Why is nuclear power so successful and popular in France?

Plantagenet · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 2:32 pm

Nuclear power provides 80% of France's electrical needs,
including powering high speed rail networks and local light
rail networks in the cities.

France is WAY AHEAD on dealing with peak oil because of their
installed nuclear power plant infrastructure, and their continued
investment in new nukes.

Why don't environmentalists in France stop their nuclear program?
Why is it popular?

Why nukes are successful in France

rangerone314 · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 2:36 pm

Doesn't half of France's nuclear waste get shipped to Africa?

I wonder if THAT is also part of the reason that nuclear power so successful and popular in France.

How enlightened of them!

Quinny · **Joined:** Thu Jul 03, 2008 12:00 am **Posts:** 1485

I've always been anti-nuclear, but the problems I forsee because of PO have forced me to re-assess my position. Although still strongly against Nuclear Weapons, I now feel that Nuclear may be the only energy source that can help us transition away from our FF addiction.

Plantagenet · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 4:32 pm

rangerone314 wrote:

Doesn't half of France's nuclear waste get shipped to Africa?

I wonder if THAT is also part of the reason that nuclear power so successful and popular in France.

How enlightened of them!

The idea of the French sending their nuclear waste to Africa is such a delightful PC fantasy that it sounds true, but it isn't.

In actuality the french recycle most of their nuclear waste and use it again---

French recycle their nuclear waste

The by products that aren't reused are currently stored at research facilities in France. The volume of the ultimate high-level waste is relatively small: the contribution of a family of four using electricity for 20 years is an inert glass cylinder the size of a disposable bic cigarette lighter.

dbuckley · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:31 pm

France is a nuclear leader because it wants to be.

The French are a fiercely independent nationality, and if the question is "France has nuclear power" versus "France has to buy power from it's neighbours" then France will have nuclear power.

And also the French generally believe in government (except when they riot against it), and these programs deliver good stuff. They have lights that work, and trains that run on time.

Sixstrings · **Joined:** Tue Jul 08, 2008 12:00 am **Posts:** 1699

Plantagenet wrote:

Nuclear power provides 80% of France's electrical needs,
including powering high speed rail networks and local light
rail networks in the cities.

France is WAY AHEAD on dealing with peak oil because of their
installed nuclear power plant infrastructure, and their continued
investment in new nukes.

Why don't environmentalists in France stop their nuclear program?
Why is it popular?

Why nukes are successful in France

DeGaulle got the French on the nuclear path before the treehuggers were out of diapers. Plus, it makes sense -- France has no coal.

Arthur75 · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 7:00 pm

rangerone314 wrote:

Doesn't half of France's nuclear waste get shipped to Africa?

I wonder if THAT is also part of the reason that nuclear power so successful and popular in France.

How enlightened of them!

No it doesn't

Most waste are handled in the "la hague" disposal recycling facility, and in fact "la hague" handles some waste from other countries like Belgium, Switzerland, Germany, even Japan !

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COGEMA_La_Hague_site

On the other hand Areva did put its hand on some key uranium sources in Africa, like in Niger for instance.

As to why France has so much nuclear ?

I guess having almost no fossile at all (some coal that is almost finished and not exploited anymore, some gas that is almost finished) it made the problem more acute quite early., but although it started in the 50s 60s (also for the military part) the decision to deploy it on a big scale for civil energy source was beginning 70 I think (and it was quite a direct decision).
These big programs also "match well" with France "corps de l'état". About environmentalists against it, there has been quite a few, Britanny for instance never got a reactor because of that, but clearly less "epidermic" than in Germany (although they also have some nuke factory and may restart the program).

But the thing is , when you add up all energy sources (for transport, heating), nuclear is then only something like 16% of France energy use, so not shielded from PO, far from it

evilgenius · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 11:29 pm

The answer is because, as the English would say, the French are bloody minded! This obstinance has garnered them a date with their chosen destiny. Whether they will keep her is another story. Women who wear that much makeup usually have something to hide.

Nuclear power in the future is ok in regions where the natives will have the capability to keep the plants up. All of that makeup comes off quickly when there is a plant disaster. France won't see any of those probably, but it may just see political pressure to do something else when various plants in the east begin to go belly up with no one there handling the situation. By then, of course, the French people might not care so much what happens to the east of them. They will realize there is no going to a massive buildup to a different kind of infrastructure. They wouldn't be able to afford it, nor would it yield the total net societal good results the one they have does.

pstarr · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 11:34 pm

Ze Franch! (Wee!) use ze depleted erl to power zere Franch-Fry Cookairs! Poof!

And zey (Ze Franch!) use ze depleted urarium to power ze Bonnets.

Wee!

Aaron · **Posted:** Wed Jul 01, 2009 4:21 am

Quote:

The French State still owns 79% of Areva – the company supplying the Finnish reactor,which also operates the French reprocessing plant at La Hague. Having unnecessarily givenlarge contracts to Areva over past years to reprocess its spent fuel, EdF has accumulated over80 tons of plutonium, and vast quantities of nuclear waste at the reprocessing plant at LaHague. So it is now confronted with huge liabilities, but insufficient funds to cover them.The Court of Accounts estimated France’s nuclear liabilities at Eur 71-billion, with Eur 48-billion of that belonging to EdF. There are also huge uncertainties attached to these liabilities.For example, the cost of a potential deep disposal facility for nuclear waste could be between40% and 230% higher than allowed for by EdF, according to radioactive waste managementagency Andra. (35). It appears, therefore, that EdF currently plans to fund only around half ofFrance’s nuclear liabilities.

Nuclear power is a failed technology which has failed to deliver. It has squanderedunparalleled, unstinting support from taxpayers around the globe leaving them with burdensthat may last for millennia. The idea that such an industry should be resuscitated with orwithout even more public subsidy is absurd.

http://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/reports/Nuclear_Subsidies.pdf

rangerone314 · **Posted:** Wed Jul 01, 2009 4:56 am

http://www.greenpeace.org/international ... sis-france

Since the origins of the French nuclear industry some 50 years ago, the management of nuclear waste has been largely neglected.

Even today, large quantities of waste remain in unconditioned and unstable form, inventories of historical dump sites are lacking or were lost and one of the largest dump sites in the world near the La Hague reprocessing plant is leaking into the underground water.

Now evidence is emerging that a new nuclear dumpsite in the Champagne region of France is leaking radioactivity into the ground water threatening contamination of tritium and at a later stage other radionuclides. The French nuclear waste authority ANDRA has only a partial inventory of the multitude of existing waste categories, as large quantities have not yet been declared by the main waste producers EDF and Cogema, including spent nuclear fuel or waste from the uranium enrichment industry. Even French government regulators are expressing their concerns over the conditions at both dump sites.

Arthur75 · **Posted:** Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:09 am

Aaron wrote:

Nuclear power is a failed technology which has failed to deliver. It has squanderedunparalleled, unstinting support from taxpayers around the globe leaving them with burdensthat may last for millennia. The idea that such an industry should be resuscitated with orwithout even more public subsidy is absurd.

http://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/reports/Nuclear_Subsidies.pdf[/quote]

I really question all of your figures and facts (and the name of your site isn't really impartial ... :wink:

), EDF is exporting nuclear power, besides buying some companies in the UK for instance.
80% for 20 or 25 years at 0 CO2 emmisions (ok not counting building aspects) isn't nothing ...

And don't forget that nuclear has one serious advantage over renewables like wind and solar : it isn't intermitent Renewables without coal and gas back ups DO NOT work these days (Danemark wind doesn't work without German coal and gas)...

France today's electricity mix is 80% nuclear, 10% hydroelectricity, 10% gas and coal
That is only 10% fossiles

Grautr · **Posted:** Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:28 am

Doesnt France also have a lot of reactors decommissioning over the next 10 years like Britain???

dinopello · **Posted:** Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:39 am

Plantagenet wrote:

French recycle their nuclear waste

That is a good article. I worked in France for several years on and off with their engineers and it is very apparent that there is a profound cultural difference when it comes to how the French analyze risk (more rational) and how they deal with fear. From the article

Quote:

" Psychologist Paul Slovic and his colleagues at Decision Research in Eugene, Oregon, discovered in their surveys that many French people have similar negative imagery and fears of radiation and disaster as Americans. The difference is that cultural, economic and political forces in France act to counteract these fears."

Mothers in the US could never be convinced to have a Nuke plant built next to their child's playground. In France, a rational assessment of the risks would be more accepted as valid. It is also because (as the article points out) - the French trust their technocrats and hold Engineers in high regard

Quote:

Part of their popularity comes from the fact that scientists and engineers have a much higher status in France than in America. Many high ranking civil servants and government officials trained as scientists and engineers (rather than lawyers, as in the United States), and, unlike in the U.S. where federal administrators are often looked down upon, these technocrats form a special elite. Many have graduated from a few elite schools such as the Ecole Polytechnic. According to Mandil, respect and trust in technocrats is widespread. "For a long time, in families, the good thing for a child to become was an engineer or a scientist, not a lawyer. We like our engineers and our scientists and we are confident in them.

According to the article, there were issues to overcome and it was based on strong cultural ideas of the rural French, who may have agreed that burying waste was safe, but had a more cultural objection.

Quote:

Bataille went and spoke to the people who were protesting and soon realized that the engineers and bureaucrats had greatly misunderstood the psychology of the French people. The technocrats had seen the problem in technical terms. To them, the cheapest and safest solution was to permanently bury the waste underground. But for the rural French says Bataille, "the idea of burying the waste awoke the most profound human myths. In France we bury the dead, we don't bury nuclear waste...there was an idea of profanation of the soil, desecration of the Earth."

Bataille discovered that the rural populations had an idea of "Parisians, the consumers of electricity, coming to the countryside, going to the bottom of your garden with a spade, digging a hole and burying nuclear waste, permanently." Using the word permanently was especially clumsy says Bataille because it left the impression that the authorities were abandoning the waste forever and would never come back to take care of it.

Arthur75 · **Posted:** Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:58 am

Grautr wrote:

Doesnt France also have a lot of reactors decommissioning over the next 10 years like Britain???

Yes there are some, the ones from the sixties, but the bulk of them is meant to last at least 20 years more I think (would have to check the details).
There is also one EPR in project (same as the one being builded in Finland)
Also EPR projects in China, probably in the UK, and recently project in the US in Ohio.

Overall I don't see France going out of nuclear energy in medium/long term (apart from a global crash due to PO).
Only real alternative would in fact be gas, and when you see what's going on with Russia ...

And of course the main source to pursue should also be savings

(especially in housing and transport energy use))

Why is nuclear power so successful and popular in France?

Who is online