Le 'bon sense' scientifique commun l'a (finalement?) emporté:

Le réacteur de fusion nucléaire Iter sera construit en France

Cyrille Vanlerberghe

Sauf surprise de dernière minute, un accord doit être conclu cet après-midi à Moscou pour entériner officiellement l'implantation d'Iter en France, à Cadarache dans les Bouches-du-Rhône. Depuis plus d'un an et demi, l'Europe et le Japon opposaient leurs candidatures pour héberger le futur réacteur de fusion nucléaire, qui pourrait offrir une solution énergétique presque sans limites pour les siècles à venir.

Le Japon s'est battu bec et ongles pratiquement jusqu'au dernier jour pour défendre le site de Rokkasho-mura, dans le nord de l'Archipel, mais le gouvernement japonais a laissé entendre la semaine dernière qu'il allait retirer sa candidature. De source proche du dossier, les compensations accordées au Japon portent sur deux domaines bien distincts. D'une part, l'Union européenne a accepté de financer un programme de recherche qui s'ajoutera à Iter, et qui sera installé au Japon. Les coûts de ce programme supplémentaire, dont le thème de recherche précis est encore inconnu, seront partagés à parts égales entre l'Europe et le Japon, pour un montant atteignant 16% du coût d'Iter.

Les autres termes de l'accord concernent les conditions avantageuses octroyées au Japon pour le programme Iter proprement dit. Sur les 4,7 milliards d'euros nécessaires à la construction, le financement japonais ne sera que de 10%. Malgré cette relativement faible contribution, les Japonais disposeront de 20% du personnel total, ainsi que de 20% des contrats industriels liés à la construction. L'Union européenne s'est également engagée à soutenir la candidature japonaise pour le poste de directeur général d'Iter.

Le coût de cet accord est en contrepartie très élevé pour l'Europe et la France, qui vont devoir apporter respectivement 40% et 10% du budget total du programme. Les 40% du budget restants seront apportés par les quatre autres pays partenaires, les États-Unis, la Russie, la Chine et la Corée du Nord.

Depuis le choix d'une candidature unique européenne (le site espagnol concurrent de Cadarache a été écarté en novembre 2003), c'est officiellement la Commission européenne qui menait les négociations internationales. Mais des discussions au plus haut niveau ont jalonné ce marathon diplomatique telle la rencontre, au Japon, entre Jacques Chirac et le premier ministre japonais Junichiro Koizumi en mars dernier. Les chefs d'État souligneront l'importance stratégique qu'ils accordent au projet Iter lors du sommet du G 8, la semaine prochaine en Écosse.

Pour la France, l'installation du futur réacteur Iter à Cadarache, sur un terrain au statut international en bordure du centre de recherche nucléaire du CEA (Commissariat à l'énergie atomique), sera une source directe de débouchés pendant les dix années de construction et les vingt ans d'exploitation.

Les 10 milliards d'euros qui y seront investis en trente ans apporteront 500 emplois directs sur le chantier de construction lui-même ainsi qu'au moins 3 000 emplois indirects dans la région, d'après une étude. La phase de fonctionnement emploiera 1 000 personnes sur le site, ainsi que 3 500 emplois indirects dans la région. En revanche, les bénéfices sur la qualité de la recherche européenne, dans le domaine précis de la fusion, ainsi que sur bien des branches de la physique qui sont proches, sont plus difficiles à estimer avec précision.

Pour tous ceux qui sont des 'ferrus' de l'environnement (et des energies renouvelables...) P.-V. voudrait leur conseiller ce livre:

The Solar Economy
by Hermann Scheer
A review by Simon Roberts

"Sustainable energy" is very much in vogue to cover more than just renewable energy technologies. It is about reducing CO2 emissions to mitigate the increasingly dire effects of climate change, and can include the use of resources that will be depleted but not for a very long time.

"Sustainability" in its broader application, though, has a wider meaning. In simple terms it is often thought of as the "triple bottom lines" of social and environmental alongside the traditional financial considerations. Sustainable development is about considering and balancing these, almost orthogonal, concepts as best as possible within current circumstances, though striving to improve for the future.

As physicists and engineers in pursuit of our interests and projects, the financial bottom line can be frustrating but we're always aware that this is the "real world". Also we're increasingly taking on board environmental consequences, never more so than in the containment of radioactive waste from nuclear power. But the social bit? Isn't that for the politicians and society to decide and provide the leadership? (...well grounded on sound technical information, of course.)

Hermann Scheer's book isn't about sustainability as such but I suggest it offers a very powerful argument connecting energy technologies and sustainability from a different direction.

Scheer uses "solar" to cover not only electricity from photovoltaics and heating but hydro, wind and wave. He includes materials of plant origin, produced from sunlight via photosynthesis to emphasise their solar origin. (Tidal-based power generation systems depend on the moon's motion, not the sun, but I think Scheer would include these within his solar label.)

The title of his book, "The solar economy", puts all these solar resources at the heart of thinking and ultimately action. His message is very simple in essence: locally or regionally produced solar energy, foodstuffs and solar resources should be consumed and marketed in preference to otherwise equivalent products. (This is the sixth of seven propositions he puts forward.)

Let's consider some of the evidence Scheer presents. By 1999, Germany had installed around 3500 MW of wind turbine capacity and Denmark 1560 MW, whereas France had installed only 19 MW and Ireland 73 MW - although the Altantic coastline endows France and Ireland with many more suitable sites.

The difference is not down to geography but to the favourable climate for wind turbine operators in Denmark and Germany provided by the "electricity feed-in laws" that guarantee grid access and minimum prices. As a German MP, Scheer was the architect behind getting this legislation through; a doer as well as a visionary. The point here is that the difference in wind turbine capacity owes more to politics and culture.

He critically examines the evolution and impact of our current energy companies. "Like a spider, the fossil resource industry has been spinning its web over more and more sectors of the economy. Each strand of this web is a supply chain, with crosslinks composed of other directly connected industries." Out of the 50 largest European companies, 17 are in part or wholly conventional suppliers of energy and raw materials, or part of the chemicals industry.

Scheer develops his argument around the number of steps in the supply chains of various energy technologies, highlighting many hidden costs. "An examination of the entire supply chain for fossil fuel energy demonstrates that its claim to be more economical is a myth. In theory, renewable energy sources have an economic advantage because of their much shorter supply chains. This can be exploited if the atomic and fossil fuel energy suppliers are divested of their numerous state privileges."

The most sensitive question humanity faces is whether the global economy produces enough to go around. If our economy continues to be based on limited, polluting resources and ever more concentrated global business structures, then there will not be enough for all. Resource reserves are in truth the flashpoints for ever more conflicts. Scheer's seventh proposition is that, "Only a solar global economy can satisfy the material needs of all mankind and grant us the freedom to re-establish our social and democratic ideals."

Scheer enables us to think big and "sustainable", not in a fluffy way but one that will appeal to many phyicist's: systemic thinking based on some fundamental physical concepts argued with a wealth of statistics.

Here are a couple of links on the web to give a taste.

Hydrogen - revolution or illusion? Effective use of renewable resources requires a radical rethink of the supply and distribution network - simply copying the established structure will not work. Many think that the "hydrogen economy" is what we need but Scheer argues against Jeremy Rifkin who supports this single-minded commitment.
A short article by Scheer, "Solar Solution: Moving From A Fossilized Economy To A Solar Economy."
If you find these links interesting, maybe you'll be tempted to read "The solar economy" for the full story.