LTECV: which strategy for 2035. Weaknesses of scenarios presented this autumn by the ADEME, RTE and the SER: why 50 per cent of nuclear production? When ideology prevails on pragmatism

In this article, the author discusses the content of three scenarios (respectively proposed by the ADEME, RTE and the SER) which have been reviewed to take the updating of the law related to energy transition for a green growth (LTECV) and the multi-annual energy planning (PPE) into account, and which comply with this updating. Moreover, the author focuses on objectives defined for 2035 because those defined for 2050 are much more uncertain and depend on technical evolutions which have not been demonstrated yet. He recalls general objectives defined by the LTECV, and comments present energy and climate performance. He discusses various aspects of the ADEME scenario: consumption by the residential and tertiary, transport, industrial, farming and fishing sectors, evolution energy resources (thermal and electrical renewable energies), evolution of CO₂ and greenhouse gas emissions. Then, he discusses the RTE scenario which only addresses the electric power mix: situation of production, consumption and exports, predictions on trans-border networks to exchange intermittent power. He also discusses the ADEME and RTE financial approach. He briefly discusses SER proposals. The author notably states that the planned reduction of greenhouse emissions and the decrease of nuclear energy production down to a share of 50 per cent are two contradicting requirements, and may result in a degradation of the energy mix quality