Despite Europe’s growing skepticism of nuclear technology in the wake of Fukushima, in 2021, French President Emmanuel Macron announced the revival of his country’s nuclear energy industry. Macron’s ambitious program aims to end the country’s dependence on fossil fuels and make France carbon neutral by 2050. The plan will require the construction of 14 new nuclear reactors. At first glance, Macron’s plans seem logical, as nuclear energy already accounts for 70% of France’s energy consumption, and cheap nuclear energy has been the backbone of the French economy since the 1970s. However, the populist tactics of the French leader are raising questions among the country’s population and experts, as the problems of the nuclear industry – which will inevitably arise soon – will be left for future generations to solve after Macron leaves office.
No room for improvisation in the face of climate risks
In its report October 3, 2024 Greenpeace harshly criticized the French government’s plans to build two new EPR2 nuclear reactors in northwestern France near Dunkirk due to the risk of flooding. The new units are scheduled to be operational by 2040, but the problem lies in the site chosen for construction. The chosen site is located in a region already at risk of flooding and will become increasingly vulnerable as climate change worsens.
The Gravelines nuclear power plant is currently the most powerful in Western Europe, already consisting of six 900 MW reactors. The French state-owned energy company EDF has promised to build two more reactors at the same plant on an 11-meter-high platform to protect from flooding. According to EDF experts, the NPP project will sufficiently resist climate challenges until 2070. However, this is only the middle of the plant’s lifespan, which is expected to last 60 years until 2100. Its dismantling is scheduled for the middle of the next century, and EDF promises to “adapt” the project to current climate conditions every 10 years after 2070.
It sounds reckless, as the UN Environment Programme warns of a temperature rise of up to +3.1°C in the coming decades, leading to sea level rise and a dramatic increase in extreme climate events. Have the French authorities already forgotten the devastating North Sea flood of 1953 and the numerous disasters in France in recent years? Even today, most of the area around the nuclear power plant is below sea level during high tides, and only protective structures built nearby, turning the NPP into a kind of “island,” have saved the region from disaster. Since 2022, the Gravelines Nuclear Power Station has been surrounded by a 3-kilometer-long protective wall, which costs EDF 35 million euros. How much more will EDF spend to ensure the nuclear plant’s safety, and what will happen if nature proves more potent than the fortifications built?
The EDF project documentation contains too many unanswered questions, which exist only thanks to Macron’s political patronage. The facts indicate that constructing new reactors poses an extreme danger to the local population and the environment. Nuclear power plants are vulnerable to climate change, and the rampant rush to revive the nuclear power industry should be stopped.
New Challenges for Macron’s Nuclear Renaissance
By announcing the revival of nuclear energy in the country, President Macron has formally taken a step toward reviving France’s economic, industrial and military power. However, the French economy is not yet ready to fully support such ambitious plans.
Macron’s ambitious plans to build 14 new nuclear power units will face a glaring shortage of qualified personnel. The French nuclear industry currently employs about 220 thousand people. To achieve Marcon’s objectives, the industry will need a significant influx of skilled workers, particularly in the workforce. By 2030, according to EDF estimates, their number needs to be at least doubled. The proposed construction timeline is also impressive. The first Gravelines unit with the EPR-2 reactor is expected to take only eight years to complete. It is worth mentioning the notorious Flamanville nuclear reactor in Normandy, which ended up costing 4 times its initial budget, reaching €13.2 billion, and was launched more than a decade behind schedule.Â
The Loss of African Uranium Deposits
France is particularly concerned about the exploitation of uranium from Niger and the potential consequences of losing its supply. For more than four decades, the Orano company, owned by the French state by 45%, has been developing uranium in African countries. Niger is one of the three largest suppliers of this valuable natural resource to France. However, the recent revocation of Orano’s uranium mining license in Niger has cast doubt on France’s energy independence. Representatives of the new Nigerien authorities have stated that uranium has been used to supply Europe with electricity for decades. Still, West Africa remains one of the poorest countries in the world and has not benefited much from exports. Additionally, the economic risks for the French nuclear industry include uranium prices that have reached historical highs, primarily due to European countries’ search for new energy suppliers after 2022.Â
According to Macron, promoting nuclear technologies in France should lead the country to complete independence from foreign energy supplies and secure France’s status as the flagship nuclear industry in the EU. The problem is that Macron knows it will not be up to him but to future generations of French politicians to address the problems mentioned above regarding his misleading nuclear policy.
[Tara Yarwais edited this piece.]
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.
Support Fair Observer
We rely on your support for our independence, diversity and quality.
For more than 10 years, Fair Observer has been free, fair and independent. No billionaire owns us, no advertisers control us. We are a reader-supported nonprofit. Unlike many other publications, we keep our content free for readers regardless of where they live or whether they can afford to pay. We have no paywalls and no ads.
In the post-truth era of fake news, echo chambers and filter bubbles, we publish a plurality of perspectives from around the world. Anyone can publish with us, but everyone goes through a rigorous editorial process. So, you get fact-checked, well-reasoned content instead of noise.
We publish 2,500+ voices from 90+ countries. We also conduct education and training programs
on subjects ranging from digital media and journalism to writing and critical thinking. This
doesn’t come cheap. Servers, editors, trainers and web developers cost
money.
Please consider supporting us on a regular basis as a recurring donor or a
sustaining member.
Will you support FO’s journalism?
We rely on your support for our independence, diversity and quality.
Comment