Shellenberger opined in mid-September, 2022 that, last year, he praised French President Emmanuel Macron for offering an inspiring vision of nuclear energy’s future, complete with a stunning, must-watch video, called “The Dream is Possible,” of nuclear’s high-tech past and future. Since then, France’s nuclear power plants have stumbled badly. France had, for many years, been the backbone of Europe, providing about 15% of the continent’s total electricity supply. But in 2022, for the first time ever, France became a net importer of electricity, especially coal power from Germany, because its nuclear power plants are producing at a 30-year low [becasue of lower output due to rising river water temperatures for cooling of fuel and need for associated operation and maintenance repairs].
The main cause is overdue repairs brought on by the neglect and lack of appreciation of nuclear power. Over half of France's 56 nuclear reactors are offline for maintenance and inspections. Twelve of those reactors have corrosion issues. They can all be fixed, and perhaps as early as December, but it may take longer. The outages couldn’t have occurred at worse time given the loss of most Russian natural gas supplies in retaliation for Europe’s support for Ukraine in its war against Russia.
In response, Macron last month said that the energy crisis signaled “the end of abundance.” When Gabriel Bouchard, an editor with Le Point, an influential French magazine read by Macron, asked me what I thought, I didn’t hold back. “Give me back the Macron of 2021!” (see Figure).
We conducted the interview in English, Le Point translated it into French, and I used Google to translate it back into English. The result is that I sound, well, French.
Here’s Bouchaud’s introduction:
“The end of abundance and carelessness” — this is the terrible prediction of the President of the French Republic. Why? Because the European Union has become dangerously dependent on Russian gas. However, the latter has decided to wage a war of conquest in Ukraine that it is unthinkable to support, even indirectly, by continuing to buy energy from Vladimir Putin. The problem with Emmanuel Macron's declaration is that energy abundance in Europe only depends on Vladimir Putin because we wanted it to, explains Michael Shellenberger, American essayist and defender of nuclear power, which he says would allow France to emerge from the climate challenge on top. According to Shellenberger, Europe’s energy crisis is due above all to the failure of Western leaders. Explosive interview.”
Le Point: Do you think, like Emmanuel Macron, that we are coming to the end of abundance in Europe?
Michael Shellenberger: Of course not, that's nonsense. That Emmanuel Macron and EDF failed to properly maintain the jewels of Europe's energy system, namely France's nuclear power plants, would mean that Europeans must become poor? This is factually false.
The problem is of technical origin: the pipe welds had not been properly inspected and maintained. These are machines! It's not sorcery and it's nowhere near as difficult as launching a telescope into space, doing nuclear fusion, or sending a robot to Mars. We are talking about pipes welded together. Obviously, this work must be done well. It must be regularly inspected. But they are machines, nothing more nor less.
I am disappointed with Emmanuel Macron. A year ago, he produced a superb video concerning his France 2030 plan, recalling the technological prowess of which France was capable. What happened to him? Who is this impostor, so easily defeated by a question of maintenance of the nuclear fleet? Give me back the Macron of 2021! (Figure)
However, the geopolitical and energy crisis we are experiencing is very real.
Yes, but it should have been the moment of glory for the French nuclear industry. And the opposite happened; it breaks my heart. The failure of the French nuclear plants at a time when Europe needs them most is a direct consequence of France’s neglect and disdain for nuclear power, coupled with a deleterious passion for renewables.
EDF [the French state-owned electric utility] invested billions of euros in wind power, which has led to increased natural gas consumption. Nuclear has been demonetized; wind power and photovoltaics have been extolled. We see the consequences now. Heads of state, Emmanuel Macron included, must prepare their populations for a harsh winter.
Part of the blame also lies with Joe Biden and Justin Trudeau, who refuse to produce enough natural gas to compensate for the Russian embargo. Increasing production would only take a year. Despite the availability of these gas reserves, and the simple need to maintain nuclear power plants, Emmanuel Macron adopts a Malthusian worldview.
How is this Malthusian?
How could there be an end to abundance, if not by our own making? Europe absolutely must wean itself off Russian gas. The fact that you are buying coal-fired electricity from Germany should be a matter of national shame. It's shocking, sad, and it's above all the brilliant demonstration of the disproportionate influence exercised by the proponents of a Malthusian policy.
Your president should affirm, on the contrary, that this proves that we need more nuclear power stations, that we must maintain with care those that already exist, and that we must stop denigrating those who work in nuclear power.
I have spoken to many former managers of EDF's nuclear fleet. They told me they left because they were poorly regarded since France took this crazy decision in 2015 to lower the rate of electricity produced by nuclear power to 50% [from nearly 80%] of the national electricity mix. This reduction obviously implied an increase in gas consumption.
The French do not have as great a responsibility as the Germans in the current situation, but they are far from being innocent. France increased its gas consumption even as the continent became increasingly dependent on Russia for its supply. However, no one in France has suggested exploiting the shale gas that is under our feet...
Yes! You have, according to the EIA [the U.S. Energy Information Agency], almost 4,000 billion cubic meters of recoverable shale gas in your resources. And with nuclear, there is little need for natural gas. With nuclear, France could export its excess power to its neurotic neighbors across the Rhine.
What do you think of the French government's decision to build fourteen new EPRs [European Pressurized nuclear Reactors]?
I'm obviously delighted. This is the path to abundance! I would add that I am not convinced by the design of the EPR reactors, which reflects the paranoia around civilian nuclear energy. It would have been better for France to have stuck with its Framatome 1200 reactor, which was very good. That said, now that the design exists, let's go! We must increase the number of these reactors in order to reduce the cost of construction.
Building EPRs is undoubtedly a good long-term solution, but before they are functional, what would you advise?
Europe needs gas now: Because of climate nihilism, Biden and Trudeau have refused to increase shale gas production. They are prisoners of the zealots of the climate cause. In June, during the G7, Macron announced to Joe Biden, in front of journalists, that the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia would not produce more oil, implying that the United States should take care of it.
Biden was counting on Arab nations to produce more oil but a few hours ago French President Macron was overheard telling Biden that the United Arab Emirates is at max capacity & the Saudis can’t produce much more. It appears to be a direct appeal to Biden to produce more oil
France has to have some ambition! The French are too diplomatic. You have to be more American. Be more direct. Summon the Donald Trump that lies dormant in you and go and demand gas from the United States. Macron should speak to Congress and propose an exchange of technical skills, with American companies that would help in the exploitation of shale gas in France, and French engineers who would contribute to the construction of new nuclear power plants in the United States.
Why have we chosen not to exploit shale gas and oil in Europe?
The former secretary general of NATO, but also Hillary Clinton, claim that Putin financed anti-shale gas activists in Europe. Even if we do not have access to the evidence, we cannot exclude that they are wrong. These are serious sources! Putin himself has spread misinformation about shale gas. And the conflicts of interest do not stop there: Tinne Van der Straeten, the Belgian Minister of Energy, worked in a law firm which notably defended Gazprom.
Hydraulic fracturing is not an environmental hazard. You just have to treat the waste water, which is not difficult. It is a very efficient technology, which has a low ecological footprint.
It is also what Pascal Bruckner calls the "Fanaticism of the Apocalypse". Greens see certain fuels as inherently good or bad. Nuclear is seen by some as truly demonic and, conversely, renewable energies are seen as restoring harmony with nature. Personally, I think coal is good if it is used to lift people out of poverty in poor nations and bad if burned in Western Europe. Europe is suffering from an infantilization of energy policy, which is symptomatic of profound decadence.
But this is also why the energy crisis, as painful as it is, is positive: it will wake up Europeans, even if the continent risks being divided on the issue. The answer to a crisis of abundance is an increase in energy production, not a decrease!
Managed & Built by I2M Consulting, LLC | © 2010-
