
How France May Squander Its Nuclear Energy Advantage
Electricite de France (EDF) CEO, Luc Remont, poses for a photograph at the Penly Nuclear Power Plant ... More in Petit-Caux, on the English Channel coast, on December 9, 2022. (Photo by Lou BENOIST / AFP) (Photo by LOU BENOIST/AFP via Getty Images)
The global rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI), the proliferation of data centers, urbanization in emerging markets, and increasingly widespread electrification are all major factors driving the insatiable demand for electricity world-wide. Meanwhile, the world's focus on zero-emission energy in response to climate change has placed a premium on developing and maintaining safe and reliable nuclear energy virtually everywhere, which can provide a steady baseload of much needed non-fossil fuel energy throughout the world. Indeed, large energy dependent companies like Microsoft and Google are even beginning to purchase their own nuclear reactors, while European nations like Germany, Austria, and Switzerland shutter their own, existing ones.
Unique among Western nations, France remained committed to producing nuclear energy while the rest of the world mothballed many nuclear facilities in reaction to disasters like Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima. According to the World Nuclear Association, France now produces approximately 70% of its energy from nuclear sources. As the world becomes more concerned with reducing dependence on fossil fuels, France would seem to be among the best-positioned nations to lead in energy production while decreasing carbon emissions. Unfortunately, this is not the case.
The reality is that energy planning and supply in France have had a spotty and complicated record over the last several years. This, in turn, raises serious questions about Paris's ability to lead Europe into the new energy age, despite President Emmanuel Macron's apparent aspirations to position France as Europe's carbon-free energy frontrunner.
2022 was a watershed year – just as the Russian invasion of Ukraine began, threatening to trigger energy supply emergencies for many European countries, half of France's nuclear power plants were offline. For the first time in decades, France was forced to become a net importer of energy, at a time when its neighbors were struggling to obtain power themselves without depending on Moscow to keep the lights and heat on. To make matters worse, the French government decided the time was right to start nationalizing the country's nuclear power operator, Électricité de France (EDF), thereby angering the company's employee shareholders in the process.
The government also decided to try to shield French consumers from rising energy costs, forcing EDF to buy energy at high market prices and distribute it at a loss. This messy scenario resulted in EDF suing its own government for some €8.3 billion in losses, with its employee shareholders threatening to sue for more.
2022 was also the year that Macron, then a candidate for his second presidential term, called for a 'nuclear renaissance' to include the build-out of up to 14 new nuclear reactors as a key step in getting away from the use of fossil fuels. His call was actually quite late in coming – in the wake of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan, France had put new nuclear projects on hold. Meanwhile, its fleet of existing reactors was aging out and needing more frequent maintenance. Further, inspections and repairs had lagged behind schedule due to the prolonged wave of COVID shutdowns. By 2021, the mean age of France's 56 reactors was 36.1 years. The government had been planning to conduct the requisite inspections and repairs to extend the life of select reactors in the fleet to 50 years when stress corrosion issues were found in several of the reactors, necessitating shutdowns. Some of France's reactors still remain offline.
In 2024, EDF finally opened a new type of reactor in Flamanville, on the Normandy coast, after massive cost overruns (€13.2 billion/US$14.6 billion – around four times the €3.3 billion initially budgeted) and 12 years of delays. However, the reactor shut itself down on its second day of operation. After completely restructuring its core, EDF eventually reconnected it to the grid in April 2025.
While France has remained committed to nuclear power, it is not managing to walk its own walk as far as costs and delivery are concerned. The example of the Flamanville reactor speaks for itself. At the same time, Paris has contradicted itself repeatedly when it comes to integrating renewables into its energy framework. For instance, in 2023, France enacted a green energy law requiring listed companies to consult their shareholders on their climate strategies — only to backtrack on many of its provisions within months in a demonstration of poor planning, ill-considered policymaking, and an overall lack of practical and strategic vision.
The constant back-and-forth, delays, and false starts, along with the massive cost overruns associated with nuclear construction, have rendered French energy policy incoherent and placed a burden on its neighbors. This became glaringly evident on April 28th, when a massive power blackout hit all of Spain and Portugal, as well as parts of France and neighboring countries. While the immediate cause of the outage is still under investigation, the fragility of Spain's grid and its limited connectivity to France were major contributors. Spain's Energy Minister, Teresa Ribera, has previously highlighted the enormous difficulties in improving cross-border energy links with France, which continue to hinder Spain's integration into the broader European energy market, leaving that country with limited options for electricity imports from France during times of crisis.
The recent blackout underscores the challenges of integrating intermittent renewable sources, which typically introduce volatility into power grids through significant fluctuations in production and transmission. While France, with its nuclear baseload, fared better during the blackout than its Iberian neighbors, the blackout once again raised the issue of how Paris will generate power reliably and cost-effectively in the future.
Despite his aspirations, France's inconsistent energy policy and budgetary constraints limit Macron's ability to maneuver internationally, and leave him little choice but to court Qatari investments and even seek accommodations with Iran.
What's more, without a coherent, long-term energy policy that generates sufficient power, France is actually creating an energy dilemma for itself that serves as fertile political ground for the home-grown populist right National Rally, which has been gaining momentum among French voters and nearly won the most recent national elections before a court barred the party's leader, Marine Le Pen, from running for the presidency in April 2027.
For France as a whole, all of this disarray and lack of cogent planning reflects the remarkable squandering of a once-commanding energy advantage. France's long-time leadership in nuclear energy should have given it a winning hand internationally. Instead, although its President talks a big game, its leaders appear unable to chart a clear course, endangering its overall leadership of the EU on energy policy in the process.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Fast Company
24 minutes ago
- Fast Company
AI assistants still need a human touch
When I first encountered AI, it wasn't anything like the sophisticated tools we have today. In the 1990s, my introduction came in the form of a helpful, but mostly frustrating, digital paperclip. Clippy, Microsoft's infamous assistant, was designed to help, but it often got in the way, popping up at the worst moments with advice no one asked for. AI has evolved since then. Major companies like Apple are investing billions, and tools like OpenAI 's ChatGPT and DALL-E have reshaped how we interact with technology. Yet, one challenge from Clippy's era lingers—understanding and adapting to user intent. The original promise of AI was to create experiences that felt seamless, intuitive, and personal. AI was supposed to anticipate our needs and provide support that felt natural. So, why do so many systems today still feel mechanical and rigid—more Clippy than collaborator? When AI assistance is a burden When first introduced, Clippy was a bold attempt at computer-guided assistance. Its purpose was groundbreaking at the time, but it quickly became known more for interruptions than useful assistance. You'd pause when typing, and Clippy would leap into action with a pop-up: 'It looks like you're writing a letter!' Its biggest flaw wasn't just being annoying: It lacked contextual awareness. Unlike modern AI tools, Clippy's interactions were static and deterministic, triggered by fixed inputs. There was no learning from previous interactions and no understanding of the user's preferences or current tasks. Whether you were drafting a report or working on a spreadsheet, Clippy offered the same generic advice—ignoring the evolving context and failing to provide truly helpful, personalized assistance. Is AI destined to be like Clippy? Even with today's advancements, many AI assistants still feel underwhelming. Siri is a prime example. Though capable of setting reminders or answering questions, it often requires users to speak in very specific ways. Deviate from the expected phrasing, and it defaults to, 'I didn't understand that.' This is more than a UX flaw—it reveals a deeper issue. Too many AI systems still operate under a one-size-fits-all mentality, failing to accommodate the needs of individual users. With Siri, for instance, you're often required to speak in a specific, rigid format for it to process your request effectively. This creates an experience that feels less like assistance and more like a chore. Building a smarter assistant isn't just about better models. It's about retaining context, respecting privacy, and delivering personalized, meaningful experiences. That's not just technically difficult—it's essential. Helpful AI requires personalization Personalization is what will finally break us out of the Clippy cycle. When AI tools remember your preferences, learn from your behavior, and adapt accordingly, they shift from being tools to trusted partners. The key to this will be communication. Most AI today speaks in a one-dimensional tone, no matter who you are or what your emotional state is. The next leap in AI won't just be about intelligence, it'll be about emotional intelligence. But intelligence isn't only about remembering facts. It's also about how an assistant communicates. For AI to truly feel useful, it needs more than functionality. It needs personality. That doesn't mean we need overly chatty bots. It means assistants that adjust tone, remember personal context, and build continuity. That's what earns trust and keeps users engaged. While not every user may want an assistant with a personality or emotions, everyone can benefit from systems that adapt to our unique needs. The outdated one-size-fits-all approach is still common in many AI tools today and risks alienating users, much like Clippy's impersonal method back in the early days. For AI to thrive in the long term it must be designed with real humans in mind. Building Clippy 2.0 Now imagine a 'Clippy 2.0'—an assistant that doesn't interrupt but understands when to offer help. One that remembers your work habits, predicts what you need, and responds in a way that feels natural and tailored to you. It could help you schedule meetings, provide intelligent suggestions, and adapt its tone to fit the moment. Whether it has a personality or not, what matters is that it adapts to—and respects the uniqueness of every user. It might even respond with different tones or emotions depending on your reactions, creating an immersive experience. This kind of intelligent assistant would blend seamlessly into your routine, saving you time and reducing friction. Clippy may have been a trailblazer, but it lacked the technological foundation to live up to its potential. With the advances we've made today, we now have the tools to build a 'Clippy 2.0'—an AI assistant capable of transforming the way we interact with technology. Although maybe this time, it doesn't need to come in the form of a paperclip with a goofy smile.
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Government urged to disrupt ‘addictive grip' of smartphones on children's lives
The Government is being urged to create child-friendly playful neighbourhoods and disrupt the 'addictive grip' of smartphones on children's lives. Closures of playgrounds, busier roads, shortened school break times and the dominance of screentime have restricted children's opportunities to play, a report has suggested. Urgent action is needed to create more opportunities for children to play outdoors and away from digital devices and social media, according to a report by the Raising the Nation Play Commission inquiry. It warned: 'Too many of our children are spending their most precious years sedentary, doomscrolling on their phones and often alone, while their health and wellbeing deteriorates.' The commission was chaired by Paul Lindley, founder of organic baby food manufacturer Ella's Kitchen, in partnership with the Centre for Young Lives think tank, which was co-founded by the former children's commissioner for England Baroness Anne Longfield. It has called on the Government to establish a National Play Strategy for England, backed by an annual £125 million investment and led by a 'minister for play'. The strategy should include a commitment to a 'step-change' in the quantity and quality of children's use of digital devices through stronger regulation, public engagement and information, and addressing addictive 'push' factors that have driven children online, the report added. The inquiry has called on the Government to raise the digital age of consent to 16 and introduce a ban on smartphones in schools during the school day. It added that it should become easier for parents to organise 'safe play' in their streets, and there should be a national ban on 'No Ball Games' signs. A poll of 2,000 parents in England, commissioned by the inquiry, suggested that 55% of parents believe their youngest child plays outside less than they did when they were children. Around three in four (76%) parents agree that people are generally less accepting of children playing outside on the street than when they were a child, according to the poll. The Raising the Nation Play Commission brought together 19 expert commissioners to conduct a year-long inquiry into how play can be restored to every childhood in England. Lady Longfield, executive chairwoman of the Centre for Young Lives, said: 'Too many of our children are spending their most precious years sedentary, doomscrolling on their phones and often alone, while their health and wellbeing deteriorates. 'It is no coincidence that the least happy generation, the generation with the highest rates of obesity and rising ill health, is the generation that plays less and less. 'As we have heard from a swathe of experts and professionals working with children over the last year, play is being squeezed out of childhoods, with drastic implications for children, our economy and public services. 'With so much at stake children really have everything to play for: their health, wellbeing, happiness, learning, and development depends on our ability to reignite the role of play. 'This report provides a blueprint for how we can get children playing again and also tackle the scourge of addictive doomscrolling, so we can prevent future generations from becoming glued to screens.' Technology Secretary Pete Kyle has indicated he is considering an 'app cap' for children. On Sunday, the minister signalled he was looking at measures to restrict the amount of time children spend on their phones, including through a possible 10pm curfew. Mr Lindley, chairman of the Raising the Nation Play Commission, said: 'Creating truly playful communities is not just about better street design, traffic management, and reduced crime, but also about a reversal of the growing culture of intolerance towards children playing. 'This will also encourage more parents to have confidence they can let their children play out more freely, in the knowledge that their children will be both having a great time and are also safe. 'We need to give our children back the time, space, opportunity, freedom – and the right – to play again.' A Government spokesperson said: 'We recognise the vital importance of play and access to nature as part of children's development and wellbeing as we strive to create the healthiest and happiest generation of children ever. 'Through our Plan for Change, we are setting young people up to achieve and thrive – both inside and outside the classroom. 'We have given hundreds of thousands of children the tools to turn their grey school spaces green as part of our National Education Nature Park, we are opening up grassroots sports to all with £100 million investment in facilities and we are working with experts to develop a framework to improve access to activities outside of school. 'Schools already have the power to completely ban phones in the classroom and the overwhelming majority – 99.8% of primary schools and 90% of secondary schools – limit or restrict use. 'And from July, new rules under the Online Safety Act will require social media platforms to protect children in the UK from seeing harmful content online.'
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Reeves to say spending review will reflect ‘priorities of working people'
Rachel Reeves will unveil her spending review on Wednesday, arguing that her priorities are 'the priorities of working people'. The Chancellor is expected to focus on 'Britain's renewal' as she sets out her spending plans for the coming years, with big increases for the NHS, defence and schools. Arguing that the Government is 'renewing Britain', she will acknowledge that 'too many people in too many parts of the country are yet to feel it'. She will say: 'This Government's task – my task – and the purpose of this spending review is to change that, to ensure that renewal is felt in people's everyday lives, their jobs, their communities.' Among the main announcements is expected to be a £30 billion increase in NHS funding, a rise of around 2.8% in real terms, along with an extra £4.5 billion for schools and a rise in defence spending to 2.5% of GDP. But Wednesday could present a tough prospect for other government as the Chancellor seeks to balance Labour's commitments on spending with her fiscal rules. The Institute for Fiscal Studies has already warned that any increase in NHS funding above 2.5% is likely to mean real-terms cuts for other departments, or further tax rises to come in the budget this autumn. This could mean a budgetary squeeze for areas such as local government, the justice system and the Home Office, despite reports that policing would receive an above-inflation settlement. The Chancellor has already insisted that her fiscal rules remain in place, along with Labour's manifesto commitment not to increase income tax, national insurance or VAT. She will say on Wednesday: 'I have made my choices. In place of chaos, I choose stability. In place of decline, I choose investment. In place of retreat, I choose national renewal. 'These are my choices. These are this Government's choices. These are the British people's choices.' Other announcements expected on Wednesday include £39 billion for social and affordable housing over the next decade as the Government aims to meet its target of building 1.5 million new homes by the next election. The Treasury said this would see annual investment in affordable housing rise to £4 billion by 2029/30, almost double the average of £2.3 billion between 2021 and 2026. The additional spending has been welcomed by homelessness charities, with Crisis calling it 'a determined political signal that housing really matters' and Shelter describing the move as 'a watershed moment in tackling the housing emergency'. The Chancellor has also already announced some £15.6 billion of spending on public transport in England's city regions, and £16.7 billion for nuclear power projects, the bulk of which will fund the new Sizewell C plant in Suffolk. There is also expected to be an extension of the £3 bus fare cap until March 2027 and an extra £445 million for upgrading Welsh railways. But one of the big losers from the spending review could be London, which is not expected to receive funding for any significant infrastructure projects or powers to introduce a tourist levy – both key requests from Mayor Sir Sadiq Khan.