Merci beaucoup, Msr. Sarkozy
Peter Hoskin 1:14pm
Next week, Gordon Brown will meet with Nicolas Sarkozy at the home of French football. And, according to early reports, Sarkozy will come bearing a few petits cadeaux – among which will be an Anglo-French agreement to construct a new generation of nuclear power stations.
Why should we regard a mutual agreement as a gift from the French? Because we have so much more to gain from it than they have. After all, whilst our Government has spent the past decade pumping money into ineffectual wind power, the French have steamed ahead with nuclear energy. Around 79% of France's electricity comes from nuclear power; and they have some of the most advanced technology and expert technicians in the world. By contrast, Britain's nuclear power plants are out-of-date and dilapidated, and our best technicians have departed for more nuclear-friendly shores. An injection of French expertise is exactly what Brown needs to meet his nuclear power ambitions.
Previous
Comments
David
March 22nd, 2008 2:50pm"Why should we regard a mutual agreement as a gift from the French? Because we have so much more to gain from it than they have." You have an odd definition of a gift. Normally it's because you have less to gain from the recipient that makes it a gift. I'm quite glad I'm not on your Christmas gift list.....
Nicholas
March 22nd, 2008 4:57pmWind farming is a particularly appropriate symbol for Brown's "strategies" per se. Tremendous cost, lots of waste, little benefit, lots of lives blighted and the triumph of ugliness over beauty.
Tiberius
March 22nd, 2008 6:18pmI don't think I've previously seen Monsieur abbreviated to anything other than M.
Pete Hoskin
March 22nd, 2008 6:27pmTiberius: it can be abbreviated to Msr., although I think that M. is more conventional. My French teacher taught me the former way though, so it's always stuck...
TGF UKIP
March 22nd, 2008 6:42pmNuclear costs and nuclear safety remain extremely dubious. All the Labour Government's dithering now means that the prospect of a real energy crunch c 2015 is now a frightening and distinct possibility. The real answer is, and has always been, coal of which we have abundant reserves. Away from all the green headbangers of Europe, the rest of the world has no doubts. World coal production has increased by 78% over the past 25 years to 4970 mt and is forecast to rise by a further 41% to 7,000 mt by 2030 with around half this increase being accounted for by China alone. Fortunately for the Chinese they are long on common sense and short on Camerons and Monbiots.
David Short
March 22nd, 2008 9:42pmI too thought Msr. looked really odd, and thought for a moment the sub-editor (do they have them any more at the Spectator) meant 'Monsignor'. I have never in my life either in France or other French-speaking countries I've visited or worked in seen such an abbreviation. M. or even M'sieu, never Msr. If you made a mistake, admit it. If not, show us another source of Msr.
Nicholas
March 23rd, 2008 12:13pm"Fortunately for the Chinese they are long on common sense" You must be joking? Have you ever been there? I mean really been there - not just passed through or watched documentaries.
TGF UKIP
March 23rd, 2008 1:32pmNo, Nicholas, and I humbly take your point. It just does seem to me, though, for the Chinese economy to have made the remarkable strides it has over the past twenty years, they must really have a very robust sense of priorities.
Sekhar
March 23rd, 2008 2:19pmI am not against nuclear energy. But it is disappointing to see people like Nicholas rubbishing wind energy. What we need is more efficient wind turbines. We need to persevere with non-conventional energy sourses along with pragmatic methods
Steve, UK
March 23rd, 2008 2:53pmDavid je ne comprends pas. Would you prefer a gift you did not really need? We have arranged something with the French that clearly benefits us more than them. So they have made us a generous gift. Non?
Nicholas
March 23rd, 2008 4:31pmSekhar, don't be disappointed old chap. I'm not rubbishing wind energy per se as much as rubbishing government "strategies" (and I use that term loosely). Wind farming, like most of the crap foisted on us by Brown & Co, is the product of zealotry + flawed planning + hasty implementation. Result = rubbish. Short term, tactical, often knee-jerk solutions to long term, strategic issues, usually built on the need "to do something" and sound good in the media.
Who said wind turbines have to be white, mounted on long poles and plonked down in some of the most beautiful parts of the country and coast? Its like the ghastly buildings being built in ancient market towns like Bury St Edmunds. The bus terminal there looks like a half-finished Tesco store with the scaffolding left on.
Planners and architects should think less about cute gimmickry,"making statements" etc., and more about respecting the country they are only transient tenants in. Who said alternative energy sources and modern municipal buildings have to be ugly?
Cogito Ergosum
March 23rd, 2008 5:10pmAt least these windmills have given us a simile: spinning like a Blair government.
Or a Brown one.
Augustus
March 23rd, 2008 6:43pm(Sarkozy, in French): "What's the English for: Take care sir, those are not giants, merely windmills?"
Max Kaye
March 23rd, 2008 6:50pmAll those who place their trust in wind power should agree to be supplied with electricity generated solely from this source. Sure, they may not have any juice when it's not windy enough - or too windy - but they'll sure feel nice virtuous as they sit and shiver (or sweat) in the dark.
The simple truth is that wind power requires virtually 100% backup from other generation sources making them at best redundant - but actually wasteful and stupid. Some excess electricity generated can be stored, but again, at great cost.
There are still some things we can learn from our French neighbours. Energy independence and widespread use of nuclear power are just two examples.