l'Actualité du Solaire

Environmentalists are mobilised to demand climate action

But they do not mobilise beyond themselves.

As long as environmentalists think about the climate, they do no harm

Environmentalists underestimate the difficulties of different economies

The economic situation is rather opposed to the development of renewable energies.

Solar and wind power have passed the threshold of childhood and can now develop on their own.

Environmentalists are mobilised to demand climate action

The prospect of an exit from confinement inspires authors of articles, as well as climate concerns. There is an explosion of contributions, calls to save the planet, volunteers to limit global warming. Some are trying to attract support; others want to show their numbers; others show unwavering conviction; some want to mobilise to relaunch industrialisation in their region or area of action. Reading these documents, one has the impression that the whole of France and the world are mobilised for the climate and to defend our enjoyment of life.

.

But they do not mobilise beyond themselves

The uproar around this theme raises questions. There is not a single voice that manifests its opposition or defends the world before. Yet the volume of this media noise hides its weakness. One of the most ecologist, Pascal Canfin (president of the European Parliament's Environment Committee) has not even gathered in his petition half of the European ministers in charge of the climate cause. He only found 37 European CEOs who agreed to sign it, despite the fact that there are tens of thousands of large European companies. Only 10% of MEPs have joined his manifesto (probably the members of his committee).

The manifesto calls on the European Commission to give priority to the "Green Plan" and to place it at the centre of the post-epidemic recovery plan. All the signatories commit to support recovery plans based on an economic transformation aimed at combating climate change and biodiversity loss. The cause is noble and deserves to be supported. Yet hardly anyone is signing! No one makes a commitment. No one wants to come forward. What a contrast with the scale of the media wave that seems to be carrying this cause!

.

As long as environmentalists think about the climate, they do no harm.

To explain this contrast, it would seem that the political leaders accept this media overflow. Even better, they do not seem to be fighting it. It allows the protesters to find a playground that occupies them and prevents them from attacking institutions or leaders. In a word, environmentalists keep busy and do no harm. If they also do good for the planet, so much the better. It seems that the attitude of power is to isolate the most restless personalities. This confinement and even virtual confinement allows them to manage the affairs of different countries without being disturbed. Between politicians!

Environmentalists hope that the post-health crisis will be an opportunity to rebuild the economy and society in a different way. They recommend either radical decisions or shifts in favour of renewable energies to the detriment of hydrocarbons. Hydrocarbons are accused of warming the planet and contributing to greenhouse gas emissions. The ecologists hope to encourage political leaders and especially the European Commission to take binding measures, since it has already set the "Energy Charter".The Commission has already set a target of reducing its greenhouse gas emissions by 40% compared to 1990 and is considering raising this target to 50% or even 60%!

However, the new Commission's intention is being thwarted by certain European countries (Poland, Czech Republic, etc.). They are opposed to reducing their emissions because these countries are heavy users of coal to produce their electricity. Even with negotiations, it is far from certain that the Commission will succeed in drawing up a text acceptable to all. Perhaps that's why the environmentalists are restless.

.

Environmentalists underestimate the difficulties of different economies

It is probably not on the European level that environmentalists will fail, but rather on the national difficulties in reviving the economy after the crisis. After two months (in general) of inactivity linked to the containment, half of the French employees are to be compensated. Above all, countless companies are likely to become insolvent. This is not the time to look for innovation, but rather to make what can still be made good.

Rather, the period of recovery from the crisis is the time to avoid a social and economic breakdown with incalculable consequences. Above all, the time has come to restore the spirit of work after two months paid to stay at home. Public authorities have many other concerns than investing in renewable energies. To keep economic structures in place, public deficits are exploding, and France's debt is at 115% of its GDP. The violence of the economic shock will lead to a recession of around 8% of GDP in 2020.

.

The economic situation is rather opposed to the development of renewable energies.

As a consequence of the global recession, the price of oil is at zero these days due to a technical aspect - the obligation for holders of oil purchase contracts to take delivery of crude oil shipments when all the warehouses are full. Even if the price of oil rises a bit in the coming days, the weak demand and abundant supply means a reduced price which does not encourage people to abandon oil in favour of RE!

During containment, the demand for electricity has decreased by 15 to 25%, leading to overproduction of energy. Electricity prices halved on the wholesale market between the period before and after the health crisis. The decrease in oil consumption in France (up to 80%) reduces the amount of French fuel taxes. However, these are allocated to support new energies. Consequently, between lower tax revenues and the public deficit, the State could be forced to reduce its subsidies for renewable energies. This would not suit the ecologists: perhaps they perceive the risk, which would motivate their demands!

Even the construction of solar power plants will be affected by this economic crisis. If the state continues to subsidise tenders, energy purchase contracts will be suspended by the situation: companies will not enter into contracts without knowing the state of the electricity market, or even the average price of energy. One source of developer activity is drying up. The activity of the sector will be less in 2021 and perhaps in 2022.

The price of solar tenders is at best €0.05 per kWh (in France). Power stations produce intermittently. This requires a storage system to obtain continuously available electricity. However, the nuclear kilowatt-hour is displayed between €0.04 (according to EDF but these figures are old) and €0.06 (according to the Cour des Comptes, also old figures). Why then develop solar power plants that produce at the same price as nuclear power plants, to which should be added the cost of storage? For the moment, nuclear power plants exist and can produce energy. Why not continue?

Lastly, solar power plants will contribute around 2% to electricity consumption in France in 2019. All renewable energies employed 152,000 full-time equivalent jobs in 2019 (according to the SER). This compares with an active population of 30 million people. RE thus employs 0.5% of the French population. Its relative importance is really low. It cannot mobilise the energy of the government(s).

.

Solar and wind power have passed the threshold of childhood and can now develop on their own.

This does not mean that its importance will not increase in the years to come, because the power plants that have been or will be built can be operated for thirty years. The cost of producing energy is expected to fall further due to the overproduction of panels in China, which will cause a collapse in manufacturing prices. New types of batteries will be introduced, reducing the kWh saved to less than 66 euros (see A promising new type of flow batteries). Other technological developments will help to increase either the conversion rate of the sun; or the production of power plants by installing much larger ones to reduce costs; or the conversion of solar energy into hydrogen to create another change.

The future belongs to solar and, to a lesser extent, wind power. Here, environmentalists are not mistaken. However, we are at the stage of discovering and developing the technologies. They no longer really need public support. Their own evolution becomes independent of external decisions. They are going to develop, but slowly, because the French and world population has not yet appropriated this new source of energy. They do not yet believe in it. They remain among professionals, which confines them to a restricted circle.

It seems that this health crisis and the economic crisis that follows from it mark above all the birth of solar energy. Like any emerging plant, it was fragile and needed a lot of attention. It can now develop. It is necessary to know how to recognise what it is capable of offering, without deluding oneself about its interest and weaknesses.