Fessenheim, the nuclear power plant has 30 years!

[sen-no-sen]

It is an essentially pessimistic speech, which I do not want to share in full (but that is another problem) ...

Pessimistic no, just realistic ...

- nuclear energy is undoubtedly registered "in a logic of maintaining energy production guaranteeing the socio-economic balance of our country". But this is the case for all forms of energy, including green energies, and even for all human productions.

Obviously, but that is not the point, what I wanted to say is that it is time to stop the discourse on GHGs when the only objective is to maintain it costs that costs growth.
Ecology is a pretty screen used to hide trivial interests.

- is there legitimacy, in this context, to try to choose the least bad way, the least harmful, to try to face formidable deadlines concerning the whole of humanity?

The problem is there, there is no real citizen choice, but rather orientations in relation to economic strategies.
The Germans decided to leave nuclear power because it represented 16% (2014) of their electricity production, getting rid of this sector was rather an opportunity, because the dismantling will allow them to develop leadership in a sector or any remains to be dismantled.

In the case of France, most of the political posturing will be played out in the end on the closure of one or two sites which would have closed anyway, because the dice have been played for 10 years.
With the arrival of the oil depletion it will be necessary to do better (produce more electricity to advance part of the car fleet) in a context of economic stagnation.

- a drastic policy of sobriety in energy and natural resources (fairly well developed in "Factor 4", even if it is a little dated) of which we can see more or less the main lines (zero or negative growth, circular economy, demography to be reviewed , lifestyle to evolve, etc.)

Yes but again it is the facts rather than the decisions that will lead us to what you describe.
Growth has been on an undulating plateau for nearly 10 years, with a slight "rising false flat" due to astronomical injections of fictitious liquidity ...
The austerity policies are already there, the end of the welfare state in favor of the monopolies is a simple observation, and the demography should logically increase due to migratory flows ... the role of the politicians will therefore consist in playing the illusionists for to prepare all your disappointments with the most feelings!

[Bardal]

Pessimistic no, just realistic ...


Obviously, but that is not the point, what I wanted to say is that it is time to stop the discourse on GHGs when the only objective is to maintain it costs that costs growth.
Ecology is a pretty screen used to hide trivial interests.

The problem is there, there is no real citizen choice, but rather orientations in relation to economic strategies.
The Germans decided to leave nuclear power because it represented 16% (2014) of their electricity production, getting rid of this sector was rather an opportunity, because the dismantling will allow them to develop leadership in a sector or any remains to be dismantled.

In the case of France, most of the political posturing will be played out in the end on the closure of one or two sites which would have closed anyway, because the dice have been played for 10 years.
With the arrival of the oil depletion it will be necessary to do better (produce more electricity to advance part of the car fleet) in a context of economic stagnation.


Yes but again it is the facts rather than the decisions that will lead us to what you describe.
Growth has been on an undulating plateau for nearly 10 years, with a slight "rising false flat" due to astronomical injections of fictitious liquidity ...
The austerity policies are already there, the end of the welfare state in favor of the monopolies is a simple observation, and the demography should logically increase due to migratory flows ... the role of the politicians will therefore consist in playing the illusionists for to prepare all your disappointments with the most feelings!

What bothers me about what you explain is that you give the impression of positioning yourself as a simple spectator, distributing the bad points to political actors; bad points which seem to me deserved elsewhere.
I tend to situate myself as a researcher of alternatives, an actor aiming to make things change. Perhaps this is utopian, even a little presumptuous ... But there is hope where we can ...

On the last point you address, the facts will also depend on the political decisions that will be taken. Certainly, economic growth in Europe has a little lead in the wing (not everywhere), but if we count the politicians actually speaking of zero growth as an objective, let alone decrease, there will be no need to " to have been to schools until late "to pass the count.

And it is undoubtedly around this notion of austerity policy that the crux of the problem lies. For me, shrinking is not synonymous with austerity; it is compatible with that of sobriety, whereas austerity is only a shortage (often artificial) unequally shared. It is more at the level of the paradigm of measuring the development of a society that it would be possible to act (replace the GNP by the BNB, Bonheur National Brut, apart from any economic growth); it's a bit too long to develop here.

@Ahmed
No doubt, many politicians claim to be ecology (which is today more of a market than a commitment), but I hardly know any who claim what I list in my first axis. Afterwards, suspecting an intervener of duplicity seems a little simplistic ...
On the other hand, I do not believe for a moment that it will be possible to impose a significant regression on those who are more in misery than in the management of the superfluous. Some, well provided, can lose, but a majority will have to maintain a correct standard of living, even to gain there. But that too would require a longer development.
I do not believe in a very significant reduction in needs, but I think it is possible to greatly reduce energy consumption to cover these needs. On the other hand, for CES emissions, we have no choice, that is to divide by 4 ...

[Ahmed]

Of course, I understand this concept of sobriety, but, as you agree, "happy degrowth" is not an option considered ...

You write:

Some, well provided, can lose, but a majority will have to maintain a correct standard of living, even to gain there.

Unfortunately, the politicians to whom you refer, as well as the other decision-makers (whom they represent) belong to this well-endowed category who are in a position to lose nothing, quite the contrary.

Further:

Admittedly, economic growth in Europe has a little lead in the wing (not everywhere)

It is the least we can say! Without the financial industry, it would even be a sharp decline.

Finally:

but a majority will have to maintain a decent standard of living, or even gain from it.

The term "standard of living" is probably ill-chosen, since it is impossible to sustain such a lifestyle, except by constraining it in time and space, as is currently the case; As for winning it, I guess it refers to other criteria and under that condition I agree.

[Janic]

but a majority will have to maintain a decent standard of living, or even gain from it.

The term "standard of living" is probably ill-chosen, since it is impossible to sustain such a lifestyle, except by constraining it in time and space, as is currently the case; As for winning it, I guess it refers to other criteria and under that condition I agree.

Completely Ahmed! the notion of a correct standard of living, globally, what would that correspond to?

[sen-no-sen]

What bothers me about what you explain is that you give the impression of positioning yourself as a simple spectator, distributing the bad points to political actors; bad points which seem to me deserved elsewhere.
I tend to situate myself as a researcher of alternatives, an actor aiming to make things change. Perhaps this is utopian, even a little presumptuous ... But there is hope where we can ...

Faced with the power of the phenomena at play, we can only pose as spectators ...
We can act on a human scale, for example to put pressure on the monopolies of the large distribution so that it gives free their stocks of foodstuff to the most needy instead of throwing them away, have Corrida or things like that prohibited. .that is, find adjustment variables *.
In the two examples cited, this will not change the system or its purposes, it may just improve things a bit.
However for the rest, and concerning the strategic sectors, we must not delude ourselves, the inertia of the forces in progress is far too great for us to be able to reverse it,Superman couldn't do it!

For me, shrinking is not synonymous with austerity; it is compatible with that of sobriety, whereas austerity is only a shortage (often artificial) unequally shared.

For me too, but the society to which you refer does not correspond at all to the dominant ideology, founded on ever more growth.
Maintaining costs that growth costs in a context of stagnation will unfortunately lead us to austerity, it has already started.





* And I am optimistic! Because in the case of large-scale distribution, its measures ultimately make it possible to restore their coats of arms and to perpetuate them in their activities!

[moinsdewatt]

No need to hurry:

After Fessenheim, EDF does not want to close any other reactor before 2029

AFP published on Jan. 30. 2018

After the closure of the Fessenheim plant, EDF does not want to shut down another nuclear reactor before 2029, said an official of the electrician.

France is currently in the process of developing its energy roadmap (the Multiannual Energy Programming, PPE) for the years 2019-2023 as well as guidelines for 2028. The government's objective is to reduce the share of the nuclear power generation from around 75% currently to 50% by 2030 or 2035.

"We clearly have an objective of bringing our reactors to 50 years, which would make the first shutdowns from 2029", declared Philippe Sasseigne, director of the French nuclear fleet of EDF, during a meeting with journalists. "In the period 2029-2035, there is a significant number of reactors which could shut down at 50 years" and "it is also said that it is reasonable to bring reactors to 50 years and others to 60 years to spread "the closures.

The current fleet has 58 reactors, including the two from the Fessenheim plant, which are due to close at the end of the year when the fuel is loaded into the new EPR at Flamanville. No other closure is planned to date. A certain number of reactors will begin to reach 40 years from 2019 and EDF is planning major works to obtain from the Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) the right to extend their life by another ten years. "We want visibility and incurring large expenses on reactors that would only last 3 or 4 years would not make sense," argued Philippe Sasseigne.

According to him, the closure plan proposed by EDF would reduce the share of nuclear power to 50% "on a horizon that looks like 2035". The government, which is also the majority shareholder of EDF, has repeatedly indicated that it wants a precise plan for the closure of reactors as part of the next PPE, which must be adopted by the end of the year. "In a year, we will have a fully planned scenario. We will be able to know how many reactors, when and on what criteria we will achieve this objective", declared Nicolas Hulot, Minister of Ecological and Inclusive Transition.

https://www.connaissancedesenergies.org ... 029-180130

[moinsdewatt]

France: Fessenheim to be dismantled in 20 years at the latest

Reuters on 01/03/2018 FESSENHEIM, Haut-Rhin

The management of the EDF nuclear power plant in Fessenheim (Haut-Rhin) specified Thursday the stages of the dismantling of the installation on the banks of the Rhine, which should begin at the end of the year and end twenty years later.

The oldest power station in the French nuclear power plant must be shut down when the EPR at Flamanville, in the English Channel is loaded with fuel, currently scheduled for the end of 2018, in accordance with the 2015 energy transition law, said its director, Marc Simon-Jean, at a press conference.

A first phase, called preparation for dismantling, will last five years and will lead, from the third year, to the total withdrawal of the fuel.

The workforce, 757 people for EDF employees alone, will drop to 331 people after two years, with many departures from September 2019, then to 224 after three years, to drop to 60 at the end of this first period. It must conclude with a decommissioning decree.

The deconstruction of the power plant and its two 900 MW reactors can then begin for a period of 15 years which will end with the clean-up of the site and its official decommissioning, making it suitable for new activities.

All of these operations and the transition from one stage to another will continue to take place, as during the production years, under the supervision of the Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN).

The year 2017 concluded, for the Alsatian plant, with a production of 5,8 billion Kwh, the lowest since its commissioning in 1977, due to the shutdown of its number 2 reactor concerned by a generic anomaly detected by ASN on a steam generator manufactured in Le Creusot.

The Secretary of State for the Ecological Transition, Sébastien Lecornu, presented on January 19 a project for economic revitalization of the Fessenheim region.

He pledged to compensate for the fiscal shortfall for local authorities, some 12 million euros per year, for three to five years, and to mobilize land reserves to create, along the Rhine, a development zone industrial with attractive taxation.

He also announced the launch of a call for projects relating to renewable energies in this territory from Colmar to Mulhouse and a photovoltaic call for tenders.

http://www.boursorama.com/actualites/fr ... 007d19e423

[moinsdewatt]

France: State issues post-Fessenheim photovoltaic tender

AFP published the 13 Apr 2018

The state will proceed to a call for tenders of 300 megawatts for photovoltaic installations in the Haut-Rhin where the Fessenheim nuclear power plant will close, Secretary of State for Ecological Transition Sébastien Lecornu said on Friday.

"Closing Fessenheim without making it a demonstrator of the energy transition would not make sense," Mr. Lecornu told the press after a meeting of the steering committee created in January for the conversion of the site of the oldest of the French nuclear power plants and its surroundings. "The State is agreeing to an unprecedented effort: a dedicated and targeted call for tenders at the level of the Haut-Rhin department on renewable energies" and photovoltaics in particular, said the Secretary of State.

This call, in which Caisse des Dépôts (CDC) will be a partner, will cover a total of 300 megawatts, including 100 MW on buildings and 200 MW of photovoltaic panels on the ground. The start of the call for tenders is scheduled for November 2018 and should take place in several phases until November 2019, with an "open possibility for crowdfunding", detailed Sébastien Lecornu.

EDF had already indicated that it was interested in such a call for tenders. As part of the reconversion of the Alsatian territory after the closure of Fessenheim, Franco-German economic cooperation must be carried out.

A Franco-German "feasibility study" must be carried out by the end of the year on the reconstruction of a rail link between Colmar and Friborg in Germany, never restored since the destruction of a bridge over the Rhine during the Second World War.

During a one-hour meeting of the unions at the Fessenheim site with Sébastien Lecornu, the CGT presented its proposals to reuse certain buildings to make them "a research site", "an engineering center" or "a large one. training center, "Jean-Luc Cardoso, CGT delegate, explained to the press.

"There are a lot of initiatives taken. Now it is a question of helping to implement all this", explained David Coste, interministerial delegate for the future of the territory of Fessenheim, appointed at the end of March.

The closure of Fessenheim, a plant with two pressurized water reactors of nearly 900 megawatts each, is currently scheduled for the end of 2018 or the spring of 2019, but is mainly linked to the commissioning of the EPR of Flamanville (Manche), where welding faults were revealed on Tuesday by EDF.

A possible further postponement of the commissioning of Flamanville will not change the fate of the Fessenheim plant, which was commissioned in 1977. "The closure of this plant has been recorded. Its principle is now irreversible", Sébastien Lecornu repeated. A new meeting of the post-Fessenheim steering committee is scheduled for September.

https://www.connaissancedesenergies.org ... eim-180413

[Bardal]

Tomorrow, we will shave for free ... And we will plant small flowers to keep the unemployed busy ...

The beautiful words, the magic promises, we hear that at each closure of industries ... In the North or in the East, nobody believes it anymore; the last one was Hollande (you remember, near a blast furnace); today it's Macron, politicians have to make a living ...

Besides, the power plant had holes ... at least 1000 holes, 7 mm ... We escaped it beautiful ...

Ah, come to think of it: for 3 years, we will risk the electric blackout every winter in Europe ... we can't have everything ... Anyway, we have nothing left to repair, Alstom has been sold at General Electric, with the turbines of the power stations and of hydroelectricity ... nuclear submarines also elsewhere, and the aircraft carrier, but that, I don't care a bit ... You have to know how to live with his time.

[Remundo]

I am not a nuclear engineer, but the 300 MWp photovoltaic will produce on average 30 MW, or 60 times less than Fessenheim 1800 MW

in short, doing PV is good, but here it is a farce.