Transition or energy decrease?- counterpoints

Posted on February 8, 2015-A+

By Michel Gay

What is the energy transition?The response that is not self -evident, the Minister of Ecology had proposed to rename the text under discussion in Parliament to title it "Law for a new French energy model".

Finally, it seems that the energy transition can be defined according to the objectives included in article 1 of the bill.Thus, it would be:

Just that !But it is consistent with the low productions of random and intermittent renewable energies and a reduction on the part of nuclear ... Is it a decrease, or even better, an implosion of France which is targeted?

Insane objectives

To better understand the absurdity of these objectives which do not seem to worry our elected officials, we must know what the concept of energy intensity represents, and know the close link that exists between energy consumption and economic activity ofa country.

L’intensité énergétique d’un pays est le ratio entre la consommation d’énergie¹ et le produit intérieur brut (PIB).This quantity is expressed in tons of oil equivalent per million euros (TEP / €) and it has significantly decreased in 40 years thanks to our energy efficiency earnings in particular to reach around 90 TEP / M € of GDP in 2014.However, it is starting to stabilize, especially since 2007, which means that it will be more and more expensive and difficult to produce wealth by consuming less energy.

From 1970 to 2011, energy intensity improved by 45%, just under 1% per year.This improvement is due to technical progress (insulation of buildings, efficient heaters, increased efficiency of household appliances, etc.) which have made it possible to obtain the same wealth with less energy spent, and also, alas, to the deindustrialisation of France.

No country in the world has experienced economic growth without increasing energy consumption.Only the ex -eastern country underwent their energy consumption between 1990 and 2000, when the growth of their GDP became strongly negative.From the 2000s, when their economy regained growth, their energy consumption has again increased.

All countries reconnecting with economic growth also see their energy consumption increase in a more important way as their demography increases, which is the case for France.

Wanna be done Writing so my natural friend @tetehumba can show me How to make flaxseed oil/ gel (excited !!)

— neema nouse Wed Jun 03 18:22:53 +0000 2015

Energy is a physical quantity that makes it possible to make changes of states.However, GDP is a merchant reflection of these changes of states.

In summary, world GDP varies in the same direction as energy consumption (see graph).

The Energy Transition Act, however, is well aimed at a division by two of energy consumption by 2050, a reduction of around ... 2% per year.A strong recession would therefore be "necessary" to achieve this insane objective!

To start to absorb unemployment, it is necessary that economic growth, that is to say the growth of GDP, that is to say at least + 1.5% per year and per inhabitant.

Now, our demography remains positive, both from the point of view of the gap between births and deaths as well as migratory balance.To reduce energy consumption by 50%, it would therefore be necessary to divide by two the energy intensity per capita by 2050 ... But it will be difficult, if not impossible, most of the efforts having already been provided.Except to wish the recession (like our green friends?), The division by two of the energy consumed in 2050 will not be reached.And you have to wish it for the good of the French.

Towards decrease?

Although fundamental for the vitality of the country, this notion of energy intensity as well as the subtle links between economy and energy remain opaque for the general public.Consequently, the politician is disinterested, since it is not an electoral issue, unlike current lies ... on the miratic capacities of renewable energies which attract policies eager to maintain their rent annuity.To make his voters believe that they will be able to live with fresh water, wind and sun is still otherwise more sympathetic than to explain why it is a dangerous illusion.

In addition, this bill was discussed not only in accelerated procedure but, moreover, in programmed time.MPs and their employees have certainly not been able to hear, reflect and improve the content of this text whose quality ... Perplexed for a law announced as one of the most important in the five -year term.

However, beyond the figures to say the least hazardous, the objectives of this bill reflect a cultural tilting which should not be underestimated.For the first time, Parliament might believe that the country's economic growth no longer depends on the increase in energy consumption, nor on nuclear electricity production, but, on the other hand, on their decrease. Il s’agirait alors bien d’une « révolution tragique » qui aurait des conséquences aussi néfastes que le « Grand Bond en avant » de Mao, ou que le Lyssenkisme² en ex-Union soviétique.

Wanting to impose by law a division by two of energy consumption in less than 40 years is clearly an objective of economic decrease with its procession of misery, poverty and unemployment which would undoubtedly lead to a real social explosion.

1. Énergie primaire ou finale : pour l’électricité hydraulique, éolienne ou photovoltaïque, c’est la quantité d’électricité produite. Remplacer de l’électricité « classique », qui constitue 30% environ de l’énergie primaire (fossile ou nucléaire), par de l’éolien et du PV « améliore » donc l’intensité énergétique, ce qui est absurde. Cela dit, une diminution de 50% de la consommation d’énergie, quelle que soit la façon dont on la calcule, est tout à fait illusoire, sauf grave récession. ↩
2. Lyssenkisme : métaphore utilisée pour dénoncer la manipulation ou la déformation de la méthode scientifique afin de soutenir une conclusion prédéterminée, souvent liée à un objectif social ou politique.« Comment Lyssenko a-t-il pu acquérir assez d’influence et de pouvoir pour subjuguer ses collègues, conquérir l’appui de la radio et de la presse, l’approbation du Comité central et de Staline en personne, au point qu’aujourd’hui tout ce qui s’en écarte est « irrévocablement banni » de la science soviétique ? (…) Tout cela est insensé, démesuré, invraisemblable. C’est vrai pourtant. Que s’est-il passé ? » (Jacques Monod, article du quotidien Combat, 19 septembre 1948).Le bilan de Lyssenko est accablant : « Apport scientifique nul, paralysie de la biologie et de l’agronomie soviétiques pendant près de trente ans, mise à l’écart et assassinats de savants mondialement réputés. » (Joël et Dan Kotek, L’Affaire Lyssenko, p. 95). ↩