Shall we vote, shall we not vote? Although the project of law related to the development of renewable energies (EnR) is being examined in the chamber of the National Assembly since Monday, environmentalists have not yet spoken. However, a line seems to be emerging.
“At the moment we are more of an abstention,” says Sandrine Rousseau on BFMTV-RMC. This decision will be made during the meeting of the environmental group on Tuesday morning, however, the deputy for Paris specifies.
If EELV elected officials are naturally in favor of renewable energy development, two elements pose a problem for them. First of all, we must not “develop renewable energy to the detriment of biodiversity”, advocates Sandrine Rousseau. “There was a whole dilemma to know whether to make exceptions to the environmental law” for the installation of wind turbines, for example.
Promote the “built, the already built”, for photovoltaic panels
“We must build wind turbines as a priority on abandoned roads, abandoned railways, in places where there is no particular quality of biodiversity,” the elected official develops.
And to underline “difficult trade-offs”, because “we have to choose between biodiversity and energy”. Next, the finalist of the last primaries of the EELV, raises “the question of photovoltaics in the fields, specifically agricultural fields”. Ecologists want to favor “what has been built, what has already been built” -such as roofs, car parks or large areas- instead of “agricultural land”.
“We have seen it with the drought, the fires, the floods […] global warming will increase, there is uncertainty about production, so it is absolutely necessary to maintain agricultural land”, justifies Sandrine Rousseau.
The abstention of the ecologists, if confirmed, would make it even more difficult for the text to be adopted by a relative majority. The executive, who only has 49.3 left until the end of next summer’s parliamentary session, has no plans to use the ax article to push through his bill.
Source: BFM TV
