We do not always realize it, but the energy transition that we must operate to face the ecological emergency, requires in most scenarios a change of society. Because energy is at the heart of our lives, so ubiquitous that we don't even realize it anymore, until its prices rise or we no longer have access to it.
Therefore, what social project do we want for our energy transition? Can we imagine a future without nuclear power? And how to make this transition to a more sober future? We are going to answer all these questions with Yves Marignac, Négawatt spokesperson for this new Blast interview on our energy futures. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXnnjAu0L9I
I don't know if it has already been said, in this case my apologies, but the title of your thread suffers from problems of semantics and / or syntax while not properly identifying the causes that would be the basis for having a vision 3D remarks and questions ... in short, it is poorly put! He suggests that we would have a choice (whether we like it or not) ”to make the ecological transition without nuclear power
1) It would be fine if this source of energy were new, but it has been omnipresent since the sixties ...
2) it is therefore, “as is” already nothing possible to do without it ...
3) and therefore the answer is: “NO, not possible to make the ecological transition without nuclear power
”(But let's go further)
4) because, by this fact, we are already for a long time in this “transition
”Which began before PIC OIL, and which sees the emergence of vehicles with other modes of propulsion than heat engines. (In particular: hybrids, electric, gas, ethanol, hydrogen ... And so nuclear has something to do with it ..
5) because energy for the sovereignty of states is a central and crucial datum - this is why (again without trying too hard), this sector and that of transport are strategic sectors in military matters and are linked to the staffs of the armies - in time of war it is necessary to supply the army with energy and to protect the populations from any related blackmail, as long as it is necessary to heat the buildings in winter, to supply refrigerators and electric hobs, etc.)
6) suddenly we have the decor which is set and which goes beyond any hint of choice or non-choice in the background since I would say that it goes beyond the search for these, making it impossible as it is the beautiful philosophical principles or societal axis (which still depend too much on the energy sector to reach the stage of emancipation or any form of ideal on which they ultimately depend, could only be realized if the problem is resolved upstream, i.e. the equation : abstract values / debt / energy, since “economy merging with energy
”, This duo is itself a vector of wars in the first place, if it is not resolved.
So it's not: - “Therefore, what social project do we want for our energy transition“?
But rather:- “Would we have the capacity to change the paradigm of current society before making the energy transition”
Since this would consist of getting out of the circle of profits based on energy determinism, of getting out of “ultra-military dependency
”Linked to energies and“security of supply dear to tacticians
”Which is imposed on us through this / s, to move towards a more virtuous circle / s which will then give (in) t the luxury of being able to think about making the energy transition of your wishes“ [/ i]
We can't put the cart before the horse all the same ...