A Report Deems France Can Divide Its Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Four

By Herve Kempf
Le Monde

Monday 09 October 2006

Is it possible to divide France's greenhouse gas emissions by four between now and 2050? "The answer is yes. Is it easy? The answer to that is clearly no."

All this is stated in the opinion expressed by a group of experts charged by the government to study a drastic reduction of French emissions. Its conclusions were made public on Monday, October 9, during a colloquium at the Finance Ministry.

This report, overseen by economist Christian de Boissieu - president of the Economic Analysis Council - derives from the commitment announced by Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin in 2003, and confirmed by Jacques Chirac in 2005, to divide polluting emissions by four in less than a half century.

Why that number? Because, if we want to limit global warming to 2 degrees Centigrade, we must limit the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) to 450 ppm (parts per million). To achieve that, humanity must freeze its annual carbon emissions at four billion tons, or 0.6 tons for each of the planet's six billion people.

As the less rich countries will, as they develop, progressively reach this level, industrialized countries must substantially reduce their waste. France must thus go from 140 million tons to 38 million.

May we wait until 2040 to commit ourselves, hoping that technologies will then be available to operate this reduction? Certainly not. The rise in the greenhouse effect is a cumulative phenomenon. "The later we act," the researchers write, "the more difficult it will be to return to a level of emissions absorbable by the biosphere; the more elevated the atmospheric concentrations are, the more significant the perturbations will be."

While it is indispensable to pursue and to accentuate research in a number of technological sectors to reduce the greenhouse effect, the experts warn that this will not be enough. Similarly, it appears that nuclear, solar, and wind power are not the solution to all our ills.

"Nuclear energy represents 6% of final energy in Europe; 2% in the world and 17% in France. Given these percentages, it does not appear justified to center the debate on nuclear energy when building a climate strategy."

As for the renewable energies (solar, wind) so often advanced, they do not constitute the panacea and the solution to all problems." On the other hand, biomass, and notably the wood sphere, seems to present significant potential.

Finally, market forces alone are not enough. It's not certain that oil prices will rise rapidly enough to change the orientation of the energy system, and very polluting substances, such as coal or bituminous schist, could be preferred by industry.

The accent must be put on "mastering energy demand." That's the area in which the actions to be taken are "at once numerous, often not very onerous, and available relatively quickly." We must also treat transport and construction, which account for half of French emissions, as priorities.

Adapting the habitat to these new conditions moreover represents a "market of several billion Euros between now and 2050." As for transportation, we must act on vehicle motorization by establishing an ecological road fund and by launching a carbon market between builders.

The stakes are enormous. But, the researchers insist, "the struggle against climate change implies a transformation of the global economy and society."

We still need to convince citizens of this policy. Their behavior is undoubtedly "the most delicate question to manage in the energy demand scenarios."

Translation: t r u t h o u t French language correspondent Leslie Thatcher.