nuclear-news

How France Sees Its Nuclear-Powered Future

How France Sees Its Nuclear-Powered Future It expands the use of nuclear energy at home and seeks to increase nuclear-technology sales abroad USNews.com By Eduardo Cue   March 10, 2009 PARIS—……………………..Opponents are warning that the new nuclear plants are too costly and will produce more dangerous waste that contains significantly higher levels of radioactive material. …………………..
The lack of real debate here until recently, critics say, was less a vote of public support than a failure in the French political system. “Nobody asked the French people what they thought,” remarks Jean-Philippe Desbordes, author of Atomic Park, a book critical of the French program. “France is much less democratic than the United States.”…………………………In January, President Nicolas Sarkozy announced the construction of a new-generation European pressurized water reactor, or EPR, in Penly in northern France………………………….

The decision to build the Penly plant was quickly challenged by environmentalists, who say high levels ofradioactivity from the new plant will pose a serious health risk to workers and that nuclear waste will have to be stored above ground for a longer period than has been the case to date. “Despite the French government’s global marketing of its flagship European Pressurized Reactor as cheap and safe,” the environmental group Greenpeace said in a statement, “nuclear energy is rapidly becoming the most expensive way to produce electricity, and its highly radioactive waste poses an ever- increasing problem.”

In announcing the construction of the Penly plant, the second in the series, the French government is hoping that building the reactor will persuade potential foreign clients to import the technology. Although no EPRs are now operating, two are currently under construction, one in Finland at Olkiluoto and the other in Flamanville in France’s Normandy region. The Finnish reactor has faced serious construction problems, including flawed pipes and waterlogged concrete, that have delayed its original April 2009 completion date by three years and led to cost overruns of 50 percent……………….

…………….The downside, according to critics, is that in the case of the French program, the government simply decided to trivialize the risks by placing the nuclear power plants near where people live, thereby giving a false sense of security as the installations came to be seen as part of the landscape.

March 11, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | France, politics | Leave a comment