and decommissioning: Electricité de France (EDF) was established in 1946 through complex issues, unresolved problems nationalisation of a number of state and private companies. First and foremost responsible for overseeing development of 16 Proliferation: the electricity supply across France, today EDF operates all 59 nuclear imperialism, world at risk nuclear reactors in service in France.
  • France and Germany Nuclear Energy Policies Revisited: a Veblenian Appraisal 689

    France and Germany Nuclear Energy Policies Revisited: a Veblenian Appraisal 689

    PANOECONOMICUS, 2013, 5, pp. 687-698 UDC 341.232:539.1(44:430) Received: 15 July 2013. DOI: 10.2298/PAN1305687P Polemic Pascal Petit France and Germany Nuclear Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - Centre d’Economie de Paris Nord, Energy Policies Revisited: University Paris Nord, France A Veblenian Appraisal [email protected] Summary: Nuclear energy policy should have been a major area of coopera- tion for France and Germany, playing a lead role in the energy policy of the EU. Yet they have retained different options, especially regarding nuclear energy while the EU energy policy remained very indicative. These two “coordinated economies” should have been able to cooperate more closely on this issue. While the reasons for this difference in behavior have much to do with the specificities of the nuclear energy, they are more precisely related to the conti- nuously rising level of security requirements, a learning process in which the magnitude of risks and time lengths appeared, even before Fukushima, to go beyond rational boundaries on which cooperation (as well as market) ventures could be based. This raises the issue in the present state of the technologies of the possibility of an international governance of this nuclear industry. Key words: Nuclear energy, Coordinated economy, European Union, Energy transition. The support of the FP7 project AUGUR is acknowledged. See www.augurproject.eu. JEL: N70. This paper is looking at the recent turn in French and German policies regarding the production of nuclear energy. Germany has decided to phase out its nuclear power within a few years; France will noticeably reduce the nuclear share of its electricity production from its current 75% to 50% by 2025.
  • Nuclear Power in France Beyond the Myth

    Nuclear Power in France Beyond the Myth

    Nuclear Power in France Beyond the Myth By Mycle Schneider International Consultant on Energy and Nuclear Policy Commissioned by the Greens-EFA Group in the European Parliament V5 Note: The present report is in part based on analysis commissioned by the Non-Proliferation Policy Education Center (NPEC), Washington DC, March 2008. This document can be downloaded for free from the website of the Greens-EFA Group in the European Parliament at: http://www.greens-efa.org/cms/topics/dokbin/258/[email protected] The report is also available in French and can be downloaded at: http://www.greens-efa.org/cms/topics/dokbin/259/[email protected] The author wishes to express his gratitude to Antony Froggatt and Mary B. Davis for their precious proof-reading and most valuable comments. About the Author Mycle Schneider works as independent international energy nuclear policy consultant. Between 1983 and April 2003 Mycle Schneider was executive director of the energy information service WISE-Paris. Since 2004 he is in charge of the Environment and Energy Strategies Lecture of the International Master of Science for Project Management for Environmental and Energy Engineering at the French Ecole des Mines in Nantes. In 2007 he has been appointed as a member of the International Panel on Fissile Materials (IPFM), based at Princeton University (www.fissilematerials.org). In 2006-2007 he was part of a consultant consortium that assessed nuclear decommissioning and waste management funding issues on behalf of the European Commission. In 2005 he has been appointed as nuclear security specialist to advise the UK Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM).
  • The Future of Nuclear Power in France, the EU and the World for the Next Quarter-Century

    The Future of Nuclear Power in France, the EU and the World for the Next Quarter-Century

    The future of nuclear power in France, the EU and the world for the next quarter-century C. Pierre Zaleski Center for Geopolitics of Energy and Raw Materials University of Paris - Dauphine February 2005 Paper prepared for the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center Follow-up to oral presentation at the workshop " Is Nuclear Proliferation Inevitable?" (October 2004) 2 The future of nuclear power in France, the EU and the world for the next quarter-century The organizers of this workshop asked me to present my views about the future of nuclear energy. Speaking about the future is always a perilous exercise. The probability of being wrong is much higher than of being right. Just two examples: In the 1970s, the assumptions about electricity demand growth adopted by U.S. utilities and the nuclear industry were so wrong that they led to the cancellation of more than half the nuclear power plant orders that had been placed. In France as well, a too-high projection of electricity demand growth led to the construction of too many nuclear plants and thus the utilization of many of them in non-economically-optimal conditions (not in baseload operation). This was despite a large effort to export electricity, which has led to exporting some 15% of electricity produced in France. Today, in addition to the classic issues of electricity demand growth and of competitiveness of nuclear power versus alternatives, we have to face the uncertainties of rapid evolution in two areas: prices of fossil fuels, and the way CO2 emissions will be handled. These uncertainties may have a very large impact on the future of nuclear energy.
  • Contrasting European Hydrogen Pathways

    Contrasting European Hydrogen Pathways

    March 2021 Contrasting European hydrogen pathways: An analysis of differing approaches in key markets OIES PAPER: NG 166 Martin Lambert, Senior Research Fellow, OIES Simon Schulte, Head of Gas Markets, EWI The contents of this paper are the authors’ sole responsibility. They do not necessarily represent the views of the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, the Institute of Energy Economics at the University of Cologne or any of its members. Copyright © 2021 Oxford Institute for Energy Studies (Registered Charity, No. 286084) This publication may be reproduced in part for educational or non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgment of the source is made. No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies. ISBN 978-1-78467-155-6 March 2021: Contrasting European hydrogen pathways ii Contents 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1 2. Overview and Comparative Analysis ............................................................................................... 2 2.1. Policy drivers by country ......................................................................................................... 2 2.2. Hydrogen Demand .................................................................................................................. 3 2.3. Hydrogen Supply