[StarvingLion]

Recent Angewandte Chemie Editorial
'Sustainable Chemistry for Energizing the Planet'
by Marc Fontecave

Fontecave: "I have to to tell that which I strongly believe to be the truth"

My summary of Fontecave:

a. all renewable energy implementation before the year 2045 is a huge waste of money because the current renewable technologies are just too primitive.

b. the western leaders have dramatically underestimated the difficulty of transitioning away from fossil fuels and nuclear

c. the energy transition will take much longer than anyone expects.

d. huge research efforts are required in many different challenging directions

e. enormous risk of populist movements to further entrench fossil fuel and/or nuclear technologies thus leading to a loss of window of opportunity to make the transition to renewables.

Fontecave: "This view is not pessimistic, it is just realistic"

Basically, this dude believes in the magical fairy tale extremely low cost scalable Solar Refinery which turns Co2 into organic products (eg. "storage") which thus solves the intermittency problem of renewables and supposedly can crank out the zillion gallons of chemicals used every day.

Its obvious he believes capitalism needs to die: "international collaboration avoiding unnecessary competition".

Fontecave is a doomer. He doesn't really know what to do except basic research for the next 30 years.

My conclusion: France is dead.

[Plantagenet]

My conclusion: France is dead.

France gets 70% of electrical power from nukes, and they are building out their solar, wind and hydro capabilities. They French also already have a wonderful electrified rail network built out all over France. The French are actually making good progress along the path to transition away from fossil fuels.


The French are making progress to transition away from fossil fuels.

[StarvingLion]

My conclusion: France is dead.

France gets 70% of electrical power from nukes, and they already have a wonderful electrified rail network build out all over France. The French are already making good progress along the path to transition away from fossil fuels.

France cannot rebuild that nuclear fleet which is severely aging. Same problem with Germany. They have to do 'capital-light' projects now. What do you think that means? Ans: They are bankrupt.

Look at Germany. They are running their utilities into the ground on the basis of 'progress'.

Its obvious that Fontecave believes the German Energiewende will collapse in the next 10 years. So do i. The simple fact is the renewables can't do the job yet.

The UK is trying to do small nuclear reactors because it is cheaper and it is "progress". Baloney. They can't afford big nuclear reactors because the UK is bankrupt.

Its the Magical Low Cost Solar Refinery or Bust

[Ibon]

I think it is safe to assume that we are moving into a period of financial constraints whereby the energy transitions in the future will come up against budget limitations. By the same token economic constraints mean less energy will be consumed. If you draw further conclusions along this trend line then we see cultural adaptation to a slow to non growth economy.

This is actually the way a culture transitions to less consumption per capita.

We have to begin to understand that transition does not happen as some idealized forecast that is planned.

Cultural transition happens as we pass through the bottle neck of constraints.

This is the future folks.

[Plantagenet]

France cannot rebuild that nuclear fleet...

Really? Don't tell the French---they are building a new nuclear reactor right now at Flamanville.

[Apneaman]

How's that going Planty?

France's nuclear calamity has UK worried

France’s world renowned prowess in the nuclear industry is being seriously undermined by its efforts to build a flagship nuclear reactor which is fast becoming a costly calamity. The future of the Flamanville 3 project appears to hang in the balance after yet another major setback that has London worried.

http://www.thelocal.fr/20150421/flamanv ... -nightmare

[Apneaman]

Hey Planty it's a clusterfuck but quite not as bad the one in Tennessee. Sign of the times, sign of diminishing returns, sign of a dying, bloated corrupted ineffectual western civilization. Only suicidal apes would continue to build new plants when they are not even doing proper maintenance on the old ones and have no money to decommission them. France is broke too.

After 36 Years, Nuclear Plant in Tennessee Nears Completion


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/11/us/af ... .html?_r=0

[Plantagenet]

it's a clusterfuck...

Gosh-a-roonies! So you say the French are having construction problems on their new nuclear plant? Imagine that! Yawn. Any news about the French Rugby league? Did you read about the pickpocket problems at the Tour de EIfel? Try some mint tea---its very relaxing. How about those Greeks---crazy isn't it? Is Hollande still with that actress, or have they broken up?

OK, have you calmed down now----Now, have you ever heard of any nuclear plant being built anywhere at anytime without any problems?

Of course not.

CHEERS!

[Apneaman]

Sure planty just a few minor problems easily dismissed with a hand wave, a bogus comparison to the 20th century and a keep calm poster. For a better understanding of why we cannot do things like we use to, start with Joseph Tainter's collapse of complex societies.

Collapse of Complex Societies by Dr. Joseph Tainter

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0R09YzyuCI



UPDATE 2-Weak spots found in steel of Areva's French EPR reactor

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/ ... S920150407


Flamanville – A timeline of costly setbacks

2005 – The green light is given for construction to begin on a new third-generation EPR (European Pressurized Reactor) at the Flamanville nuclear power plant. The overall cost of construction is estimated at €3.3 billion.

2007 – Construction on the new reactor begins in December 2007.

2011 - A construction worker on the new EPR reactor dies after an 18-metre fall as the footbridge he was walking on was hit by a crane.

2012 – In the year that the reactor is due to begin operating, EDF announced that costs have in fact risen to €8.5 billion and the completion will be delayed until 2016.

2014 – In November EDF says construction was delayed again until 2017, due to delays in component delivery by Areva.

April 2015 – Areva informs French nuclear safety regulator ASN that anomalies have been detected in the reactor vessel steel, meaning a delay of at least another year.

http://www.thelocal.fr/20150421/flamanv ... -nightmare

October 2015 – Results of further tests on the vessel are set to be handed to authorities. The future of the whole project could hinge on those results.


"In 2005 the French government proudly gave the green light for construction to begin on the first third-generation nuclear reactor at Flamanville in Normandy on the north coast, a site environmentalists say is threatened by flooding."


Latest numbers show at least 5 metres sea-level rise locked in


"It’s too late to stop the seas rising at least 5 metres and only fast, drastic action will avert a 20-metre rise, New Scientist calculates based on recent studies"

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg2 ... Z6QXrUV1NE

[Plantagenet]

Latest numbers show at least 5 metres sea-level rise locked in


"It’s too late to stop the seas rising at least 5 metres and only fast, drastic action will avert a 20-metre rise, New Scientist calculates based on recent studies"

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg2 ... Z6QXrUV1NE

Yup.

Thats exactly why the planet has to get off fossil fuels and take fast, drastic action to shift to non-carbon emitting energy sources like nukes, wind, solar, geothermal, etc. as the French have done.

Get it now?

[davep]

Flamanville may be a bit of a nightmare, but the OP's post has nothing to do with France, apart from the nationality of the author. So "My conclusion: France is dead." is totally without foundation based on what preceded it.

[StarvingLion]

Flamanville may be a bit of a nightmare, but the OP's post has nothing to do with France, apart from the nationality of the author. So "My conclusion: France is dead." is totally without foundation based on what preceded it.

Fontecave explicitly states that nuclear is an "old technology" that civilization will *eventually* get rid of along with use of fossil fuels. He makes clear that nuclear is a dead end not worthy of further research.

Fontecave advocates kicking the can for the next 30 years so that the storage problem can be solved. He explicitly states that implementing renewables now is wrong because the storage problem must first be solved and more efficient solar cells, etc...

I can't just publish the article here.

Fontecave is living in a dream world of endless research. Storage is the wrecking ball of the renewables pipedream. The French intellectuals are increasingly joining the ranks of crazy people who believe in Kurzweillian cuckoo microphysics stuff instead of competent large scale engineering. They are a bunch of Google admirers when the kooks at Google gave up on the energy problem years ago.

At least the physicist Richard Jones knows very well that the renewables pipedream can't do the job and is advocating a crash programme to develop modular light water fission reactors.

http://www.softmachines.org/wordpress/?p=1618#more-1618

[davep]

If he put nuclear in the same basket as fossil fuels, I don't see why France would be particularly dead compared to any other nation.

BTW, there are practical applications of small-scale electrical electrical generation as it helps avoid the infrastructure costs required to ensure viable service in more rural areas at the leaf ends of the traditional transmission lines.

[Tanada]

It appears to me this 'chemist' is projecting opinions and calling it truth. YMMV.

[davep]

It appears to me this 'chemist' is projecting opinions and calling it truth. YMMV.

This place would be empty if we didn't do that