The elected official of Vaucluse denounces the public support for renewable energies and considers that the choices of energy policy are "illegible" for the citizens.
The Vaucluse MP (LR) Julien Aubert is chairman of the parliamentary inquiry commission on the "economic, industrial and environmental impact of renewable energies, on the transparency of funding and on the social acceptability of energy transition policies", who began his work in the Assembly on Tuesday, 12 March. The committee, whose rapporteur is the MEP (LRM) of Isère Marjolaine Meynier-Millefert, is due to report at the end of July.
What is the purpose of this commission?
The objective is to question the incoherence of the French energy transition. There is a general misunderstanding and a lack of acceptability. It's about the amount of money you raise, the way it's perceived by people. This is what the movement of "yellow vests" showed. It can also be seen on topics such as wind turbines or the Linky meter, where there is local resistance.
What are the members going to look at?
The problem is that we do not have a very clear vision of how much it costs us, how much we spend, and we see that lobbies have specialized in the field and gained significant gains. In order for the energy transition to be acceptable to citizens, we need to be clear about what we take, what we take in the gas tank, what we take on the electricity bill.
We started the hearings with representatives of the oil sector. We realize that we take 47 billion euros per year in various taxes, of which only about 9 billion are donated to the energy transition. Which means that 75% of what is taken from the fossil does not go to ecology.
It's the same thing about electricity: the bill has increased by 40% in ten years. However, taxes that previously financed renewable energies are no longer allocated, since 2016, to the energy transition, but directly to the state budget.
The Court of Auditors estimates that France spends about 5 billion euros a year to support renewable energy, it seems to you a sum too important?
On this part of spending, I think we do anything! If we wanted to summarize, we could say that we spend a lot of money to replace a carbon-free energy produced with industrial jobs in France – the nuclear – by a carbon-free energy that favors companies from neighboring countries – solar and wind power . So the impact on our CO emissions2 is zero, and the industrial impact is bad. While our real subject is reducing emissions in transportation and heating.