> they even put the reduction of nuclear straight into the law
after decades of little investing in renewable energy, which is now cheap. France has a long coast and lots of sunshine...
Example: there are thousands of offshore wind turbines in Europe. A tiny fraction of those are in France.
> two decades being forced to sell electricity below production
The French nuclear industry now is mostly government owned. It picked up the failed business of EDF, which had debt of around 60 billion euros from exploding costs of new reactor constructions. It was always a political instrument to sell cheap electricity, while the tax payer pays for the hidden additional costs.
> There were never greens in the French government.
France is a democracy, you don't need to be in the governement to have an influence. They had agreements with Chirac and then Hollande against nuclear for their votes.
> after decades of little investing in renewable energy, which is now cheap. France has a long coast and lots of sunshine...
France has invested half of the total price of the nuclear grid in renewable. I do agree that those tremendous renewable investments went poorly though.
Since you're talking about wind turbines, the last one opened took 14 years to build.
> The French nuclear industry now is mostly government owned. It picked up the failed business of EDF, which had debt of around 60 billion euros from exploding costs of new reactor constructions. It was always a political instrument to sell cheap electricity, while the tax payer pays for the hidden additional costs.
Again, I don't see how anything else would have been better. Renewable companies won't last 20 years without investments (that's the full lifetime of solar and wind turbines anyways...) and forced to sell electricity below production cost to their competitors.
> France is a democracy, you don't need to be in the governement to have an influence.
Real influence is when a party is part of the government, has ministers, etc. Like the greens in Germany.
Just see the difference renewable energy for electricity production in France is at 20%. In Germany it's currently at around 50%.
If the 'greens' had any influence in France, this influence is not very visible in the results.
> I do agree that those tremendous renewable investments went poorly though.
The investments in nuclear went much worse: half of the reactor fleet is offline and more than a hundred billion Euros is needed for this fleet just to keep it running and replace some of these aging reactors. No wonder EDF is nationalized, with huge debt and billions of more needed - a normal company would already be bankrupt.
> Renewable companies won't last 20 years without investments (that's the full lifetime of solar and wind turbines anyways...) and forced to sell electricity below production cost to their competitors.
Renewables are currently the cheapest source of electricity and its getting cheaper.
Nuclear is only getting more expensive. See the French nuclear power plant in UK (Hinkley Point C), which a very expensive way to produce electricity. Delayed. Cost increases.
> Real influence is when a party is part of the government, has ministers, etc. Like the greens in Germany.
Yes that's what happened. Real influence is when you sign agreements for your votes at the presidential election in exchange for a few ministers, exactly what the greens did during the past 20 years.
> If the 'greens' had any influence in France, this influence is not very visible in the results.
I can point at actual laws propped up by the greens against their votes if you want, at this point it's just denying reality.
> The investments in nuclear went much worse: half of the reactor fleet is offline and more than a hundred billion Euros is needed for this fleet just to keep it running and replace some of these aging reactors. No wonder EDF is nationalized, with huge debt and billions of more needed - a normal company would already be bankrupt.
Well that's what happens when you stop investments and force selling electricity to below production costs yeah, again you're lucky it's nuclear we're talking about, it would be renewables, the production would have dropped to zero at that point.
> Renewables are currently the cheapest source of electricity and its getting cheaper.
France spent around half the price of the nuclear grid on renewables ... for 7% of the production. This puts it at around 5 times more expensive than the existing nuclear grid without taking into account the backup infrastructure.
The french investment on renewable was one of the most expensive with the lowest output ever performed by the country
This also did not help the current situation either.
There were never greens in the French government.
> they even put the reduction of nuclear straight into the law
after decades of little investing in renewable energy, which is now cheap. France has a long coast and lots of sunshine...
Example: there are thousands of offshore wind turbines in Europe. A tiny fraction of those are in France.
> two decades being forced to sell electricity below production
The French nuclear industry now is mostly government owned. It picked up the failed business of EDF, which had debt of around 60 billion euros from exploding costs of new reactor constructions. It was always a political instrument to sell cheap electricity, while the tax payer pays for the hidden additional costs.