In your reactions or on the forumMany of you are telling us about your misunderstanding about companies' unwillingness to do research and development for alternative energy solutions.
In the following article, it is the former research director of Schneider Electric who explains his reasoning and enlightens us on the blindness that reigns in the labs. Particularly tasty: do not worry about waste, our grandchildren will come behind us to clean our m… s.
Calculate the true cost of energy: a puzzle for everyone
In terms of power-maintenance-cost ratio, the energy supplied by EDF (80% nuclear of origin) is the best for domestic consumption. On this basis of economic reference, wind turbines or solar panels are only of interest in very localized cases. Their low power compared to conventional sources of energy is not worth the trouble of investing massively in these 'micro-energies'. In essence, this is the conclusion reached, after in-depth comparisons, by Michel Barrault, from the consultancy firm Guidance and former director of research at Schneider Electric. “The speech focuses on energy, whereas we need power at a precise moment. And there, nothing beats the classic network. This does not prevent taking advantage of the diversity of situations to use the potential of local resources: wind, geothermal energy, waterfall. And, above all, energy must be saved where it is easiest to do: in heating and transport, ”adds Michel Barrault. Nuclear power, without rival in the habitat? This is what makes more than one specialist jump… “I prefer to consider the use of inexhaustible energy sources producing little or no waste. Of course, today, the energy supplied by EDF seems the most reliable. But what will happen when the electricity market is completely open to competition? We remember the monster cuts in countries where this is already the case… ”asks Bassam Ouaida, from the Transénergie research office. Another question raised: what about nuclear waste that we do not know how to deal with today and whose storage is never taken into account when calculating the costs of this type of energy? From Michel Barrault's perspective, such an argument cannot be accepted: “If we do not have the technology today to treat nuclear waste, our grandchildren will have it. We cripple ourselves by limiting our options for a question of scientific knowledge at any given time as research continues to advance. "
In energy matters, debates on innovation are not objective. Should we continue to invest in traditional solutions, then, to respect the framework of French energy policy and its three pillars - security of supply, preservation of the environment, access to all? Here too, opinions differ. “Let's build with our environment rather than against it. The Nordic countries are giving us an example today, by building with wood, using the wind, the sun, geothermal energy and even sea currents to produce energy, ”argues Bassam Ouaida. Position opposite to that of Michel Barrault, for whom “investments must be made where the return in terms of power is the best. The less effective solutions should not be helped ”.