The rising price of electricity poses the question of affordable energy, and therefore of nuclear energy trends, says the Christian blogger Incarnare. For him, the Church should take up this debate, which raises many ethical questions.
Here is the list of top nuclear energy trends in 2022.
1. Nuclear Energy
Until a year ago, being anti-nuclear was one of those convenient ideological attributes that allowed one to rally those who rejected it without completely alienating those who saw in this technology a cheap and low-polluting source of nuclear energy trends.
That was a year ago. Since then, the price of an off-peak megawatt-hour has risen from €45 to over €200 for nuclear energy trends to be delivered in 2022, with variations of nearly €60 within the same trading day. Like the telluric tremors that herald an earthquake, the markets have given us a glimpse of what an electricity system without nuclear power would be like: a system subject to the vagaries of the sun and the wind (often absent on days of great anticyclonic cold), and, through their intermittency, to the goodwill of hydrocarbon-supplying regimes (rarely friendly or democratic).
From being an object of theoretical speculation, the issue instantly became very concrete: in the same way that our elected officials lose all ecological ambition as soon as the price of gasoline at the pump approaches €2, the same people who were promoting a competitive market immediately put in place tariff shields. It is likely that the Council of State will harshly judge their inconsistency as it had, in 2016, pinned Ségolène Royal for her 2014 intervention on the regulated sales tariff.
2. A Political Choice to be Made (and assumed)
There is one judgment that elected officials to fear more than that of the high administrative court, and that is the judgment of the ballot box. And this winter’s market tension will at least have had the positive consequence of bringing to the heart of the presidential campaign this theme that must become the major issue: what source of nuclear energy do we want tomorrow? How do we intend to decarbonize our economy and limit our environmental impact?
The 2022 presidential election will determine our ecological ethics, our strategic autonomy and our future competitiveness. And the key question that candidates should be asked is: “Among the scenarios developed by RTE (the electricity transmission operator, in charge of the stability of the network) for 2050, which one do you consider the most desirable?
In this respect, the rate shield that has been introduced induces a very problematic bias in the democratic debate, since, by mitigating the impact of the wholesale market price on citizens’ bills, the rate shield anesthetizes their awareness of the issues and consequences that their vote could have.
3. Tomorrow Begins Today
Some might be tempted to drown the fish, preferring to surf on insecurity or any other theme on which they feel more comfortable. After all, 2050 is a long way off! But in a hypercapitalist sector like nuclear energy trends, 2050 is tomorrow.
For the past fifteen years, politicians have been passing on the hot potato of the decision to build new power plants (not to mention the decision to bury waste, which has been under study for thirty years and inexplicably blocked for the past five). In Belgium, it is even Engie, the operator of the nuclear power plants, that has to show responsibility and explain to the politicians who played the cicada that too late is too late.
4. Reinvesting in Nuclear Energy Trends
On the side of the Jadot camp, joined in this by Mélenchon, one persists and signs on the will to leave the nuclear power at all costs. What does it matter that Germany, which implants wind mills at a frantic rate for fifteen years, always has an electricity ten times more carbonized than ours!
Others have taken note of the issue. Fabien Roussel has positioned himself in favor of reinvesting in nuclear energy trends, in the traditional line of the communist left, but in a break with the distances taken in recent years. Emmanuel Macron, after a five-year period of hesitation, has finally understood the importance of the issue and has taken a position.
5. Sobriety Too
A frequent criticism of nuclear energy trends by those who are not radically opposed to it is that it makes possible (and therefore encourages) an expensive lifestyle that has important consequences on the environment, apart from the strict issue of warming (and therefore decarbonization).
One of the most prominent nuclear lawyers, Jean-Marc Jancovici, has been federating for more than two years a hundred collaborators within the “Shift Project” to produce.
The first is the “plan for transforming the French economy” describing the transformations to be made in order to meet the objectives of the Paris agreements and avoid the full force of the coming climate and nuclear energy crisis and its consequences. The second key question for the candidates to the I believe that their position on the main recommendations of this plan should be the presidential one.
In a recent interview on the Youtube channel Thinkerview, Jancovici indicated that he had not yet had any contact with the representatives of religious communities. It would be incomprehensible that the leaders of a Church that is advancing in the dynamics of Laudato si’ do not dialogue with the representatives of such an initiative in the civil sphere, especially since we find on both sides the concern for the service of mankind, especially in the workplace (the attention that the authors of the plan payments to the reconversion of entire sectors of the economy are in line with many intuitions of the encyclical Laborem exercens).
From being a totem for the “anti”, nuclear energy has become a sign of contradiction, and a touchstone for the credibility of our elected officials when they talk about the environment. Nuclear capacity will reach 582 GW in 2040, according to current trends and regulatory targets, significantly below the 730 GW necessary in the Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario.