This priority is mandatory because we are confronted with a cumulative phenomenon: that which is not avoided today will be harder and more expensive to compensate for in the future. The first imperative is to reduce the CO₂ emissions from fossil fuels, and simultaneously the CH₄ and N₂O emissions. Efficient action within the next 15 years is necessary and must be based on existing mature and competitive technologies. While a long-term vision extending to 2050 is relevant for research orientations, it is not for mid-term programming: it may lead to cruel failures.

The LTECV[1] is inefficient (along with the PPE) because it sets rigid objectives for 2030 relative to 2012, namely: reducing the final and primary energy consumption by 20% and 30% respectively; increasing renewable energies to 32% of the final energy consumption; renovating 500 000 homes per year; reducing the contribution to electricity generation of carbon-free nuclear power from 75% to 50% by 2025. These goals, along with their inconsistencies, clearly dominate today's political choices, over and above the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions within the best economic and social conditions.

 Full pdf version : PPE Debate Contribution-21 juin 2018

or the full html version : https://www.sauvonsleclimat.org/en/document-database/slc-contribution-debate-energy-policy

[1]     Translator's note: LTECV Loi de transition énergétique pour la croissance verte - French law published in August 2015 - defines the priorities for the French energy transition, it currently serves as a framework for the PPE (Programmation Pluriannuelle de l’énergie or multi-year energy programming).