You are on page 1of 193

Wind Energy in France

An Analysis of Specific Developments and Constraints

Diploma Thesis by Fabia Schäufele

Technical University Berlin Sociology and Technology Studies

May 2010

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010

Technische Universität Berlin Institut für Soziologie FG Techniksoziologie

Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Werner Rammert Co-advisor: Martin Meister, M.A.

1

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010

Table of Contents
Wind Energy in France – An Analysis of Specific Developments and Constraints ........................ 0 1 2 2.1 2.2 2.3
2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3

Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 4 Theories of Technological and Sectoral Change ............................................................................. 7 Wind Power as an Innovation ..................................................................................................... 7 Innovations in Socio-Technical Constellations ......................................................................... 9 Socio-Technical Constellations in a Wider Context ............................................................... 14
The Evolution of Large Technological Systems .............................................................................................. 15 Technological Transitions in a Multi-Level-Framework ............................................................................... 16 Technology-Based Sectoral Change .................................................................................................................. 20

2.4 3 3.1 3.2 4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 5 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 6

Pattern, Phases and Paths .......................................................................................................... 23 Case Studies in other National Contexts ........................................................................................ 27 The Development of Wind Power Stations in Denmark and in the USA ........................... 27 The Innovation Biography of Wind Energy in Germany ...................................................... 29 The Development of the French Wind Energy Sector .................................................................. 33 Technology Development and Technological Profile of the Sector ..................................... 38 Development of Institutional Structures – the French Energy Policy ................................ 55 Changes in Actor Constellations and in the Socio-Economic Framework ......................... 69 Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 88 Constricting and Enabling Factors of the Niche-Sector-Transformation .................................. 90 Geographical Preconditions ....................................................................................................... 90 Events at the Landscape Level .................................................................................................. 91 Niche Factors................................................................................................................................ 96 Impact of the Regime Level ..................................................................................................... 102 Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 119 Transformation of the French Energy System ............................................................................ 122

References, Indexes, and Appendix..................................................................................................... 127

2

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010

Abstract
Wind energy is currently one of the most mature technologies in the renewable energy sector and Europe is taking a leading role in its development. However, within Europe, there are significant differences in the advancement of wind energy: While it has come to play a significant, non-negligible role in the German energy system, the same technology could not yet establish itself in France. The niche has not succeeded in transforming the French energy system, although the surrounding conditions in France have changed significantly over the past years. To shed some light on the reasons for this particular development, this case study tracks back the development of the French wind energy sector from its beginnings up to the present. Special attention is given to the following three processes: technological change, changes in energy policy, and changes in actor constellations and the socio-economic context. Based on this extensive analysis, it is possible to work out enabling and constricting factors in this development, which have caused it to take its special “French” course. For the theoretical analysis of “the French development” the ‘Multi-Level-Perspective’ (Rip & Kemp 1998) was then applied to the empirically compiled data. This perspective gives a contextualized view of the role niches play in a technological transition process. It makes it possible to assign the enabling and constricting factors to different socio-technological constellations on three analytical levels: the wind energy niche, the established and dominant constellation in the French energy sector (the regime), and the overall macro level of society (the landscape). The perspective further helps to observe interactions between processes at all the analytical levels and to analyze the effects of the respective ‘change mechanisms’ on the socio-technical transition process. The study finally assesses whether a regime shift is actually possible in the French context.

Keywords: STS, sociology of technology, multi-level-perspective, socio-technical change, regime shift, niche, wind energy, renewable energies, France

3

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010

1 Introduction
Until the end of the 18th century our energy sources have all been renewable (Cochet 2000). It was only with the first industrial revolution1 that wood, wind, water, and solar energy were quickly and efficiently replaced by coal and steam as main energy sources. The industrial revolution profoundly changed social and economical conditions of our society and modified power production in such a way that it became location- and time-independent. The increasing industrial relevance of oil and the comprehensive application of electric power then marked the beginning of a second industrial revolution. Of late, the idea of a third industrial revolution frequently comes up in discussions on climate change and a possible turnaround in the energy sector. Supporters of this idea emphasize the importance of an efficient handling of our energy resources and overcoming our dependence upon fossil fuels to guarantee sustainable growth in our society. (BMU 2008) “I believe we are now standing on the brink of a Third Industrial Revolution: the Low Carbon Age […] Like the previous industrial revolutions, this will be driven by technology and new forms of energy. It will also transform our societies.” (José Manual Barroso, President of the European Commission, in a speech on October 1, 2007; BMU 2008: 11) Present power supply systems are already about to change. The share of renewables is rising in many countries. The German Federal Environment Agency assumes that in 2020, 40% of the national energy sources could be renewable (Tagesschau.de). In recent years, French politicians became interested in those topics, too. During the European Wind Energy Conference of 2009, the Secretary of State for Ecology Chantal Jouanno said for example that the world had no alternative other than to pass a new energetic threshold and that the French energetic revolution had already begun but that it had to accelerate from now on (SER/FEE press release 2009). Wind energy, as a quite mature technological innovation, plays an important part in that energetic transformation process. In the EU in 2008 and 2009 “more new wind power capacity

Ever since the first industrial revolution, historians have repeatedly tried to classify the subsequent development into phases. The classification I refer to defines the first, second, and third industrial revolution with respect to important raw materials and energy resources that mark the respective phase. (BMU 2008)

1

4

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 was installed [...] than any other electricity-generating technology” (EWEA 2010). With a total of 25,777 MW, Germany today is the absolute market leader regarding cumulative installed wind energy capacity and only second to the USA relative to annually installed capacity in 2009. Proportionately, the French wind energy sector is fairly undeveloped. EU-directives2 on renewable energies admittedly provide a common basis for their development the actual implementation and promotion of the potential of renewables in the respective countries can however differ strongly. France’s wind energy sector for example started to develop comparatively late, its cumulative installed capacity of wind energy was only 4,574 MW in 2009, and its energy sector seems to develop into a different direction than for example that of Germany. Motivated by personal experience with the French culture and society, I decided to research and explore the matter and to attempt to discover where those differences come from. For my diploma thesis, I want to answer the question: why the wind energy development in France proceeded in this particular way and how the development of the sector was and still is constricted?3 The case study is loosely based on two sociological studies on wind energy in different national contexts; owing to the research question, I chose a different theoretical framework, though. The period of time I selected also resulted from the subject: I studied the French wind energy development from the first relevant activities in the 1940s until 2009. As the different actors in the field are very numerous and heterogeneous, I decided against conducting interviews and instead concentrated on the analysis of secondary literature and on various documents like: studies on technological issues and tariff models, surveys on acceptance of wind energy, press releases, brochures and reports of enterprises, organizations, or associations, articles in professional journals and newspapers, and legal texts. Regarding the theoretical approaches I am going to use in my study I will use them as a set of tools to get my research question answered; it is not my priority objective to discuss pros and cons of those theories.

All European Directives are accessible on the website EUR-Lex (see respective Official Journals of the European Communities): http://eur-lex.europa.eu 3 My analysis may appear biased towards wind energy. This impression could be caused by the fact that in my analysis I adopt the perspective of the wind energy sector. I am in fact a supporter of renewable energy sources; I however tried not to let these personal preferences skew my results. A normative evaluation of different energy sources was not my intention.

2

5

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 The study is structured as follows. First of all, I am going to present the theoretical concepts (chapter 2) and the two case studies on wind energy already mentioned above (chapter 3), which I will later use and refer to in my analysis of the development of wind energy in France (chapter 5). Before this analysis, I will describe in detail how exactly the French wind energy sector is structured and how the development process took place over the years (chapter 4). In chapter 6, I will finally discuss the question to what extent this development resulted in a transformation of the French energy supply system and whether a regime shift is actually possible in the French context. I limited the analysis almost exclusively to on-shore development, as it would have gone beyond the scope of my diploma thesis to cover all the current development paths of wind energy. The offshore development is still in its early stages – not only in France – which means that it is characterized by various divergent activities. It can be seen as a new path that was born from overall wind energy development, which was previously confined to expansion on land. Furthermore, I will not include some of the financial aspects of the French wind energy development – financing models and business taxes – due to insufficient data.

6

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010

2 Theories of Technological and Sectoral Change
Before analyzing innovations like wind power generators it is necessary to theoretically define the subject and introduce appropriate theories to approach them. First, I am going to focus on what innovations actually are and on several distinctions that exist between them. Secondly, I will describe the innovations as elements of so-called socio-technical constellations. I will further place those socio-technical constellations in a wider context. It will thus become possible to analyze changes in or between different constellations and at different levels. In the last section, I will touch on the subject of a temporal order and recurring patterns of technological change.

2.1 Wind Power as an Innovation
Commonly, innovations have a very positive connotation, but literally, an innovation simply describes something new – be it positive or negative. It is, however, not the actual newness of an idea or an invention that is decisive but the newness perceived. “The idea may be a recombination of old ideas, a scheme that challenges the present order, a formula or a unique approach […] as long as the idea is perceived as new by the individuals involved, it is an ‘innovative idea’” (Van de Ven et al. 2008: 9). So, in the case of the wind energy, it is not important that mankind has been using wind energy for a very long time now (in navigation or agriculture for instance), but that someone had the idea to combine the windmill with a generator, thus creating a new technology for new kinds of applications. There are however not only technical innovations. In the Oslo Manual (OECD.org) for example – a report from the OECD and Eurostat, that was published to provide guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data – a differentiation was made between ‘technological product and process innovations’ (‘TPP’) and ‘organizational innovations’: “TPP innovation must be distinguished from organizational innovation. Organizational innovation in the firm includes: the introduction of significantly changed organizational structures, of advanced management techniques, and of new or substantially changed corporate strategic orientations”. (ibid.)

7

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Thus, the definition of innovations was somewhat extended (beyond concrete products, processes and technologies), but was still limited to an exclusively economic field. In a broader definition, social and institutional innovations are included as well (innovations in the legal framework or in behavior patterns, for example). Such a broad definition of innovations can be found in the work of S. Schön, D. Ohlhorst, J. Köppel and E. Bruns about wind energy in Germany (Schön et al. 2008). They assume that innovations can comprise technical, economical, social, organizational, political and institutional aspects (ibid.: 22f). A wind power turbine can be regarded as a technical innovation; but seen in a wider context, the use of wind power includes other aspects too: such as new laws4 in country planning and construction activity, changes in energy policies, development of new branches of industry, and maybe even a new aesthetical perception and ecological awareness of the population. Most of the time, and especially in economic science, innovations are distinguished from inventions. This differentiation emphasizes the importance of markets and efficiency. “(TPP) innovations comprise implemented technologically new products and processes and significant technological improvements in products and processes. A TPP innovation has been implemented if it has been introduced on the market (product innovation) or used within a production process (process innovation).” (OECD.org: 31) Put like that, an invention only becomes an innovation if it is successfully commercialized or used by a widespread community. Today’s wind power stations are certainly widespread and they have a proper market, but it has not always been like that. Contrary to early definitions, which stress the merits of an ingenious inventor with a groundbreaking idea, it is now assumed that innovation processes, from invention to innovation, are too complex to be conducted by a single person and that those processes take place in a network of heterogeneous actors (e.g. Van de Ven et al. 2008). A last differentiation is made between incremental and radical innovations. Minor improvements, continuous adaption, and variations are contrasted with fundamental transitions. Schön and her colleagues additionally use the term of “additive innovations”, which stands for a larger and more expansive exploration of already existing possibilities (Schön et al. 2008: 23). Technical innovations to improve the performance of existing wind power stations are incremental
All French laws and regulations are accessible on the website Legifrance.Gouv.fr, Le service public de la diffusion du droit: www.legifrance.gouv.fr
4

8

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 innovations; the extension of wind energy exploitation to offshore areas can be seen as an additive innovation; but the utilization of wind energy stations as such can be defined as radical innovation. “This assumption has to be substantiated, as biomass, water power and wind energy already constituted the energy basis of the pre-modern ages” (Mautz 2007: 115). This may be so, but the innovative quality of modern wind power is not the usage of wind as an energy source, but “the rediscovering and further development of the above-mentioned technologies, embedded in new social contexts and linked to societal and environmental objectives of a wider range” (ibid.). So, a technical innovation such as a wind power station is much more than simply new technology and cannot be analyzed independently from the context in which it arose and in which it was developed. In the next chapter I am going to elaborate on the theoretical concept of the socio-technical constellations or systems in which technical innovations are embedded.

2.2 Innovations in Socio-Technical Constellations
Sociological theories of technological change generally concentrate on two main aspects of technology: their genesis – How do they evolve as a result of and are shaped by social action? – and their consequences – How do they structure social action and what are their effects on society? In recent years, attention was turned increasingly to the interplay of both processes (Schulz-Schaeffer 2008, Rammert 2008). Very popular are approaches of the Sciences and Technology Studies, which are, in respect of their interdisciplinary orientation, multifaceted and not always uniform. Rating among them are for instance the concepts of the Social Construction of Technology (SCOT; Pinch & Bijker 1989) and the Actor-Network-Theory (ANT; Latour 1991). Their common starting point is the assumption that technology interacts closely with its social context and that it is shaped by it. Technical artifacts are considered as components of socio-technical systems or constellations. In the conception of those systems, two theoretical concepts are very important5: Firstly, the concept of ‘technical systems’ from the historian Thomas P. Hughes (that also worked together with Trevor Pinch and Wiebe Bijker,
The notion of socio-technical systems has in fact been coined by a group of scientists at the London Travistock Institute, but they had rather an additive than a systemic idea of those systems. Hughes showed that the components also interact and influence each other. He thinks of those systems as a seamless web (Schulz-Schaeffer 2000: 91ff).
5

9

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 two leading adherents of the SCOT approach) and secondly, the already mentioned theory of ‘actor-networks’, which can be seen as a more radical version of the former. Hughes’ study about Edison and the history of electric light and power is dealing with the question of how heterogeneous components of such processes are fused together and how the emerging systems mange to remain stable over time (Hughes 1989, Schulz-Schaeffer 2000: 91ff). In his analysis, he stresses the strong interdependency of scientific, technical, socioeconomic, political, legal, institutional, and cognitive factors and of different interests in the process of technology development. In fact, Hughes never uses the term ‘socio-technical systems’ himself, but admits later that it was a more appropriate designation for the systems described by him as ‘technological systems’ (Schulz-Schaeffer 2000: 92f), which he defined as follows: “Technological systems contain messy, complex, problem-solving components. They are both socially constructed and society shaping. Among the components in technological systems are physical artifacts […] Technological systems also include organizations […] and they incorporate components usually labeled scientific […] Legislative artifacts, such as regulatory laws, can also be part of technological systems […] natural resources also qualify as system artifacts.” (Hughes 1989: 51) As these components interact, the removal or alteration of one of them changes the characteristics of the whole network. Not all components are equal though. Hughes distinguishes between artifacts and human beings. The latter can be inventors, industrial scientists, managers, financiers, engineers, or workers; all of them have certain degrees of freedom that other components of the system do not posses. The most important group is that of the system builders6. Their task is it to invent, design, and develop coherent technological systems by bringing more and more factors and components under their control. “One of the primary characteristics of a system builder is the ability to construct or to force unity from diversity, centralization in the face of pluralism, and coherence from chaos.” (ibid.: 52) The boundaries of technological systems are defined by the limits of control that system builders, and their associates, are able to exercise. All intractable factors not under the control of the
When applying Hughes’ findings to present-day technology development one has to bear in mind that he was studying American inventors at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century. Nowadays, the predominant figure of the system builder (a pivotal individual or collective actor) should be replace by the concept of system building as a result of interaction of a plurality of actors with potentially different and competitive interests.
6

10

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 system operators can be called the environment, which consist of further technological systems. Hughes explicitly says that “the convention of designating social factors as the environment, or context, of a technological system should be avoided” (ibid.) as individuals, groups, and organizational components – conventionally labeled as social – can either be part of the system or of the environment. The Actor-Network-Theory – conceptualized and developed mainly by Bruno Latour and Michel Callon – even goes a step further in defining those heterogeneous networks. The theory is also based on a social-constructivist approach of Science and Technology Studies but criticizes that the importance of technologies and objects in the analysis of social processes was not respected in most approaches and that, in relation to social factors, they seemingly played only a marginal role. Therefore, the ANT demands to abolish all theoretical distinctions between different network components (be it natural, institutional, social, or technical) and to give all of them equal status as so called ‘actants’ in the development and maintenance of heterogeneous systems called ‘actor-networks’. Technology development is thus seen as the result of a process in which several different actants are linked together to a successfully working association or network around the technology in question. They all influence the development process in a certain way. The strong point of the ANT lies in this non-dualistic perspective on society through the revaluation and equal treatment of technology as explaining factor in social processes. At the same time, the generalized principle of symmetry, which does not only concern the definition of actants but other aspects of the theory as well, poses theoretical and practical problems: the symmetry results in a leveling of all analytical conceptions (Schulz-Schaeffer 2008: 19, Schulz-Schaeffer 2000: 125ff), which makes it difficult to empirically work with this theory. Whilst, on the theoretical level, having to face the problem of an ‘infinite regress’, those leveled analytical concepts cannot satisfyingly describe all the different facets of empirical reality. This is why, further on in my analysis, I will not work with the Actor-Network-Theory anymore. Even so, the theoretical concept of socio-technical constellations forms the basis of my analysis. Describing the emerging and changing socio-technical wind energy constellation in France in detail and with regard to the particular technological innovation, I will later draw mainly on Ulrich Dolata’s analytical approach on ‘sectoral change’ (see chapter 4). His ‘sectoral systems’
11

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 are specified as “socio-technical events” (Dolata 2007: 12) or “socio-technical entities” (Dolata 2008a: 7) with socio-technical profiles or structures (Dolata 2007: 30, 34f). They are essentially constituted by specific technologies, which are developed, produced, and used in those (and sometimes in other) sectoral systems. At the same time, they are socially embedded entities with special industrial and institutional structures. „They are sociotechnical entities. Characteristic of the constitution of sectoral systems are not just distinct socioeconomic structures and institutions, typical constellations of actors, and patterns of actor-based interaction, but also the specific technologies being developed, produced, or used. (ibid.) All the components together – the technological profile, a special socio-economic and institutional context, and specific types of actors and patterns of interaction – form a “sociotechnical match” (ibid.: 8). The technological profile of such a match plays an important role in shaping the sector’s actor configurations, its dominating types of interaction, the regulation patterns, and its institutions. Just as institutions, it opens up possible courses of action and restricts them at the same time. It can be defined in more detail by the following classification categories: (Dolata 2005, 2007, 2008b, Dolata & Werle 2007)
1) Type of technology that characterizes the sector: Nowadays ‘technology’ can be many things – for example individually useable consumer technology, large-scale and capital-intensive technology, cross-sectional technology, infrastructural systems, methods, or even programs. Technical characteristics differ mainly in size, complexity and coupling of their elements. 2) Degree of the technology’s activity: Is it a passive, active, reactive, interactive or transactive technology (Rammert 2003: 8)? How is action divided between humans and non-humans? 3) Patterns and conditions of use: How is the technology utilized? Can it be used individually as part of the everyday life, is it an industrial good, or is it a large-scale and capital-intensive technology that cannot be used individually at all? 4) Knowledge base and access to it: Is the development of the technology based on fundamental academic research or rather on practice- and application-oriented knowledge from engineers? Is this knowledge open to numerous people or just to a small distinct community? 5) Homogeneity versus heterogeneity of a technology: Is there a clear function associated with the technology or is it used in different contexts and different ways? Has it clear or unclear origins?

12

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010
6) Endogenous versus exogenous technologies: Is the development and use of an (for the sector) important technology essentially a sector-immanent phenomenon or has the technology been developed outside the sector? 7) Potential effects of the technology on a sector: Will there be radical, and far-reaching, changes in the sector through the emergence of a new technology or will this technology only have limited effects, so that there will only be incremental change?

Secondly, sectoral systems are marked through special, historically grown and stabilized socio-economic and institutional contexts. Those constitute the sector’s socio-economic ‘topography’, whose rules are formed by institutional arrangements. These institutions make it possible for actors in the sector to interact and limit at the same time possible courses of action. Actors do not have simply to submit to existing structures though. Institutional structures are shaped reciprocally through processes of structuration and institutionalization. The following factors have to be considered: 1) Industrial and corporate structures of the sector: like e.g. the concentration and size of organizations, the degree of the sector’s internationalization, or the form and dynamics of competition 2) Market, production, and research structures of the sector: like e.g. the organization and intensity of research and development activities, the types of production and markets, or patterns of demand 3) Socio-economic embedding of the sector: like e.g. the importance of other sectors, the quality of inter-relations with other sectors, regulatory influences of state institutions, or the role of non-governmental and non-profit organizations Finally, there are the sector’s specific types of actors and patterns of interaction. Numerous social actors take part in the development or reinterpretation of a sector and interact with each other – like for example manufacturers, suppliers, commercial enterprises, service providers, research facilities, stakeholders, lobbies, governmental institutions, non-profit organizations, citizens, or consumers. They can be individual, corporate, or non-organized collective actors. Their interactions can be characterized as competitive, cooperative, negotiation-oriented, or societal.

13

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 In this illustration the linkages between analytical categories are summarized:

figure 1: Sectoral systems - analytical categories (Dolata 2007: 25)7

In summary, technological innovations are part of socio-technical systems, or constellations, of heterogeneous, more or less equal, components that can be categorized as either: social, technical, natural, institutional, scientific, political, or legal. Those components interact and shape each other, thus influencing the characteristics of the whole system and impacting their environment; their interdependency gives those networks stability.

2.3 Socio-Technical Constellations in a Wider Context
The socio-technical constellations, of which technical innovations are a part, are again embedded in a larger context. This socio-economic embedding of a sector is an important factor in Dolata’s definition; the section on Dolata’s sectoral systems in chapter 2.2 already partially covered the issue. In this chapter, I am going to enlarge upon interactions between different constellations. I will further introduce concepts, which will allow me to analyze mechanisms of change that can be found on different levels of society (see chapter 5). Additionally, I will discuss the concept of ‘sectoral impact and adoptability’ by Ulrich Dolata, which I am going to apply in my last chapter (see chapter 6).
7

translation by the author

14

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010

2.3.1 The Evolution of Large Technological Systems
In Hughes’ concept of the evolution of large technological systems8, those systems exist in an environment of all the components, which are not part of the system, in other words, an environment of other technological systems. There is, for example, the technological system of wind power, solar energy, the well-established technological system of energy production through oil and carbon, and many others. Those technological systems can again be divided into subsystems, which depend on the choice of the level of analysis (Hughes 1989: 55). The technological system of wind power is, for example, a subsystem of the technological system of renewable energies. So, technological systems have defined boundaries, they are however never completely autonomous from their environment. As system builders (see above) try to get more and more components under the control of the system, they give it stability, make it durable, and minimize uncertainties. Little by little, through “organizations and people committed by various interests” (ibid.: 76) a system can acquire momentum and become seemingly independent of its environment. Technological systems are however open systems that depend on other systems and are influenced by them: “Two kinds of environment relate to open technological systems: ones on which they are dependent and ones dependent on them. In neither case is there interaction between the system and the environment; there is simply a one-way influence. Because they are not under the control, environmental factors affecting the system should not be mistaken for components of the system.” (ibid.: 53). With growing size and complexity of a system problems are likely to increase, as well. Hughes calls them ‘reverse salients’. “Reverse salients are components in the system that have fallen behind or are out of phase with the others. […] Until the lagging components can be altered, often by invention, they are reverse salients.” (ibid.: 73) Being out of phase, reverse salients restrain development. If a reverse salient has no big impact on the system’s growth, yet, it can be balance or removed by new, but usually conservative or incremental inventions. When a reverse salient cannot be corrected within the context of an
8

Hughes developed a non-linear, complex phase model (see also chapter 2.4) of “the history of technological systems” (Hughes 1989). In this model, he showed that “large, modern technological systems seem[ed] to evolve in accordance with a loosely defined pattern [of evolution: …] invention, development, innovation, transfer, and growth, competition and consolidation” (ibid.: 56). For my study, I only selected certain aspects of this approach; I will not discuss it in detail.

15

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 existing system anymore, it becomes a radical problem and its solution may bring a new and competing system with it. The concept of the reverse salient is very similar to that of mismatches (see chapter 2.3.3), or that of tensions in the regime structure (see chapter 2.3.2), which I will use in chapter 5. Hughes assumes that radical innovations neither become components in existing technological systems (this is where incremental change takes place) nor do they contribute to their development and growth. They more likely challenge the systems and force them to change. So, if successfully developed, radical inventions will culminate in new technological systems. In the case of wind power, it has to be discussed how well the new technological system around the innovation could establish itself in France (see chapter 6).

2.3.2 Technological Transitions in a Multi-Level-Framework
The ‘multi-level-perspective’, first formulated by Arie Rip and René Kemp (1998), is a further concept that applies the idea of socio-technical constellations. Next to some of the aspects of Hughes’ theory on the development of technological systems (see above) the concepts and mechanisms of change of this theoretical approach will later serve me to find enabling and constricting factors of the wind energy development in France (see chapter 5). Technological transitions (‘TT’) are conceptualized as something more than just technological changes:
“TT do not only involve technological changes, but also changes in elements such as user practices, regulation, industrial networks, infrastructure, and symbolic meaning. […] TT consist of a change from one sociotechnical configuration to another, involving substitution of technology, as well as changes in other elements.” (Geels 2002: 1257f)

So, in the course of technological transitions, entire socio-technical configurations composed of heterogeneous elements have to be modified. Such a modification of established configurations is however no easy task.
“Such reconfiguration processes do not occur easily, because the elements in a sociotechnical configuration are linked and aligned to each other. Radically new technologies have a hard time to break through, because regulations, infrastructure, user practices, maintenance networks are aligned to the existing technology.” (Geels 2002: 1258)

New radical innovations – or so-called “hopeful monstrosities” (ibid.: 1261) – emerge in small niches where they do not have to compete with established socio-institutional constellations at first. Market selection is deliberately kept out to provide a protected space with special selec-

16

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 tion criteria for newly emerging, radical innovations. This is necessary because “they have relatively low technical performance, [and] are often cumbersome and expensive” (ibid.). The multi-level-perspective gives a contextualized view of the role such niches play in the process of technological transitions. Rip and Kemp describe and analyze the connections and interactions between different levels of society in which those transition processes take place. They distinguish three analytical levels (see also Weyer 2008):
1) The micro-level of the niche – a protected space for innovations, which will eventually develop into a new regime 2) The meso-level of socio-technical regimes – a system of formal, normative, and cognitive rules, which enables and constrains possible courses of action and 3) The macro-level of socio-technical landscapes – the material and cultural framework for the niche and the regime

Their conception of socio-technical regimes is an extended version of the ‘technological regime’ from evolutionary economics. Rip and Kemp specifically refer to the “Nelson-Winter-Dosimodel” (Van den Belt & Rip 1989) of technological development. In this model, a technological regime is formed by shared cognitive routines of an engineer community, which are embedded in the minds and practices of those engineers and which guide innovative activity in one direction, along ‘technological trajectories’, towards incremental change (Geels 2002: 1259). As do technological regimes, socio-technical regimes are guiding activities of relevant actors, are giving orientation, and accounting for stability of established configurations. Socio-technical regimes comprise however a much larger set of social groups (like for example: users, policy makers, suppliers, scientists, or banks) and they do not only refer to “cognitive routines and belief systems, but also to regulative rules and normative roles” (Geels & Schot 2008: 545). ‘Socio-technical landscapes’ are conceptualized as an external structure or context in which regimes and niches are embedded. Like regimes, they also can function as selection mechanisms for transitions, but are much harder to change. Deep structural trends and patterns like macro-political developments, changes in cultural patterns, or macro-economical trends are beyond the direct influence of niche and regime actors. They are susceptible to change, more slowly than regimes however, as developmental shifts occur across decades.

17

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010

figure 2: Multi-level-perspective on transitions (Geels & Schot 2008: 546; Geels 2002: 1263)

The connections between the three levels are never unilateral: “The core notion of the multi-level perspective (MLP) is that transitions come about through interactions between processes at different levels [...] The MLP thus corrects the suggestion of the early SNM [Strategic Niche Management] literature that regime shifts would come about through bottom-up processes of niche expansion.” (Geels & Schot 2008: 546)

18

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Radical innovations may build up internal momentum, gradually stabilize into a new dominant design, and break out of the niche to form a new regime9, but to cause a shift in existing structures and frameworks, changes at all three levels have to occur. It would be an oversimplification to assume that niches are just “waiting out there” (Geels 2002: 1271) and that they can break out just by themselves. Niche-intern mechanisms to accelerate technological transitions are important, but they need the support of favorable processes at the regime and landscape level. As interconnections between levels are not uni-lateral, transformation processes can work in the opposite manner as well. Successfully established, new regimes may contribute to changes on the landscape level. Important is the alignment of developments and processes at multiple levels (Geels & Schot 2008: 545; Geels 2002: 1262) and in both directions (bottom-up and top-down). At the niche level, transition processes can be supported by the cumulative effect of “nichepiling” (Rip & Schot 2002: 165) or “niche-cumulation” (Geels 2002: 1271): innovations branch out into further varieties, transfer their specific mode of application to other domains or markets, and “add up to something more than their simple sum” (Rip and Schot 2002: 165). Another niche-mechanism is that of technological add-on or hybridization (Geels 2002): an innovation physically links up with established technology, often in its early phase, to form some kind of symbiosis; thus, there is no immediate competition. Furthermore, new technology can break out of its niche by riding along with growth in particular markets and profit from the increased demand (ibid.). At the landscape level, favorable processes for transition can be shifts such as cultural changes, demographic trends, or broad political changes and revolutions. Changes at the landscape level take place very slowly, but have the power to put pressure on socio-technical re-

Recent works revealed some new types of co-evolution between niches and regimes and more differentiated views of their interactions (Geels & Schot 2008: 547). They show that niche-regime interactions need not always be about competition (this is contrary to what Hughes said) and that niches can play very different roles in those interactions: they can become a new regime and eventually replaces the old one, but they can also incorporated into existing regimes. The adoption or incorporation of innovations into existing regimes usually happens to solve certain problems. Thus, they may transform the regime from within. Another alternative to substitution that has been discovered was the translation from niche experiences to the regime; niche practices are picked up and applied by actors of the dominant regime, thus triggering regime changes. It is however arguable if a radical regime shift can be achieved in these ways.

9

19

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 gimes and destabilize them. Thus, ‘windows of opportunity10’ for niche innovations are likely open up. Processes and events at the regime level can also create such windows of opportunity. They may be caused by tensions in the regime. Geels distinguishes seven dimensions of sociotechnical regimes: “technology, user practices and application domains (markets), symbolic meaning of technology, infrastructure, industry structure, policy and techno-scientific knowledge” (ibid.). Those dimensions are interconnected and co-evolve, but they also have their own internal dynamics. Like in Hughes’ concept of reverse salients (see chapter 2.3.1), this may lead to tensions, which could create openings for innovations by weakening the linkages between the components of the regime. I will work with those concepts in chapter 5 when analyzing constricting and enabling factors of the French wind energy development.

2.3.3 Technology-Based Sectoral Change
Ulrich Dolata developed an analytic framework for studying and explaining technologydriven sectoral change (Dolata 2008a: 6). It is based on two theoretical concepts: that of sociotechnical constellations (see above) and that of matches and mismatches by Freeman and Perez (ibid.: 7f). Interrelationships in socio-technical constellations are conceptualized as matches. Components of constellations have to be aligned to a working match otherwise those heterogeneous systems do not work properly (see also chapter 2.3.1 and 2.3.2, reverse salient’s and tensions on the regime level). Impulses for change and modification in matches can be quite different. Some economical, political, and societal examples are: modulation of the legal framework, reorientation in corporate strategies, acquisition or take-over of organizations, new competitors, changes in consumer preferences, or changes in public perception of problems and risks. Existing constellations can also be influenced by both new radical and incremental technologies. Major challenges for and modifications of established constellations often derive from fundamentally new or substantially enhanced technologies – also called system innovations11 – that cannot be integrated into established matches anymore because frameworks and structures
This expression will be used as in Geels 2002: 1262. System innovations are innovations that have a significant effect on established social, economical, and institutional structures and that entail fundamental changes (Ohlhorst 2008: 213f).
11 10

20

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010
no longer corresponds to the potential of the new technology. Those phases of searching, exper-

imenting, struggling, and adjusting are called “periods of mismatch” that, over time, result in a new equilibrium. Thus far, Dolata’s observations are not very different from the approaches I have introduced. From his point of view, Freeman’s and other scholar’s concepts of technological change are not fully satisfying, though, as they remain vague in the analysis of concrete patterns, dynamics, and variants of technology-driven socio-economic and institutional transformation. New technologies can affect sectors in very different ways and they can also be perceived and treated quite differently depending on the respective structure and constellation of the sector. “The match/mismatch approach conceptualizes the influence of new technologies on socioeconomic and institutional change as pressure on existing structures, institutions, and actors to change and adjust. However, when we focus on the meso-level, it becomes obvious that, at times, the pressure of the same set of technologies on various economic sectors differs significantly.” (ibid.: 9). To identify and analyze technology-driven sectoral change, Dolata formulated the concepts of ‘sectoral impact’ (also called ‘transformative capacity’) and of ‘sectoral adaptability’. I will come back to those considerations in chapter 6 when discussing the transformation process of the French wind energy sector. The transformative capacity of a technology can by defined along two dimensions. The first dimension is that of a technology’s origin: technologies developed outside a sector using them (exogenous) and technologies that come from within a certain sector (endogenous) must be distinguished. In sectors with a high degree of innovative activity, technology-driven change processes may derive from endogenous innovations and from exogenous innovations tailored to the demands of the sector. Economic sectors that are not characterized as innovative mainly use externally developed technologies and adapt them to their needs through a processes of coinvention. The second dimension of transformative capacity is that of a low versus a high impact of a technology on the sector. A technology may have only a feeble transformative capacity and fail to challenge the established structures of a sector. The higher the relevance of the technology for the sector, the lower the possibility to modify and adapt it to the sector’s needs, and the higher the need for a restructuring of the sector, the higher is the pressure and the effect of the innovation on the existing match of constellations in the sector.

21

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 That still leaves open the question of how exactly a new, challenging technology is handled within the sector, which then determines the specific course of sectoral transformation. All of this depends on the adaptability and openness towards path-deviant developments of the existing sectoral structures and institutions, and on the actors’ capability to anticipate and to react adequately: “Existing sectoral systems and their actors may be characterized by structural, institutional, and cognitive openness and adaptability, which encourages the early perception and adoption of new technological opportunities. At the other end of the scale, we find sectors that are characterized by persistence and structural conservatism on both the system and actor levels, which impedes early and directed sectoral change and causes crisis-ridden adjustment processes instead.” (ibid.: 13) The spectrum of adaptability stretches from structural, institutional, and cognitive openness to persistence and conservatism. Low adaptability is typical for sectoral systems with structures and institutions that have been very stable, successful, and therefore change-resistant over a long time. In those sectors, new technologies are often treated with suspicion and their effects and potentials are often noticed very late. Together with a high transformative capacity of a new technology such persistence usually leads to crisis-like reactions and transformations; the process is then undirected and not under the control of focal actors. Dolata calls it “transformation-resistant sectoral path dependency” (Dolata 2007: 37). High transformative capacity and high adaptability and anticipation skills however lead to a transformation-supportive sectoral path dependency. Some sectors have institutionalized mechanisms of transformation, which facilitate sectoral change that deviates from established paths (Dolata 2008a: 7). Those mechanisms are not the same in all sectoral systems and may also vary in different nations, but some relevant mechanisms are: strong dynamics of technological innovation and economic competition, “transformation-supporting industry structures [, …] horizontally structured and collaboratively embedded focal actors [, …] institutionalized mechanisms of transfer between academia and industry [, … and] technology, innovation, and competition policy” (ibid.: 18f). Anticipative and adaptive sectors are much more likely to actively steer and control sectoral change. In this case, change is more like an “open-minded use and advancement of new technological alternatives [... and] matching structural and institutional arrangements” (ibid.: 19) than a crisis-ridden, and late, reaction to endogenous shocks and the pressure to adapt. This does not mean, of course, that it is a harmonious process; competition, power struggles, and read22

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 justments in constellations of actors and power structures are defining characteristics of all sectoral change processes. Together, the two concepts create specific modes of sectoral transformation. To further analyze and explain them Dolata draws on the concept of “gradual institutional transformations” by Streeck and Thelen (Dolata 2007: 43). “by means of the concept of gradual transformations we can analyze technology-driven sectoral change, beyond the dichotomy of continuity and sharp breaks, as a multitude of more or less consistent organizational, structural, and institutional readjustments, thereby highlighting the numerous tentative, erratic, and highly competitive sectoral restructurings that span a longer period of time and are typical even of sectors confronted with serious pressure to change.” (Dolata 2008a: 24) With this last aspect of his concept Dolata criticizes certain phase models of technology development that assume that transformations processes are characterized by stable paths that are only occasionally interrupted (cf. chapter 2.4 – path dependence) or that they are characterized by long convergent and short divergent periods (cf. chapter 2.4 – innovation journey). He suggests instead that transformation processes are gradual, consist of rather long phases of discontinuity, and remain susceptible to change all throughout the development process (Dolata 2007; Dolata 2008b; Dolata & Werle 2007).

2.4 Pattern, Phases and Paths
When analyzing innovations, dynamic aspects of society, concepts of change, and transitions are very important. Through innovations, there arise new social constellations or pre-existing constellations are changed. In my study on the development of wind power in France, change is conceptualized as a process that has an established socio-technical constellation as a starting point and that results in a new and modified socio-technical constellation (cf. Schulz-Schaeffer 2008). To this point, I have left out all aspects that refer to a temporal order of technological change, to the partitioning of change processes into specified phases or periods, and to their generalization into typical patterns and courses. I justify this choice with respect to my object of study, for, in the French case, I have to deal with a rather short development process that did not even “really take-off” yet. The analyzable evolution is therefore too short to show a distinct and generalizable pattern. I will nonetheless devote a brief section to phases, paths, and pattern, as two important sociological studies about wind power development (see chapter 3) are
23

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 based on, on the one hand, a ‘complex phase model’ (as in: Schön et al. 2008, Ohlhorst 2008) and, on the other hand, a ‘path model’ (as in: Garud & Karnoe 2003). In chapter 4, I will loosely
base the description of the French development on the phases presented in the German case study.

Non-Linear Phases and Recurrent Cycles
There exist several quite similar approaches for analyzing technology and innovation development that assume that those processes do not have linear, but complex sequences. Classical complex phase models distinguish generally between three ideal-typical phases: genesis, stabilization and diffusion, like for example Johannes Weyer’s concept of “networked innovations”12 (Weyer 2008: 186f, Schulz-Schaeffer 2008: 15f). The innovation’s development is described as a multistage process of social construction of technology. Another concept that assumes that innovation processes can be subdivided into three big phases or periods – that are in fact not unlike the three phases of the basic complex phase models – is the so called ‘Innovation Journey’. The authors of this approach focus however on a cyclical model of innovation processes (Van de Ven et al. 2008). They describe an ‘innovation journey’ as “a nonlinear cycle of divergent and convergent activities that may repeat over time and at different organizational levels if resources are obtained to renew the cycle” (ibid.: 184). These loops are basically composed of one shorter, divergent period (characterized by complexity, expansion, and dissemination activities) and one longer, convergent period (characterized by constraining factors, focusing, and reduction of complexity) and are typical in particular organizational innovation processes. Complex phase models are one important theoretical basis for Ohlhorst’s concept of phase modules in the development of wind energy in Germany (see chapter 3.2). In her study she describes the discontinuous and non-linear development of wind energy as a sequence of idealtypical phases, some longer and some shorter, which are combined in varying ways.

Path Dependence and Path Creation
First formulated by Paul David and Brian Arthur (David 1985; Arthur 1994; Meyer & Schubert 2005), the concept of ‘Path Dependence’ tries to explain why suboptimal and proportional-

12

translation by the author: ‘vernetzte Innovationen’

24

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 ly inefficient technologies can prevail over seemingly superior ones. The path concept13 explains why decisions made in the past, even though circumstances may have changed, still influence the present course of events, or, in other words, why technological standards persist even though new and “better” technologies have been invented that could replace them. It says that the course of all social processes can be reduced to path dependencies and historical conditionality. The phenomenon is explained by three mechanisms that create, stabilize, and help to pursue paths: “increasing returns”, “momentum”, and “lock-ins” (ibid.). The increasing marginal utility one can derive from continuously using the same kind of technology (increasing returns) contributes to the emergence of a path, which stabilizes and increases in strength over time and develops some kind of internal dynamics (momentum). The force of habit (known technologies are easier to use and to anticipate in their further development) and invested time, money, and knowledge into a certain technology also play an important role for a technological path to acquire momentum. The steadiness and assumed irreversibility of a hardened structure of rules and routines – or a path – is called lock-in. For some time, development happens quite predictably along those paths then, which can only be interrupted and changed through external shocks. Shocks cause disruptions in paths, creating a short-time period in which processes are open to development in new directions before the described process starts anew. Innovation processes are thus seen as a succession of long stable and short unstable periods. The concept of path creation, mainly formulated by Raghu Garud and Peter Karnoe (Garud & Karnoe 2003, see also Meyer & Schubert 2005), carries on the main aspects of path dependence with one major modification: Garud and Karnoe emphasize the active role actors can play in changing existent and creating new paths. Apart from external shocks, actors (with sufficient resources) can deliberately alter paths. Garud and Karnoe therefore speak of technology entrepreneurship as a process of ‘mindful deviation’. They also assume that success or failure of technology entrepreneurship is not attributed to a single individual. In innovative projects, agency is distributed across different kind of actors that become involved with the technology

Some of the other concepts I introduced sometimes refer to the notion of paths, as well: Socio-technical regimes, for example, consist of hardened rules, routines, and structures that account for stability and guide development along technological trajectories – or in other words along established paths (see chapter 2.3.2) – and Dolata mentions ‘path deviant development’ and ‘sectoral path dependency’ when explaining sectoral impact and transformative capacity (see chapter 2.3.3).

13

25

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 in question and thus influence the development of an emerging technological path. Through the steady accumulation of inputs from various actors that try to shape it, the path gains momentum and begins, on his part, to influence (to constrain but also to enable) the activities of the actors involved. One of their studies is about the development of wind power stations in Denmark and in the United States of America (see chapter 3.1).

26

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010

3 Case Studies in other National Contexts
To be able to contextualize the development of the French wind energy sector, it is helpful to be familiar with the development of the sector in other countries and their special characteristics. In the context of my work, I cannot offer a full comparison of several or even of two countries; I will instead briefly present two important sociological studies on wind energy development in other countries that I am going to refer to in my work. One of them asserts that there are two opposite approaches to technology entrepreneurship (see above): a breakthrough approach and a bricolage approach (Garud & Karnoe 2003). Both of them could be detected in the German wind energy development, but I could only find aspects of the findings of this case study in the French wind energy development, which seems to follow a special path. In my description of this special ‘French way’, I will later use the theoretical concept of phases of the second case study, an analysis of the ‘innovation biography’ of wind energy in Germany (Ohlhorst 2008).

3.1 The Development of Wind Power Stations in Denmark and in the USA
In their comparative study about different paths of wind turbine technology development in Denmark and in the USA (Garud & Karnoe 2003), Garud and Karnoe analyze why one path eventually prevailed over the other. Their question “How is it possible for one group of actors deploying modest resources to prevail over another deploying far superior resources?” (ibid.: 278) finally led to the discovery of two contrasting approaches to technology entrepreneurship that actors in the US and in Denmark pursued: bricolage and breakthrough. The Danish approach to wind turbine development, called ‘bricolage’, was characterized by the deployment of modest resources, a steady build up and improvement process, and a low-tech design. Through resourcefulness and improvisation, involved actors progressively and collectively built up a functional wind turbine path. Actors of the US path followed a different logic, labeled ‘breakthrough’. With sophisticated high-tech designs, large development leaps, and a science-based

27

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 technology-push model, they tried to overtake the Danes. The path finally failed though, despite of a deployment of significant financial and intellectual resources. Why? The group of designers and producers in Denmark consisted of groups of mostly practical engineers and technicians that were skilled workers but lacked theoretical knowledge on turbine aerodynamics. So, they started low and took much smaller steps in designing, redesigning, and improving their turbines, which allowed them to initiate learning processes. In addition, there was considerable interaction among those early designers and producers that formed into collaborative networks. Such networks could not be found between actors in the US. Besides, designers started on a much higher level and did not take the time to engage in product development in-between the large scale-up stages. The American actors therefore deprived themselves of precious learning processes that are vital for the emergence of a viable technology path. Developers in the US could not profit from interaction with wind turbine users either like the Danish could, because ownership structure was very different. In Denmark small turbines were sold to individual users and cooperatives, keen on improving the turbine design and on sharing their knowledge about operating them, thus offering continual feedback, whereas in the US, many wind parks were sold to actors that did not depend on the performance of a wind turbine bur rather were interested in generating profits by exploiting subsidies and tax credits. The knowledge base in the Danish case was also broadened by results of evaluation and test centers that systematically tested wind turbines, thus contributing to the development of industry-wide standards and a research agenda. This kind of extensive and trusting relationship was not to be found between the US-American wind turbine industry and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. The laboratory did not insure systematic testing of commercial turbines, but focused instead on research and testing of a high-tech turbine design, generating abstract models that were too theoretical to be useful to the commercial turbine designers. A last significant difference of the two paths can be found in regulatory involvement. Danish policy makers, “a fragile yet persistent political coalition around wind energy” (ibid.: 293), strategically steered or modulated activities in the emerging wind turbine industry. With rather flexible and adaptable policies, they kept the path alive in times of crisis or prevented the market from growing too fast. The US government also played an active role in shaping the wind turbine path in offering huge incentives, like market subsidies and tax credits to users and producers.
28

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 It’s interventions had an episodic quality, though: first “jump-starting” (ibid.: 284) the wind turbine markets and then, after a government change, abruptly removing subsidies and thus putting the wind turbine industry in a difficult position. These findings show that “micro-processes can have the potential to overcome advantages conferred by a sophisticated high-tech approach backed by large-scale resources (ibid.: 281).”

3.2 The Innovation Biography of Wind Energy in Germany
Dörte Ohlhorst’s dissertation about ‘the development of wind energy in Germany’ (Ohlhorst 2008) originated in the context of an interdisciplinary research project at the Center for Technology and Society Berlin with the title ‘Wind Energy – An Innovation Biography’ (Schön et al. 2008). Constellations, phases, and patterns of innovation and technology development processes are described as follows: It is presumed that innovation processes neither follow the same sequence of phases every time nor that they proceed without any discernible regularity. They rather consist of certain typical and recurrent situations and phases – the modules (Ohlhorst 2008: 185) – which are combined in varying ways. Thus, the respective sequence and length of phases in innovation processes can deviate significantly. Besides, phases do not succeed each other in a linear way but overlap, repeat themselves, or feed back so that they cannot always be distinguished clearly from one another. The typology of those phases is based on the idea of ‘ideal types’. Figure 3 shows the German development curve and its composition of different modules. In the pioneer or departure phase, new technology is born (or an old model is rediscovered). The technology initially manifests a large technical diversity and is usually not profitable yet. The phase’s function is to give the new technology a possibility to arise and grow. The sociotechnical constellation can be characterized as a “sensible niche” (ibid.: 186) that is completely isolated from the dominant system or constellation and that has not found a stable internal equilibrium, yet. The niche assumes the function of a protective space for the still unstable, new technology that cannot develop on its own and that is dependent on the commitment of pioneers and on stimulating context events. In Germany, that phase lasted about 15 years, from the middle of the 1970s until 1986 and was characterized by two different socio-technical constellations grouped around two different technologies. The path that resulted in a dead end
29

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 describes the failed attempt to realize a large-scale wind energy project initiated by the government, the GROWIAN (in German short for large-scale wind energy facility). Like in the USA, the underlying principles of the breakthrough approach did not lead to success. The development along the other path progressed similarly to the development in Denmark and on a lowtech design and steadily building up (see above).

figure 3: Phases of the innovation process of wind energy in Germany (Ohlhorst 2008: 185)14

In the phase of progression, the niche-constellation and the technology itself stabilize more and more. It is characterized by a stepwise and purposeful improvement of the technology’s performance and efficiency, the stabilization of the development process, the gradual emergence of a dominant design, and the diffusion of the technology. In other words, the technological evolution develops into some kind of path or trajectory that becomes narrower and more distinct over time and that guides the continuing development. Thus, the niche becomes more and more self-supporting but is still strongly dependent on governmental and entrepreneurial

14

translation by the author

30

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 protection for the dominant paradigm still exerts a strong influence on the niche-constellation. At the same time however, the niche begins to compete with the established paradigm. Through the innovation’s success, the established system is faced with arising doubts but it still remains strong and closed, which makes it difficult for the niche-technology to break through. In Germany, that phase lasted from 1986 until 1990 and was largely triggered by the Chernobyl disaster. This ‘external shock’ caused massive changes in the awareness of risks regarding nuclear energy production, which put pressure on the established technological paradigm and and destabilized it. The wind energy niche took advantage of those events and expanded. In the phase of the dynamic expansion, the niche eventually develops into an established element of the overall system. By acquiring momentum, it becomes stable and self-supporting. Technological development then becomes predominantly incremental. The constellation in this phase is usually characterized by the addition of new elements (like new companies, investors, legal arrangements, or the enhancement of the infrastructure) and by the development of a strong bond between of the relevant actors. Ideally, the constellation in this phase would be consistent and not marked by conflicts. So far in Germany, two such phases of dynamic expansion could be observed: one from 1991 until 1995 (the breakthrough phase) and the windenergy boost from 1998 until 2002. During the breakthrough phase, the wind energy constellation was still a large niche whereas in the boost phase, wind energy finally developed into a self-contained part of the German energy supply system. In the German case, the two phases of the dynamic expansion have been interrupted by a short phase called ‘development slump’; it can arise through the occurrence of several unfavorable niche-external or niche-internal developments – like, for example, the massive resistance from the traditional energy industry, a hesitant attitude of actors in the finance sector, and changes in the legal framework with a negative effect. Such a crisis-like situation can be just a temporal lean period but it can also become very critical for a niche-technology and even threaten its existence; that depends on how fast obstacles can be overcome. The phase’s characteristics are the rearrangement and at best the re-stabilization of the unbalanced and disturbed constellation.

31

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 The last phase of the German development curve (the consolidation phase from 2002 until 2007) includes another split-up into two different paths: that of the on-shore constellation and that of the offshore constellation. It can be called ‘bifurcation’ or ‘forking’. Technology development branches out and new fields of application can thus be opened up. The German onshore development is characterized through decreasing installation rates and a focus on export trade and repowering. The offshore development is still in the early stages and is mainly supported by a new constellation of actors consisting of the German government and large enterprises of the still dominant energy supply industry. Both paths have to deal with the problem of the integration of ever increasing amounts of RES-E into a limited grid. Whether both of them will be successful or whether one (or even both) will eventually turn out to be unsuccessful, and thus leading to a dead end, cannot be determined. This analysis of wind energy development in Germany showed that the process was discontinuous and non-linear and was composed of a sequence of different phases or modules. Ohlhorst also observed that some phases with stable and consistent constellations were longer and some phases marked by unstable constellations and bold changes were shorter. These findings would confirm the assumption of the theoretical approaches discussed in chapter 2.4 (the Innovation Journey and Path Dependence) that such innovation processes consist of long convergent and short divergent periods.

32

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010

4 The Development of the French Wind Energy Sector
France’s wind energy sector started to develop much later and relatively slower than the German wind energy sector, but due to very favorable wind conditions and the adoption of a feed-in tariff system in 2001 (which had already been successfully applied in several countries), a dynamic development in the French sector has been predicted ever since the abolition of a first tender scheme in 2000. The promised innovations took time to get off the ground, though. The rate at which technology was installed and implemented was much slower than expected, or hoped for, and would have to increase dramatically if the RES-E (electricity production from renewable energy sources) capacity targets for 2010 were to be reached. The newly installed capacity did, however, not increase much until the year 2005. (Jobert et al. 2007, Persem 2008, Dena 2006, EWEA 2005)

figure 4: Annual and cumulated wind development in MW (RTE 2009a: 68)

33

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 2005 was the year when France joined, for the first time, the ‘top ten wind power markets’ regarding delivered wind turbines (Chabot 2006) and it seemed as if the sector finally reached a “tipping point”. Since 2006, France displayed one of the most dynamic development rates in Europe with 950 MW in 2008 (see figure 5); however, it still lagged far behind the two European market leaders Germany (1,665 MW) and Spain (1,609 MW) or the international newcomers China (6,300 MW), the US (8,358 MW), and India (1,800 MW) (GTAI.de, GWEC 2008, RTE 2009a).

figure 5: Installed wind power by country on December 31, 2008 (SER/FEE kit éolien 2009: 2)

The following table (see table 1) substantiates the above-mentioned development curve (see figure 4) of the French wind energy sector over the last twelve years. In this table view of the data, it becomes clear that apart from two very small setbacks in the early development stages

34

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 (1998 and 2001, in red15), the development is marked by a continuous capacity increase. From 2005 on, rates of installation are comparatively high. When comparing the years 1998 and 2006, the amount of MW that was built annually increased one hundred times. At the end of 2005, the first TWh of wind energy was produced, which more than double production figures from 2004. And 2006 growth rates, both in MW (810 MW) and in GWh (1,206 GWh) indicate a possible take-off in the French wind energy sector, as well.

Year

Over-all number of WPS

Annual installation rate of WPS

Cumulative installed capacity in MW

Annual installation rate in MW

Produced energy in GWh

Annual increase in GWh

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

33 59 70 154 242 302 374 500 649 956

25 26 (78.8%) 11 (18.6%) 84 (120%) 88 (57.1%) 60 (24.8%) 72 (23.8%) 126 (33.7%) 149 (29.8%) 307 (47.3%)

3 5 13 21 61 92 144 244 390 757

1 2 (66.7%) 8 (160%) 8 (61.5%) 40 (190.5%) 31 (50.8%) 52 (56.5%) 100 (69.4%) 146 (59.8%) 367 (94.1%) 70 131 245 363 577 963  first TWh 61 (87%) 114 (87%) 118 (48%) 214 (59%) 386 (67%)

2006 2007 2008

1344 1868 2488

388 (40.6%) 524 (39%) 620 (33.2%)

1567 2455 3404

810 (107%) 888 (56.7%) 949 (38.7%)  first GW

2169 4140 5653

1206 (125%) 1971 (91%) 1513 (35%)

table 1: Table view of the French wind energy development from 1996 to 2008 (the figures I used for my calculations can be looked up in: SER/FEE kit éolien 2009 + état parc 2009)

Where do those setbacks come from? The “2001-setback” may result from possible hesitant behavior of park developers that wanted to await the new legal framework before deciding to further or henceforth investing in wind energy.

15

35

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 The annual installation rate in MW now seems to stabilize around 1,000 MW per year (RTE 2009a) although Charles Dugué, the President of the French Wind Organization, claims that “in terms of projects we have the pipeline there to reach 2,000 MW per year” (EWEA 2009a) – a rate of installation that will be absolutely necessary to meet France’s RES-E capacity target of 25 GW in 2020. This 2020 target is still attainable, but despite recent developments in the sector, France’s 2010 target (13.5 GW) is not likely to be reached. It also remains unclear whether the recent capacity increase is the beginning of a “real” breakthrough of wind power in the French energy sector or whether it will remain a niche in a nuclear dominated energy system. Although the French wind energy lobby seems optimistic to be able to increase installation rates and to help on the sector (see above), an international wind market trend analysis (Husum WindEnergy 2008) assumes that the importance of the French market share will decrease rather than increase in the years to come. So, the future development remains ambiguous. A rather interesting discovery was the fact that the development of the French and the German wind curve is quite similar when theoretically shifting the German curve at about 10 years (see figure 6). In most articles about wind energy development in France, it is mentioned that France was lagging far behind other countries and that development was much slower than in the pioneer countries. However, when comparing the French development with that of Germany ten years earlier, the similarities are striking – admittedly, always provided that France sticks to its RES-E capacity targets, as from the 2009-mark on, I worked with hypothetical figures16. These findings are rather encouraging for the French wind energy sector and given the time, perhaps it will be able to catch up; however, one has to ask the question: why was the rate at which the technology was installed and implemented not quicker? With state-of-the-art on-shore wind generators producing ever-increasing amounts of electricity and with the foundation that other countries had already laid in the domain of policy framework, France should have been able to achieve much higher installation rates than Germany did 10 years ago.

16

To meet the target of 25 GW in 2020 an annual installation rate of at least 1,800 MW is necessary.

36

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010

figure 6: Wind power development in France and Germany (graphic rendered by author)

37

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 I will later argue that France’s development curve of wind energy production is very likely to be capped at a certain point (see chapter 6). Before going into detail though about why and how the French wind energy sector was and still is constricted, I am going to describe the development of the sector on the basis of Dolata’s analytical categories of sectoral systems (cf. chapter 2.2, its technological profile, institutional arrangements, socio-economic context, and actor constellations and networks) and on Ohlhorst’s classification on different phases or modules of innovation processes (cf. chapter 3.2). The fact that the analyzable development period is still very short and the fact that the sector’s development is marked by a constant capacity increase make it difficult to group events into distinct development phases. My attempt to subdivide the development into different periods on the basis Ohlhorst’s classification is as follows: a “prephase” lasted from the 1940s until the 1990s, followed by a first period inspired by the pioneer or departure phase (1991 - 2000), then a learning period that is loosely based on the phase of progression (2000 - 2005), and finally the possible beginning of a take-off (from 2005 on). Those phases can be found in each of the following subchapters.

4.1 Technology Development and Technological Profile of the Sector
Technical Details of the Core Technology17
The wind power station (‘WPS’) is the core technology of the wind energy niche. There exist several, technically different types but all of them transform wind into electricity and are uniformly used for this purpose – the most commonly used design I will shortly describe in detail. The here-introduced WPS should not be confused with the windmill. At first glance they seem quite similar: they both have a wind turbine that converts the kinetic energy in the wind into mechanical power. However, windmills do not convert this mechanical energy into electricity; they use it directly for various machinery (e.g. for grinding grain or pumping water). WPSs additionally have generators that convert the mechanical energy into electricity. (VDE.com) This electricity can be produced for home requirements only, it can be fed in the overall power

This chapter is very technical and serves above all a better understanding of the core technology of the sector that I am going to describe and analyze.

17

38

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 supply system, or it can be stored elsewhere for future use. Small, individually usable consumer technologies, used for home requirements (between 0.1 and 20 kW; see ADEME guide: 22ff), are not prevalent in France (only about 1,000 small wind systems as compared to over 10,000 in the UK; see LaTribune.fr, BWEA 2009) and do not presently exert influence on the development of the wind energy sector in France. I will therefore limit myself to the analysis of modular technologies consisting of several autonomous and complex technologies (like generators, gears, or transformers) and producing electricity, which is then sold to power consumers (the electricity being the merchandise and the WPS the industrial good). Purchasers of WPSs are mostly industrial costumers, but also individuals or associations of such. Several wind power stations together are called a wind park or farm. The existence of wind is dependent on the sun. Wind is therefore a form of solar energy. Masses of air are set into motion due to an inhomogeneous surface of the earth, uneven heating of the atmosphere, and rotation of the earth. (WindSonne.de) The kinetic energy in the wind impacts on the rotor blades of the WPS, which are set into motion through the airstream that circulates around the blades. The rotor then spins a shaft that connects to a generator that, in turn, transforms the mechanical energy into electricity. In this way (and at the present state of technology), a maximum of 59% of the wind’s kinetic energy can be extracted. However, because of losses during the transformation, modern WPS have an efficiency of only 45 to 50%. The amount of energy produced depends on several parameters: firstly, on the design of the rotor blades, their length, and their positioning in the airstream, and secondly, on wind speed and on the density of the air. If the length of the blades doubles, the WPS can produce four times as much electricity, and if the wind speeds doubles, the possible outcome is even multiplied by eight. Another 3% of increased performance can be added by a temperature drop of ten degrees. (BWE A-Z, SER/FEE kit éolien 2009) The rotor does not always run on maximum speed, though. The yearly operation time of a WPS is at an average of 7,500h – 85% of the 8,760h in a year. Full load hours (when the rotor runs on maximum speed) of on-shore WPSs however average only 2,000h per year. They achieve their maximum or nominal capacity (mostly identifiable through the WPS’s name, like for example Jeumont’s 750 kW machine J48/750) at a specific wind speed that generally lies between 40 and 54 km/h. Modern WPS are designed for a life expectancy of 20 years. The
39

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 energy they produce during this period is 40 to 70-fold the energy that is used for the WPS’s fabrication, utilization, and disposal together. An on-shore WPS can therefore “offset” the consumed energy costs of construction after three months to one year. (BWE A-Z) There exist several different designs for WPSs. They vary most prominently in three areas: positioning of the rotation axis, number of rotor blades, and wind exposition. Over the years, WPSs with horizontal rotation axes prevailed, but designs with vertical axes – also called the eggbeater-style – still exist18. Depending on site conditions, they sometimes constitute the superior alternative (e.g. in an urban environment), even though their efficiency is comparatively low. Their technical advantages are their small size, easy manageability and maintenance (the generator and the gearbox being installed at the bottom), and independence of the wind direction. The best-known vertical rotor model is the Darrieus rotor that has been invented by George Darrieus, a French engineer, in 1930. In the 1980s, his concept was applied on a large scale in Canada at the wind park Éole; the prototype was 110m high and had a nominal capacity of 4 MW. Before it was destroyed in a storm, it was the largest WPS with a vertical axis
ever built and at the time also the largest WPS on the planet. (EcoSource.info, LeMoniteur.fr)

WPSs with a horizontal axis can have a varying number of rotor blades – in the 70s and 80s WPSs were built with a range of one to four and more rotor blades – today’s prevailing design however has three. The choice for an uneven number of blades has special technical reasons19. The third difference in design – whether the rotor is facing into the wind (upwind) or facing away from it (downwind) – depends on whether a yaw gear is installed or not. Downwind facing WPSs can do without a yaw gear for the wind turns the rotor automatically in the right direction. This passive adjustment of the rotor works, however, only for small WPSs because of turbulences on the downwind side of the tower. Windward facing WPSs are dependent on the right wind direction. They need a tracking device that adjusts the rotor, a so-called yaw gear that is hinged to the top of the WPS’s tower. The wind vane measures the wind direction and communicates it to the yaw drive that will then orient the turbine properly. (BWE Technik)
The question of why wind generators with vertical axes were not successful will not be answered in this study. It could however be quite interesting to approach this issue as vertical axes do recently reemerge in the domain of urban wind power. (see later in this chapter: technology development) 19 To know why, please read the chapter “Pourquoi la plupart des éoliennes ont-elles trois pales ?” of the “kit éolien” (SER/FEE 2009 kit éolien) or the article “Anzahl von Blättern” on the number of rotor blades on the BWE-website (BWE Technik).
18

40

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010

figure 7: Schematic representations of nacelles, with and without gears (Agentur für Erneuerbare Energien)

41

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 “Wind turbines are complex mechanical systems” (Molly 2009: 15) and “comprise many interactive parts that work together to convert kinetic wind energy to electromagnetic energy” (Garud & Karnoe 2003: 282) like a rotor with a hub and blades, a nacelle, a gearbox, electrical equipment, a tower, a foundation, a monitoring, control, and regulating system, and a connection to the grid. (BWE A-Z, SER/FEE kit éolien 2009) The most distinctive component of a WPS is the rotor, a hub with blades, which work roughly like the wings of an airplane (on the principle of aerodynamics). The rotor converts the kinetic energy in the wind into mechanical power. Two shafts and a gearbox (or just one shaft if the WPS does not have a gearbox) transfer the rotation energy to the generator. For the case of an emergency, a WPS has to have a break that can stop the rotor and the gears. The gears connect the main shaft to the high-speed shaft and thus increase the rotational speed to one required by the generator to produce electricity (for the rotor turns with a relatively low rotation speed and the generator with one much higher). There are constant-speed generators and variable-speed generators. A constant-speed generator can be connected directly to the grid. This allows WPSs to be built with a simpler design but has the drawback that the rotation speed of the rotor cannot be adapted to changing wind speeds, which leads to a lower energy production. Frequency and amount of the electricity produced by variable speed generators fluctuate permanently. Therefore, the energy output has to be transformed into continuous current by a rectifier, filtered, and than retransformed by an inverter into alternating current. In the end, the voltage has to be, in both cases, the same as that of the grid. Most of the equipment is situated in the nacelle, which is mounted on the top of the tower and can weigh several hundred tons. The tower has not only to bear the nacelle’s weight, but also to withstand mechanical forces that are exerted by the swinging of the nacelle under different operating conditions and other strains caused by the wind. They are usually made from concrete, steel, or steel lattice. Their height is decisive for the WPS’s power output. In higher air layers, turbulences are reduced, the wind stream is more continuous, and its speed increases. Thus, taller towers enable turbines to capture more energy and generate more electricity. The whole construction has to be fixed securely to a ground foundation. Foundation designs are primarily selected depending on geotechnical conditions and range from spread footings, and

42

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 pile and cap foundations, to rock anchors. Offshore foundations have various designs like their on-shore siblings, but remain to have a codified building standard as of yet. Another part of the electric equipment (apart from the generator and the mechanisms for grid connection) is the monitoring, regulating, and control system. First of all, these measures serve as preventive maintenance, because changes and wear-out can be detected early on and can be remotely monitored (through modern information and communication technology). What is more, these systems automatically regulate the WPS’s power production. At promising wind speeds (9 - 32 km/h) the controller starts up the machines and the WPS is connected to the grid. Wind speeds can be measured by an anemometer, which transmits the data to the controller, or can be calculated by the rotation speed of the rotor and the generators power output. The WPS is again disconnected when the wind speed drops to low or rises to high (90 122 km/h) to protect it from capacity overload and from physical damage through high winds. This disconnection does not occur abruptly, but slowly and in harmony with the power grid to guarantee a steady feed-in. The WPS is not just shut down but the output is reduced gradually. Currently, there exist two different ways of power control on modern WPSs: active or passive stall control and pitch control. WPSs with stall-controlled turbines have their rotor blades bolted onto the hub at a fixed angle. With increasing wind speed, the angle of attack of the rotor blade will increase until, at some point (the moment the wind speed becomes too high), it begins to stall. Stalling means that air turbulences occur on the downwind side of the rotor, limiting the rotation speed of the rotor and with it the engine’s performance. Thus, the WPS can be limited to its nominal capacity even with high winds. This simple solution avoids using a complex control system and installing moving parts in the rotor itself, but it also has some drawbacks. Owing to its special blade profile, the WPS cannot start running independently when wind speeds are low. They then need to use the generator as a motor to activate the rotor. In addition, stall-induced vibrations of the blades generate noise emissions that are disrupting the surrounding residents. Furthermore, the power output of a WPS with a passive stall control – being usually equipped with generators that can be connected directly to the grid – is difficult to synchronize with the power supply network, for a constant rotation speed of the rotor and the generator can only be maintained in a rather limited range. WPSs with an active stall control can additionally
43

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 regulate the stall point through stepwise modification of the rotor blade angle. Thus, variations in wind speed can be more accurately balanced and higher wind speeds can be better exploited. A pitch control system resembles the active stall control in one point: they both use adjustable rotor blades. In the case of active stall control, however, the angle of attack of the blades is increased in order to make the blades go into a deeper stall. Thus, the excess energy in the wind is wasted. Pitch controlled WPSs turn, or pitch, their blades out of the wind to control the rotor speed. By choosing a suboptimal blade angle the aerodynamic efficiency of the blades is deliberately worsened. Pitch-controlled WPSs generally use a variable speed generator – that is, generator and grid connection are decoupled. Thus, gust of winds do not backlash on the WPS’s power output. A pitch-controlled WPS is additionally equipped with electronic controllers that constantly check the power output and that send orders to the blade pitch mechanism when the power output becomes to high or drops to low. The pitch mechanism then immediately turns the rotor blades either in or out of the wind. This can be performed continuously (unlike the stepwise adaption of the active stall control) and separately for every blade. Pitch-controlled blades can also be used as aerodynamic breaks; most of the pitch-controlled WPSs do not feature mechanical breaks. The nature of the monitoring, regulating, and control system defines a WPS’s ‘degree of activity’. All WPSs are at least ‘automobile’ for they can independently transfer kinetic energy into electricity. They can also automatically launch their engines if wind speeds are promising and will yield a return, which means that they are ‘reactive’, as well. Today’s modern pitchcontrolled WPS can even guarantee a steady power output that does not disturb the grid’s stability. Together with the latest grid control systems, modern WPSs may even be called ‘interactive’ since they adapt, in “cooperation” with grid control systems and human grid administrators, to the requirements of the grid. This “jointly” action has been demonstrated in the power failure on November 4, 2006 that affected nearly all Europe (Bundesnetzagentur 2006) -------------------------------------------------------------------- SIDE NOTE: POWER FAILURE The power outage of November 4, 2006 originated in Northwest Germany where E.ON (a German electricity provider) switched off a high voltage power line across a river to allow a cruise ship to pass underneath. After the line had been switched off the load flows were
44

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 redirected to other power lines. Due to overloading, an interconnection line in the area finally tripped, entailing a cascade of line trippings within the next few seconds from North to South Germany and all throughout Europe. The result of the failure of individual lines was the disconnection of approximately 15 million people throughout Europe from power supply and the separation of the interconnected European power supply system into three zones with different frequencies.

figure 8: Diagram of the grid after the power outage (Bundesnetzagentur 2006: 10)

Shortly after the incident, the first line tripping was blamed in several articles (see e.g. Landtag Nordrhein-Westfahlen Drucksache) on a high feed-in of wind power stations in the area, but extraordinarily high wind feed-in can be ruled out as the initial cause, for the network’s load on that evening was not unusual and feed-in forecasts of wind energy had been taken into account. So, although wind power feed-in was indeed not the cause of the power outage it admittedly aggravated the situation by the automatic reconnection of some of the units while system operators were trying to stabilize the grid. One could say that the cause of the outage and the difficulties experienced after the first line tripping was a mixture of human misjudgment, inadequate load management, lack of cooperation and communication, and the automatic “behavior” of technical elements. System operators of the two neighboring grids had been previously informed about the upcoming disconnection of a high voltage power line, but E.ON failed to notify them when deciding to advance the disconnection. The changed load flows therefore took the other two

45

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 operators by surprise. Due to a lack of coordination and cooperation, many phone calls between the different operators and a last minute crisis management became necessary – which naturally provoked mistakes and hasty decisions. An important part was also the transmission grid’s ‘tripping value’ and ‘voltage collapse boundary’. The first limit activates grid protection equipment; the second one is a security limit value that must not be exceeded to prevent a power line from being automatically disconnected. Due to the fact that the limits of those protection concepts differ from operator to operator, the situation became still more confusing. A third factor was the insufficient cooperation between transmission system operators and distribution network operators. A large number of decentral generation units, which are connected at distribution network level, as are for example wind power stations, automatically disconnected from the grid as a result of the unexpected frequency change (about 60% of the connected wind generation units disconnected). The automatic tripping of wind generation occurs if the network frequency drops under or rises over a certain limit20. In the western area this further aggravated the frequency drop and the shortage in power generation. In the northeastern area, wind generation units also disconnected from the grid due to its over-frequency. They then automatically reconnected when the network frequency was just stabilizing, interfering negatively with the stabilization process and making it crash once again. The main problem therefore was, that it happened without being monitored by the transmission or the distribution system operators and without any information being exchanged between them. The interaction and coordination between these different actors of today’s network management – system operators from all distribution levels and from different operators, but also technical network elements with automatic control systems – has to be intensified and strengthened to guarantee a smoothly running power supply system. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- END SIDE NOTE
20

“All the generating equipment in an electric system is designed to operate within very strict frequency margins. Grid codes specify that all generating plants should be able to operate continuously between a frequency range around the nominal frequency of the grid, usually between 49.5 and 50.5 Hz in Europe, and to operate for different periods of time when lower/higher frequencies down/up to a minimum/maximum limit, usually 47 - 47.5 and 52 Hz. Operation outside these limits would damage the generating plants, so even very short duration deviations from the nominal frequency values would trip load shedding relays and generation capacity would be lost. The lost of generation leads to further frequency deviation and a black-out may occur.” (de Alegria et al. 2007)

46

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010

Exogenous Technologies
Alongside the core technology there are some niche-extern technologies that should be mentioned due to their influence on the wind energy sector. Two of them that, so far, had a restricting effect on the wind energy sector are mechanisms for energy storage and the power supply system. Storage mechanisms do exist (e.g. technologies that work with hydrogen; Zeit.de b) although they are not able to store large quantities of energy and, above all, not for a long period of time because storage of electricity usually leads to significant energy losses. However, with the growing size and growing production output of today’s wind parks, their importance will probably rise and could give the whole development in the sector another boost because non-storability of electricity produced by wind energy is so far seen as a bottleneck. Another restricting technology is the grid. Wind parks and electrical infrastructure have to reciprocally adapt to solve supply-demand problems based on geographical, seasonal, and daily patterns of demand. Its enhancement can have a similar effect as the theoretical solution of the storage problem. Wind forecasts have been highly improved in their accuracy and help to calculate the amount of electricity that will be produced at a certain time by means of wind energy and then fed into the grid. To make sure that the interplay of several different forms of energy production on one grid runs smoothly, it makes sense to interconnect the power supply systems of several European countries to a larger extent so that surplus electricity can be used where it is needed. New information and communication technologies, that have completely revolutionized other sectors, do have an impact on the wind energy sector, as well – although it is rather small. Changes mainly occur in the area of monitoring, regulating, and control systems. The fact that the maintenance of WPSs can now be conducted and sometimes even executed from afar changes the working structure of the maintenance industry. A WPS in Brittany for example, built by a German company, can be controlled almost entirely by a controller in Germany. Thus, new information and communication technologies may counteract the possible decentralization effect of new flexible energy production technologies, fostering centralized management approaches of energy systems.

47

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010

Technology Development
In the early stages of technology development, sectoral dynamics were characterized by paradigmatically new technologies and radical innovations. The first “French” technological innovation has probably been the Darrieus rotor, a rotor with a vertical axis named after its inventor (see above). Such wind generators had not been rediscovered in France until very recently though. In 2008 for example, a small French enterprise named Apple-Wind presented a smallscale wind generator prototype based on the Darrieus rotor. The “micro-generator” was designed to be placed on rooftops of enterprises, townhouses, or farms. (LeMoniteur.fr, AppleWind.fr) Another innovative French wind energy project that uses a vertical rotor is called Wind-it and was designed by Elioth, a firm of engineering consultants. Their wind generators, which can be integrated into power poles, won a first prize at the ‘Metropolis Next Generation Design Competition’ in 2009. The generators, ranging from 1 kW to 1 MW, can in most instances be inserted in already existing infrastructure and can above all be connected directly to the power supply system. (WindIt.fr + IosisGroup.fr, Actu-Environnement.fr p) The first French large-scale research projects in the domain of wind generators with a horizontal axis took place in a period from the late 1940s to the beginning of the 1960s. (Bonnefille 1974, Cahiers d’Eole, Site Cavey) The research activities, which resulted in three prototypes, have been undertaken under survey of EDF. In collaboration with the enterprise Neyrpic, EDF built two three-winged large-scale wind generators in St-Rémy-des-Landes (Manche region), one with a 132 kW capacity and another with 1,000 kW. Those prototypes do not figure in current registers, like TheWindPower.net or suivi-eolien.fr – those websites list those wind generators that have been connected to the French power supply system – contrary to the third experimental large-scale wind generator that has been built during this period in Nogent-le-Roi (Centre region). The wind generator of the type ‘800 KVA BEST-Romani’ had a nominal capacity of either 650 kW or 800 kW, a synchronous generator, three airfoil rotor blades, a rotor diameter of 30m, was 58m high, and was mounted on a tripod lattice tower. It resulted from a cooperation of EDF and the research center BEST (Bureau d'Etude Scientifique et Technique, established by Lucien Romani; dissolved and replace by Aérowatt in 1966) and was commissioned in 1958. At that time, BEST – together with Aeronautical Institute of Saint-Cyr School at Yvelines (l'Institut Aérotechnique de Saint-Cyr l'Ecole) – had already experimented for almost
48

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 two decades with several small-scale wind generators fixed on pylons. The ‘800 KVA BESTRomani’ has been designed with the objective to test large-scale wind generators in France. When in 1963, during a test run, a blade of the BEST-Romani generator broke, EDF discontinued its wind energy research activities and finally suspended all payments. Possible reasons for this were technical problems and also the decrease in the cost of gasoline (Bonnefille 1974). The generators were eventually dismantled in 1966. Thus ended the first experiments on largescale wind generators in France. The first experimental French wind park by the name of Château de Lastours (municipality of Portel des Corbières, Languedoc-Roussillon/Aude region) was put into operation about twenty years later, in 1983. The installed wind generators were, however, much less powerful than the three large-scale wind generators from the 1960s; the park was equipped with ten smallscale 10kW generators from Aérowatt/Vergnet (see below). (Feuille sur le Vent, Cahiers d’Eole) With EDF discontinuing all research activities in the domain of wind energy and the failure of the Darrieus rotor to establish itself, those first “French” initiatives to develop large-scale wind generators have not been pursued further. Other renewable energy projects, like for example EDF’s research project on tidal power (EDF commissioned a tidal power plant in 1966 at La Rance that was the biggest in the world), met the same fate. In the 1970s, EDF finally stopped all research on tidal power in favor of nuclear energy – all this at a time when it was absolutely not sure yet that nuclear power plants were a competitive alternative. (Cahiers d’Eole, EDF press release) Since the 1970s, France’s government steadily reinforces its commitment to nuclear energy, its chosen solution to energy sourcing challenges. (Dena 2006, Szarka 2007a; see also chapter 4.2) At the same time, Denmark settled for a different path, that of wind energy. The so-called ‘Danish concept’ of wind generators grew out of a social movement that strongly rejected nuclear energy and was very skeptical about conventional energy sources. It could finally get the upper hand due to a broad opposition to nuclear energy in the Danish population. Thus, Denmark became the cradle of the entire contemporary wind power industry – but not with largescale generator projects and a ‘top-down’ strategy devised by the government, but through incremental enhancements of small machines, and a ‘bottom-up’ movement that was undertaken by green hobbyists, technical experts, engineers and agriculturists (Szarka 2007a: 25, 31).
49

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 At this stage of technology development, technical basics were not based on fundamental academic research and research activities from large-scale industry, but on practice- and application-oriented knowledge from engineers. „Modern wind turbines are not based on any new dramatic inventions or recent scientific discoveries. Rather, modern wind turbines embody the steady accretion of inputs from many actors. [... In Denmark,] instead of pursuing a design intensive R&D approach, these firms [Vestas, and nine other Danish wind turbine firms] deployed prototypes designed with simple engineering heuristics to engender a process of trial-anderror learning. (Garud & Karnoe 2003: 282) Garud and Karnoe also point out the importance of feedback between all groups involved in the technology development: theorists, users, and engineers of different expertise like mechanics, electrotechnology, hydraulics, aerodynamics, advanced materials, and welding. The result of this approach was the ‘Danish concept’ of wind generators for which the foundation had already been laid in the late 19th century, with the experiments of the wind pioneer Paul la Cour, and in the 1950s, with the designing of the Gedser turbine by Johannes Juul. The ‘Danish model’ was a simple, robust, upwind machine with a horizontal rotation axis, three blades, a constant speed rotor, a stall control, a gearbox, an asynchronous generator, and a direct grid connection. During the 1980s and early 1990s, it constituted the vast majority of wind generators sold worldwide. The first wind generator of this type was installed in 1956/57 and had a nominal capacity of 200 kW. The ‘Danish model’ was for a long time the ‘state of the art’ of the wind energy sector all over the world. Only over the years did its capacity increase (up to a nominal capacity of 500 kW). They had many advantages like a simple configuration, robustness, low maintenance costs, cheap engine parts, and direct grid coupling. The asynchronous generator and the direct coupling to the grid also posed some problems, though: because of the direct connection to the grid no other generator than an asynchronous constant speed generator could be used. That meant that the rotor speed had to be constant, too. So, there was only one ideal wind speed at which the wind generator could perform best and it could not adapt to different wind speeds – leading to a suboptimal performance. What is more, asynchronous generators required idle power (electricity that some machines need to be able to start operating). And finally, mechanical forces, like strong gusts of wind, considerably strained the rotor blades and the gear train. (BWE Technik)

50

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 At the beginning of the 1990s, France made a new attempt to get involved in the wind energy development. In 1991, at a time when a first standardization of technology had already been taking place, the first non-experimental wind power station had been connected to the grid. There are two French wind park developers that claim to have been the first21: ‘La Compagnie du Vent’ and ‘Espace Eolien Developpement’. ‘La Compagnie du Vent’ (at that time still being called Cabinet Germa) installed one 200kW machine (V25/200) from the Danish manufacturer Vestas at Port-la-Nouvelle (Languedoc-Roussillon/Aude region). ‘Espace Eolien Developpement’ chose a Dutch model from the manufacturer Windmaster (which in the meantime ceased to exist) with a capacity of 300kW and the same rotor diameter of 25m, which was installed at Dunkerque (Nord-Pas-De-Calais region). (CdV press release, Energie-Cités.org, Suivi-Eolien.com + TheWindPower.net) In the ten years that followed, about thirty projects were started, half of them due to the calls of tender of the so-called EOLE-2005 project (see chapter 4.2), and several of them have already been dismantled again. Their average nominal capacity was 350 kW (from 15 kW to 750 kW; one single park even had 1,300 kW machines); the average capacity of the parks was 2,300 kW (from 15 to 7,800 kW) and they were equipped with 1 - 40 wind generators. The parks with the highest number of wind generators (usually small machines with little capacity) were often situated on the islands of the overseas departments and territories (DOM-TOM) and Corsica – about half of the projects have been situated there. The cumulated output of all the wind power stations in France has, at that time, not been significant, yet (until 1997, the output was in the single-digit MW range). (see table 3 in the appendix) In 1993 and 1996, two new wind generator models affected the international wind energy markets and their market shares have increased ever since. To solve the Danish model’s drawbacks, a new WPS generation, which operates with variable rotor and generator speed, has been developed. This could be achieved through the replacement of the asynchronous through a synchronous generator that can operate with variable speeds and can be combined with a pitch control. Thus it became possible to cover a whole range of different wind speeds and to increase the WPS’s efficiency. An additional benefit was that the strain on the blades and the

Apparently, there has been installed a third WPS in 1991 at Malo-les-Bains (Nord-Pas-de-Calais region); it was however no industrial wind generator but an experimental one with a capacity of 300 kW (ADEME.fr letter).

21

51

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 gear train was diminished. The produced electricity of such WPS varies in frequency however, and thus these new models cannot be directly connected to the grid. A converter is needed that adapts the energy to the supply frequency. With a higher performance, the capital cost of variable speed WPSs increased, too, because of the utilization of more electronics. Capital costs further increase when the gearbox is left out although this increases energy efficiency (through lesser losses) and reduces complexity, the number of component parts, and maintenance requirements of a WPS. The size, weight, and the rather high price of the new generators used (e.g. ring generators) are however still disadvantageous. (BWE Technik) At the same time, a special kind of asynchronous two-pole generator was developed that can also be used with variable speed rotors. It has the advantage of being smaller, less heavy, and cheaper than synchronous generators and at the same time, able to compensate for the drawbacks of the “ordinary” asynchronous generator. Those generators can switch between different (usually two) poles and can consequently adapt to two (or in some cases more) different wind speeds. In comparison to synchronous generators, only 40% of the produced electricity has to be converted to the supply frequency. These developments allowed wind generator manufactures to increase nominal capacity much more rapidly than before their implementation. In the middle of the 1990s first ‘MWmachines’ penetrated the markets. A hard competition between manufactures was going on to increase wind generators in height, rotor diameter and nominal capacity. At the beginning of the 1980s, a WPS’s rotor diameter was less than 18m wide, today’s rotor diameters count up to 112m and even 126m – and the trend is to create even lager rotors in the years to come. The same trend of expansion can also be seen with regards to the height of the towers. The highest WPS in the world – the Fuhrländer FL2500 at Laasow/Brandenburg (Germany) – has a tower of 160m and an overall height of 205m. (Molly 2009, BWE A-Z, MEDAD d, VDE.com) The WPSs’ nominal capacity increased proportionally, as it is dependent on its height and its rotor diameter (see above). The average capacity of wind generators at the beginning of the 1980s was about 100 kW, 500 kW in the late 90s, has increased to several MW today (see figure 9 on the left). With 6 MW, the Enercon EN112 is currently the strongest WPS in the world, it is however not an on-shore but an offshore wind generator. (MEDAD d, VDE.com, SER/FEE kit éolien 2009 + état parc 2009) In France, the increase in installation of machines with two ore more MW
52

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 occurred from 2005 on; installation of WPSs with more than 3 MW is not planned prior to 2010 (or maybe even later). (see table 3 in the appendix) Naturally, the average capacity of wind parks became bigger, too – from a couple of MW in the year 2000 to nearly 13 MW in 2008, with a tendency to still bigger parks in the years to come (SER/FEE état parc 2009). Until 2007, there are almost no wind parks in France bigger than 12 MW because of the 12-MW-limit in the purchase obligation (see figure 9 on the right, see also chapter 4.2)22.

figure 9: Development of the average potential of single wind power stations (on the left) and of whole wind parks (on the right) in MW (SER/FEE état parc 2009: 10, 11)

The downside of this fast size development is the fact that the quality of the wind turbines could not always keep pace because of a very competitive environment that left no time for manufactures to improve the design. Dealing with failures and lifetime problems that led to additional costs became part of a wind park operator’s activities. In recent years, when the size development of wind generators slowed down, quality gained more importance in the manufacturers’ competition. (Molly 2009) Further technological innovations, apart from size and capacity, have been added to the design, like for example ice sensors and navigation lights at the rotor blades (Enertrag.com). Naturally, there exist a great many different wind generator designs, often influenced by the manufacturer’s historical background and based on the technical options described in this chapter (see above).
Before 2007, large parks presumably originated from occasional calls of tender, which had been carried on simultaneously to the feed-in obligation regulation, to support parks larger than 12 MW (see chapter 4.2).
22

53

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 France did not play a decisive role in the described technology development. Only two French enterprises, which I will introduce in more detail in chapter 4.3, were involved in the development of whole wind power stations – with varied success. Intending to directly join the market of large-scale WPSs, Jeumont Industries designed the J48/750 direct drive wind generator with a nominal capacity of 750 kW. The model was equipped with an innovative synchronous generator (a permanent magnet type ring generator), a variable speed rotor with stall control, an aerodynamic efficiency control, an electronic converter technology, and no gearbox. The J48/750 was launched in 2001 but production ceased after just a few years after encountering numerous technical problems. (LesEchos.fr, Gosset & Ranchin 2006, Suivi-Eolien.com) Another French, and very successful, WPS manufacturer is Vergnet SA. Together with BESTRomani, this enterprise had already been involved in the first large-scale wind generator research projects in France. Today, it is world leader in the domain of small and medium-sized machines with a special cyclone protection.23

figure 10: Butoni Wind Farm on the Fiji Islands (Vergnet.fr, © Vergnet SA)

These WPSs are predominantly sold in so-called FARWIND-zones, isolated areas like archipelagos, mountainsides, and semi-deserts with underdeveloped infrastructure and extreme climate conditions. Vergnet’s newest (2008), award-winning invention on the market is the ‘GEV HP 1MW’. Its specific characteristics are: a retractable tower that permits to lower the nacelle to
It would probably be very interesting to study the career of Vergnet in detail and to analyze why the enterprise had so much success. I will however not further elaborate on this at this point.
23

54

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 the ground (in case of storm warnings or to facilitate maintenance work); a guy-wire fixture that allows to install high towers (to access higher wind speeds); a two-winged, pitch controlled rotor with an oscillating hub (derived from the technology used for helicopters); an asynchronous, three-phase generator with variable speed (that necessitates a gear train); and a special converter technology that allows the WPS to integrate even in weak, local power supply systems. (Vergnet.fr) Over the years, Vergnet had a great success in selling theses machines, but due to its specialization the enterprise could only achieve a share of 1% in the French market of manufacturers in 2008 (SER/FEE état parc 2009) and it could never compete with manufacturers of large-scale wind generators like for example REpower. Today, on-shore wind generators are regarded as a mature and stable technology that only adapts incrementally; further, on-shore development will focus on upscaling and repowering the existing technology24. That is why some say that France ‘has missed the boat for good’ – however, there may be a chance for them to compete with the technology development in the offshore sector (Gosset & Ranchin 2006). In contrast to the discoveries of on-shore development, the offshore development is still rather unexplored. This new “territory” is quite attractive, as it promises many advantages like: more space, higher wind speeds and higher electricity production (BWE A-Z). The most pressing problems – for the on-shore as well as for the offshore development – will be storage technologies and the smooth integration of wind power (and other renewables) into the grid (cf. chapter 4.1). New impulses in the on-shore development could come from the domain of small and urban wind generators (Gosset & Ranchin 2006; see above) but it seems like, for the big players of the wind energy industry, the future lies at sea.

4.2 Development of Institutional Structures – the French Energy Policy
Starting at the beginning of the 1970s – at the same time as two oil-crises shook the world – the French government (like many other countries) invested increasingly in nuclear energy, an

Repowering means the replacement of wind generators of the first generation through more powerful machines with the objective of a better exploitation of available sites, an increase in installed capacity, and a simultaneous reduction of the number of installed WPSs. (BWE Technik)

24

55

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 industry launched in 1946. The government announced that it intended to render the country independent from fossil resources through intensified nuclear power production. This decision laid out the path for today’s energy policy. France’s first nuclear power programs did not have any legislative foundation and they were never voted on in parliament. The first law concerning nuclear matters, from 1991, was limited to research and development questions on radioactive waste. Only in 2006, the ‘law relative to transparency and security in nuclear matters’ specified legislation. (Schneider 2008) For several years, there were no special laws concerning wind power stations, either. Wind park developers therefore had to resort to the general French Environmental Code (Le Code de l’Environnement), that of Urbanism (Le Code de l’Urbanisme), and the Code of Public Health (Le Code de la Santé Publique). The Urbanistic Code is a set of laws that determines spatial planning and land utilization. Emerging in the postwar period after World War II, its present-day form was established in 1973 and from 1983 on, it has been continuously expanding. An important amendment for the wind energy sector was the ‘Urbanisme and Habitat Act’ (no. 2003-590 of July 2, 2003; see below). Not being considered as urban buildings but as ‘installations required for public facilities’ – because the produced energy is usually not self-consumed – wind power generators can be built far away from urbanized areas and are not subject to the obligation of article L.146-4 of the Urbanistic Code, which prescribes that buildings have to be built near other buildings. In 2007, proceedings for building licenses were profoundly modified. (Gralon.net, DroitFinances.net, DDE Drôme) The reform became effective on October 1, 2007 and set new standardized and simplified rules for obtaining a building license. Instead of eighteen forms of licenses and declarations there afterwards remained only three types of planning applications (planning permit, development permit, demolition permit) and a single works declaration. (IWRPressedienst.de, MEDAD g) The Environmental Code with its three distinct principles (that of precaution, of prevention, and the polluter-pays-principle) aims at the protection and conservation of the environment. The ‘law of May 2, 1930 about the protection of natural monuments and artistic, historical, scientific, legendary, and picturesque sites’ proclaimed for the first time, with its actual name, the intention of protecting nature. There was another law that confirmed this governmental
56

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 commitment, the ‘law about the protection of nature’, however, it was not passed until July 10, 1976. Together with the ‘Mountain act’ (la loi Montagne, 1985), the ‘Littoral act’ (la loi Littoral, 1986), and the ‘Landscape act’ (la loi Paysage, 1993), they constitute the basis of the Environmental Code. It tries to prevent an aggravation of the environmental situation and wants to protect and preserve fauna, flora, the landscape, air, water and soil. Although dating back to 1930, the legislative part of the Code, consisting currently of seven different books, is quite recent. It was approved by the regulation no. 2000-914 of September 18, 2000 (l’ordonnance relative à la partie législative du code de l’environnement) and ratified by the law no. 2003-591 of July 2, 2003 (la loi habilitant le gouvernement à simplifier le droit). (Droit-Finances.net, DroitNature.free.fr) Rules and laws concerning the handling and control of noise can be found in the Urbanistic Code and in the Code of Public Health. The ‘circular letter of February 27, 1996 about neighborhood noise’ and the ‘decree no. 2006-1099 of August 31, 2006 concerning the abatement of neighborhood noise’ (le décret relatif à la lutte contre les bruits de voisinage), which abrogates the ‘ministerial order of May 10, 1995 concerning the measurement of neighborhood noise' (l'arrêté relatif aux modalités de mesure des bruits de voisinage), are to be applied to noise made by wind generators (being classified as neighborhood noise). (Afsset.fr, Ministère en charge de la santé) In 1996, the French Ministry for industry launched the first wind power program, a tender scheme named EOLE-2005, which aimed at an increase in installed capacity from 5 MW at the time to 250 - 500 MW in 2005. It was the first noticeable regulatory move of the French government concerning promotion of wind power and assistance in competitiveness for the French wind power sector. The four rounds of calls for tender, inspired by the UK non fossil fuel obligation (NFFO)25, produced very low bid prices (with 5 EURct/kWh they were the lowest in Europe), but had rather disappointing outcomes in installed capacity (only 53 - 70 MW in 2000). Therefore, the program has been discontinued and was replaced by the 2000 Electricity act. (Dena 2006, Jobert et al. 2007, Nadai 2007, Szarka 2007b, Cochet 2000, DGEMP a)

Established in the 1990s, the NFFO consisted “of a series of rounds of calls to tender [… but its key aim was rather] to prop up nuclear power […] whilst offering limited support to renewables.” (Szarka 2007a: 82f)

25

57

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 This Electricity act, the ‘law no. 2008-108 of February 10, 2000 about the modernization and development of the public electricity sector’ (la loi relative à la modernisation et au développement du service public de l'électricité), was a milestone of French energy policy. It put the ‘EU directive 96/92/EC concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity’ and the ‘EU directive 2001/77/EC on the promotion of electricity produced from renewable energy sources in the internal electricity market’ into national legislation, which resulted in two, for the wind energy sector interesting aspects: the liberalization of the electricity market and the elaboration of a legal framework for wind power generation. (Dena 2006, Fröding 2009) The law obligated EDF and local electricity providers to buy electricity produced from wind energy, and from other renewable energy sources in general, at a fixed price. The preferential renewable energy feed-in tariff had to be paid to all independent producers that operated wind generators or parks with a maximum of 12 MW. It was legally substantiated in the ‘decree no. 2001-410 of May 10, 2001 about terms of purchase of electricity produced by operators that benefit from the purchase obligation’ (le décret relatif aux conditions d'achat de l'électricité produite par des producteurs bénéficiant de l'obligation d'achat), that comprised regulations on the precise form of the power purchase agreement between EDF and the producers, and in the ‘ministerial order of June 8, 2001 defining terms of purchase of electricity produced by installations using mechanical wind power’ (l’arrêté fixant les conditions d’achat de l’électricité produite par les installations utilisant l’énergie mécanique du vent), that defined fixed tariffs for new wind power installations. During the first five years of operation, entitled wind energy producers received 8.38 EURct/kWh and then, during a period of 10 years, between 3.05 and 8.38 EURct/kWh depending on on-site wind speeds. Initially, those tariffs were only valid until the completion of a total of 1,500 MW in France – then some lower tariffs would be valid, but it never came to that26. (Fröding 2006, Dena 2006) With the introduction of feed-in tariffs for installations below 12 MW, the 2000 Electricity Act created a dual wind power support system, as calls for tender had not been abolished and were still used to stimulate projects above 12 MW, like for example in 2004 when 500 MW onshore and 500 MW offshore have been tendered (Szarka 2007b).
The French energy policy had been changed again before the attainment of 1,500 MW of installed wind energy capacity.
26

58

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Emphasizing on monetary aspects of promotion for renewables the 2000 Electricity Act did not give much thought to landscape issues and spatial planning. Those aspects have been treated later in subsequent legal acts when a lack of coordination in the development became obvious. This ongoing legislative process generated among others the ‘Urbanism and Habitat act’ (la loi n°2003-590 du 2 juillet 2003 urbanisme et habitat; q.v. circular letter of September 10, 2003 on promotion of terrestrial wind energy development), and the ‘law no. 2003-8 of January 3, 2003 relating to gas and electricity markets and to the public energy service’ (la loi relative aux marches du gaz et de l’électricité et au service public de l’énergie). This 2003 Electricity and Gas Act was a kind of complement to the 2000 Electricity act. It implemented the ‘EU directive 2003/55/EC concerning common rules for the internal market in natural gas’ and increased legal certainty for wind power operators: installations above 12m now needed a construction permit whose instruction procedure is specified in the Urbanistic Code; a public enquiry and a study of impact were required for installations with a capacity of 2.5 MW27 or higher, as defined in article 59 of the 2003 Electricity and Gas act, in article 98 of the Urbanism and Habitat act, and in article L.122-1 of the Environmental Code; moreover, a minimum distance between wind generators had been introduced (1,500m), for being able to consider them belonging to the same or to different wind parks; the act also included the obligation for operators to restore the site to its original condition after the dismantling of a wind generator (q.v. article L.553-3 of the Urbanistic Code); and finally, regional wind schemes (des schémas regional éolien), a tool for local planning relative to wind power, have been created (q.v. article L.553-4 of the Urbanistic Code). Regional wind schemes are tools used at regional or departmental level to indicate the best-adapted geographical zones or sectors for wind power installations28, taking into account a number of criteria including landscape, birds and noise emissions. This is also stipulated in the ‘Urbanism and Habitat act’, which tries to promote a harmonic wind power development through the introduction of wind power schemes and other tools like good practices and wind power charters. At that time, these measures were however

It changed to a limit defined by the height of the tower (50m) in 2005 with the adoption of the 2005 Energy Act (see article L.553-2 of the Environmental Code; see also below). 28 First ‘wind atlases’ have already been devised in France in 1991, but only in few departments (like the Finistère, Aude, or Languedoc-Roussilon). (ADEME letter 1999, Lajartre 2007)

27

59

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 still voluntary and had no authoritative value on future wind power installations. (Dena 2006, Nadai 2007, Senat.fr c) Despite of this new, legislative framework for renewables and especially wind power, heavy promotion of nuclear energy by the government (with a right-wing majority since 2002) still continued (cf. chapter 4.3). In 2003 and 2004, national energy debates were organized throughout France where issues like the future of France’s nuclear energy sector and France’s energy mix were expected to be discussed, but the debates were accused of being dishonest and its outcome being predefined: namely the evaluation of nuclear power as a local, climate friendly, and competitive energy source. The outcome of the debates should officially have been integrated in a new Energy Act (see below) but in practice the debates did not influence governmental decision-making in any way. Even some time before a parliamentary debate on the topic took place, the government had already decided to invest further into nuclear power and it had approved the construction of a first ‘third-generation European Pressurized water Reactor’ (‘EPR’) at Flamanville. Regarding security supply issues, this was absolutely not necessary, for France possesses significant surplus capacities in base-load power generation and “it is quite commonly agreed that the nuclear share has gone too high in France if compared with an ideal generating mix” (Schneider 2008: 35). The most obvious reason why the French government wanted this EPR to be constructed is the fear of a widening competence problem and a generational gap in the nuclear sector. In order to remain being a world leader in nuclear energy, France constantly has to enlarge and update the knowledge and skills needed to build and design nuclear plants. (Dena 2006, Nadai 2007, Schneider 2008) This promotion of nuclear power by the French government was also reflected in the 2005 Energy Act, the ‘law no. 2005-781 of July 13, 2005 defining the orientation of energy policy’ (la loi de programme fixant les orientations de la politique énergétique). The legislative debate over the law started in April 2004 in a context still marked by the legislative election in 2002, which led to a right-wing majority favorable of nuclear energy in the Government, the Senate, and the National Assembly. The four main aims of the Energy Act were: further energy independence, competitiveness of the French Republic, protection of climate and environment, and equitable access to energy services in France. To attain them, the Energy Act clearly expressed the French government’s trust in technological choices made in the past and the will to more60

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 or-less maintain the status quo in the French energy sector in which nuclear power holds the most important place: “The [French] State takes care of maintaining an important part of electricity produced by nuclear energy in its electricity production, which looks to security of supply, energy independence, competitiveness, the fight against the greenhouse effect, and the influence of an industrial branch’s excellence although, in the future, it will rely on, along side the nuclear, the increasing production of renewable energies, and, to respond to peak demands, on the sustainment of the potential of production of hydropower and thermal power stations.” (Loi n°2005-781 du 13 juillet 2005)29 However, the 2005 Energy Act also encouraged the development of renewable energy sources. It transposed targets on renewables and reinforced measures to support them. Concerning wind power, these measures consisted mainly in: the conservation of the tariff system and the subsequent increase in the level of support, in the abolition of the 12-MW-limit for installations to benefit from the preferential feed-in tariff (and thus also abandoning additional calls for tender), and in the introduction of so-called ‘wind power development zones’ (zones de développement de l’éolien, ZDE). (Dena 2006, Nadai 2007, Szarka 2007b) In parts, ZDEs resemble the already discussed wind power schemes (see above), for they take into account similar criteria, like the conservation and protection of nature, landscape, and historical monuments. They impose, however, on existing wind power schemes, because such schemes, being urbanistic documents with no authoritative value, have no legal impact on the installation of wind power stations. By defining certain zones with special characteristics (the area’s wind potential, the possibilities of connection to the power supply network, the zone’s maximum and minimum capacity for electricity produced by wind power stations, and the protection of nature, landscape, and historical monuments), conditions are set that have to be followed in order to benefit from preferential feed-in tariff (the former condition of operating an installation under 12 MW having been abolished). A building permit cannot be denied, however, on the grounds that a future installation may not be situated in a ZDE and permits will not automatically be granted for projects situated in a ZDE because wind power development zones are officially an energy policy decision, introduced to modify conditions of the purchase obligation for wind power stations, and no urbanistic document. In practice, however, ZDEs were perceived as part of local planning law, a tool or an instrument to protect the local environment
29

translation by the author

61

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 and to regulate the diffusion of wind power stations. A request for the creation of a ZDE can only be made by a ‘public institution for inter-municipal cooperation’ (‘établissement public de coopération intercommunale’, Fröding 2009: 69) and is then decided on by the Prefect of the department. Third parties, like local associations and residents are to be included in the process in order to intensify the understanding and participation of those groups; they cannot request the creation of a wind power development zone, though. (Fröding 2006 + 2009, ADEME colloque 2006, Senat.fr c, DRIRE Pays de la Loire)30 Based on the 2005 Energy act, the ‘ministerial order of July 10, 2006 defining terms of purchase of electricity produced by installations using mechanical wind power’ (l’arrêté fixant les conditions d’achat de l’électricité produite par les installations utilisant l’énergie mécanique du vent) fixed new tariffs for wind energy. While maintaining the general principle of the tariffs system, they brought some important changes. For on-shore installations, the initial high tariff was slightly diminished (from 8.38 to 8.2 EURct/kWh), but it is now paid during at least a ten year period (not five) and for another five years if the wind generator’s full load lies under 2,400h per year (6.8 EURct/kWh if it lies under 2,800h and 2.8 EURct/kWh if it lies under 3,600h). Furthermore, tariffs are now adapted to inflation and the 1,500 MW limit for the expiration of the tariffs’ validity has been abolished. (Dena 2006, Fröding 2006, SER/FEE contrevérités 2008) Those tariffs are effective until at least 2012 – even though they have been legally challenged in August 2008. Due to a formal error, the ministerial order had been revoked by the State Council but the tariff as stands has not been questioned. Therefore, a new ministerial order was released in November 2008 (l’arrêté du 17 novembre 2008 fixant les conditions d'achat de l'électricité produite par les installations utilisant l'énergie mécanique du vent) that accorded in almost every point with the order revoked in August. (Actu-Environnement.fr k + m, Enviro2b.com b, DeveloppementDurable.com a, MEEDDAT f)

q.v. official documents of the government: Instruction ‘installation de parcs éoliens’ of January 1, 2006, Circulaire ‘dispositions relatives à la creation des zones de développement de l'éolien terrestre’ of June 19, 2006, and Instruction ‘des demandes de certificat ouvrant droit a l'obligation d'achat d'électricite produite par des installations éoliennes implantés hors ZDE’ of June 18, 2007

30

62

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SIDE NOTE: PROCEDURE The development of a wind park, form designing to operating it, is a long process during which several obstacles have to be overcome and various licenses have to be obtained. In addition to feasibility studies, the conceptual design of the park, and negotiations with landowners a rather complex administrative procedure has to be run through. It can be divided into two thematically different blocks concerning energy law and building law. Regulations concerning energy issues prescribe that every wind park project has to apply for an operating license. It is issued by the Ministry in charge of energy issues and is imprescriptible. After that, the request for the power purchase obligation certificate can be made (Certificat ouvrant droit à l’obligation d’achat) at the local office for industry, research, and environment (Direction régionale de l’industrie de la recherché et de l’environnement). It is the basis for a contract of sale (valid for 15 years after the start of operation) between the future electricity producer and EDF or another local network operator. After those 15 years, the produced electricity has to be sold on a free market. Finally, the agreement about grid access (Convention de raccordement) has to be obtained by the wind park operator. It is usually issued by the high-voltage network operator (the RTE or ‘Réseau de Transport de l’Electricité’) after the wind park operator has undertaken an estimate of costs and preliminary technical calculations. Charges for the grid connection are at the expense of the wind park operator.
Concerning building law, the most important document to obtain is the building license. It has to be issued by the Prefect of the department for all wind generators with a tower of 12m or higher. It is initially valid for a period of two years – if after the lapse of this period no con-struction works have been undertaken, the license expires. For installations with a height of 50m or higher, developers additionally have to perform a study of impact (including environmental, landscape, and sanitary aspects) and a public inquiry among the residents. This procedure aims at an appropriate protection of the local landscape, of the environment, of flora and fauna, and the residential neighborhood. Furthermore, communication with and participation of residents, local associations, and regional industry and trade are to be improved in this way. (Fröding 2006, Senat.fr c, DroitFinaces.net, Gosset & Ranchin 2006, SER/FEE kit éolien 2009 + SER/FEE future 2009)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- END SIDE NOTE
63

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Of particular importance for French energy and environment policy over the last years was the so-called ‘Grenelle of Environment’ and its outcomes – a convention on sustainable development organized in France in October 2007 and followed by a great many political meetings and discussions (see chapter 4.3). Legally, it is composed of two draft laws, the Grenelle I and II. The Grenelle I was initiated on July 6, 2007 and was finally adopted with quasi-unanimity in summer 2009 (loi n°2009-967 du 3 août 2009 de programmation relative à la mise en œuvre du Grenelle de l’environnement). The Grenelle II (projet de loi n°155 portant engagement national pour l'environnement) can be seen as some kind of judicial toolbox for the implementation of the Grenelle I. On January 7, 2009 it has been presented in the council of ministers and on October 8, 2009 is has been adopted by the French Senate. Next, the Grenelle II Act has to pass the National Assembly, where it will be discussed in Mai 2010. (MEEDDAT d, LeGrenelleEnvironnement.gouv.fr, Actu-Environnement.fr n, MEEDDM b, Senat.fr d, Vie-publique.fr) Concerning wind power, some important issues have been codified with regards to planning conditions and procedures. Future offshore wind parks will be exempt from the ZDE regulation, and legal conditions are to be simplified through the creation of a planning instrument especially adapted to offshore conditions31. Concerning on-shore wind parks, an amendment of the ZDE regulations was decided. Every region in France will have to devise a regional scheme for renewable energies (des schémas régionaux d'énergies renouvelables). These schemes are geographical zones defined through special characteristics: in addition to those defining a ZDE (the renewable energy potential in the area, the conservation and protection of nature, landscape, and historical monuments, the possibilities of connection to the power supply network), regional wind energy schemes will be defined through concerns of the neighborhood, security issues, farming interests and aspects of health protection – thus specifying an area in which energy production should preferably take place. Simultaneously, regional schemes for climate, air, and energy (des schémas régionaux du climat, de l’air et de l’énergie) will have to be established, which will define quantitative and qualitative targets that should be achieved in each

In order to improve planning procedures for offshore installations, the environment minister launched another ‘Grenelle’ in February 2009, the Grenelle of the Sea. Following the Grenelle of Environment, new and especially adapted planning instruments and developments zones shall be devised in a collective discussion of concerned ministries, communities, representatives of the local economy, and residents. (ActuEnvironnement.fr o, LeGrenelle-Mer.gouv.fr, MEEDDAT h)

31

64

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 case. Unlike the “old” regional schemes (see above), the new schemes are no longer voluntary; they will have to be established in compliance with ZDEs, making it impossible to create a ZDE outside such a regional scheme (the existence of a ZDE is however not required for the creation of a regional scheme). In a circular letter from February 26, 2009 (la circulaire relatif à la planification du developpement de l’energie eolienne terrestre), a note from April 14, 2009 (la note ‘permettre un développement soutenu et maîtrisé de l'énergie éolienne par une amélioration de la planification territoriale, de la concertation et de l'encadrement réglementaire’), and another circular letter from May 19, 2009 (la circulaire relatif à la planification du developpement de l’energie eolienne terrestre) the environment minister Jean-Louis Borloo requested the regional and departmental Prefects to develop such schemes relative to wind power in cooperation with all relevant local parties concerned and to complete them before the end of the year. Through this amelioration of planning conditions and the legal framework in the wind energy sector and through integration of all the parties involved, an efficient, orderly, and controlled development of wind power in France is expected – or hoped for. In the mentioned official documents it is also specified that the French government favors a ‘high quality development’ (meaning the avoidance of urban sprawl and of adverse effects on the country side, the patrimony, and residents) – therefore, large wind parks that pool wind power stations are to be encouraged. (Fröding 2009, Espace-ENR.com, Actu-Environnement.fr l, Energie2007.fr, MEEDDAT d) Since 2008, there is also a discussion going on whether wind generators should be categorized as so-called ICPEs, that is ‘classified installations for environmental protection’ (installations classées pour la protection de l’environnement), or not. An ICPE is defined in the 5th book of the Environmental Code (article L.511-1) as a fixed installation, whose operation represents a risk for the environment, public health or security, like for example a factory or a stone pit. Until recently, two different proceedings existed: the regime of declaration (régime de declaration) for installations that have only a minor impact, and the regime of authorization (régime d’autorisation), a more binding procedure for installations with a heavy impact. The law no. 2009-179 of February 17, 2009 (la loi pour l’accélération des programmes de construction et d’investissement publics et privés) allowed for the modification of the ICPE procedure and made it possible to establish a third regime, that of registration (régime d’enregistrement), which is stipulated in the regulation no. 2009-663 of June 11, 2009 relative to the registration
65

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 of certain classified installations for the sake of environmental protection (l’ordonnance relative à l’enregistrement de certaines installations classées pour la protection de l’environnement). This intermediate procedure that will apply to simple and standardized installations positioned outside of environmentally sensitive zones shall officially lead to a reduction of delays in the issuing of permits, a decrease in administrative expenses, a simplification of the application procedure, and a better protection of the environment through the concentration on preventive measures and on primary risk problems (when comparing it with the regime of authorization). (Koordinierungsstelle Windenergie, Actu-Environnement.fr r + s, Envirolex.fr) The wind sector, however, is trying to prevent the application of the new regime to wind power stations that had already been rejected by the ‘Comité Opérationnel’ n°10 of the Grenelle. In a press release of July 2008, the wind energy lobby criticized, among other things, that a single 2 MW wind generator would then be subject to the same conditions and financial penalties as a thermal power plant of 500 or 1,000 MW. They further observed that no country in the world had ever implemented a wind power framework as rigid and remarked that wind power development is already sufficiently restricted in France with the regulation of ZDEs, studies of impact, public inquiries, building permits, operating licenses, and the obligation for operators to restore the site to its original condition after the dismantling of the wind generator. The planned application of the third ICPE regime to wind generators is also denunciated because it is assumed not to bring any advantages – it is rather expected to further complicate the already complex administrative framework and to put into question the objectives of the Grenelle and the European energy climate agreements (see next paragraph). Some, like Arnaud Gossement, lawyer and spokesman of the SER, even raise concerns about the lawfulness of the regulation with reference to the EU Directive 2009/28/EC, which demands a reduction of administrative barriers in the EU that could hamper the development of renewables. So far, wind generators are not yet mentioned in regulation no. 2009-663 of June 11, 2009, but in the context of negotiations on the Grenelle II Act (see above), the French Senate adopted several articles on the controversial ICPE regulation for wind generators. If the act passes, wind generators will be subject to the ICPE regime starting in 2011. (Koordinierungsstelle Windenergie, SER/FEE press release 2008 a, Blog Gossement, Actu-Environnement.fr u, GreenUnivers.com, Bureau Lefebvre)

66

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Apart from the institutional framework, binding objective targets are important, too. Europe’s first collective climate target can be associated with the Rio Summit of 1992 (cf. chapter 5.2) and has been fixed in the EU-White Paper of 1997 (cf. chapter 4.3) that also provided a support program for renewables: in 2010, Europe’s gross energy consumption should comprise 12% of renewable energy sources. (Nadai 2007, EU White Paper KOM97, EU Paper 2006) Four years later, the target was confirmed in the European Directive 2001/77/EC – an initiative that, referring to commitments accepted by the signing of the Kyoto protocol in 1997 (UNFCCC.int), wanted to provide a basis for significant growth of electricity production from renewable energy sources. It proposed measures to facilitate grid access for renewables, to simplify administrative procedures, to achieve green electricity certification, and it split up the 12% target of gross energy consumption produced from renewable energy sources (or in other words, 22.1% of the European gross electricity consumption) into well-defined, but non-binding national targets. For France the 2010 target was 21%32 of its gross electricity consumption produced by renewables (compared to 15% in 1997). (Cochet 2000) In France, those targets were transposed in the 2000 Electricity Act and the 2005 Energy Act. In the ‘law no. 2005-781 of July 13, 2005 defining the orientation of energy policy’ it was fixed that 10% of the annual energy demand should be provided by renewable energy sources in 2010 and that wind would play an important role in achieving this target. Furthermore, the French government published a multi-annual roadmap on investments – la programmation pluriannuelle des investissements (‘PPI’) – to be made in the electricity sector, in the thermal energy sector, and in that of gas; this roadmap is published every three years. In the PPI of 2003 a 6,000 MW target for wind power had been fixed for 2007. This target has been expanded to 13,500 MW (for 2010) and 17,000 MW (for 2015) in the PPI of 2006. With that, wind power had to take over the main part of the overall 14,430 MW to be produced by renewables in 2010 (20,000 MW in 2015). It soon became evident that the French targets were out of range. (Dena 2006, EWEA 2003) According to a report of the European Commission in April 2009, the EU Member states will not reach the targets set for 2010. While Germany had already reached its targets in 2006,
The percentage can be calculated by dividing the national production of RES-E by the gross national electricity consumption.
32

67

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 many other countries are still far away from it. (EU Paper 2009) In the case of France, 2010 wind energy targets (13,500 MW) are unrealistic. Furthermore, the 10% of renewable energy sources of France’s gross energy consumption in 2010 will presumably not be reached either.33 This likely failure to reach the targets can be demonstrated by the following calculations (Dena 2006, Directive 2001/77/CE, MEEDDAT a + d, RTE 2009b):

Year

Gross Electricity Production RES

Gross Electricity Consumption 440 TWh

Percentage

1997

66 TWh (Directive 2001)

- 15% (Directive 2001)

2007

68 TWh (MEDDAT d)

/ 480 TWh (MEDDAT d) / 490 TWh (Dena 2006 ) / 506 or 525 or 534 TWh
34

- 14.2%

2008

77.6 TWh (RTE 2009b)

- 15.8%

2010 (MEEDDAT d, three scenarios) 2010

x TWh

- 21% (Directive 2001)

x - 106.3 or 110.3 or 112.1 TWh

x TWh

/ 510 TWh (Dena 2006)

- 21% (Directive 2001)

x - 107.1 TWh

table 2: Calculations on the share of renewable energy sources in the french gross electricity consumption

Depending on the scenario (MEEDDAT d), France would have to produce, in the next two years, about 110 TWh of the gross national electricity production by means of renewables to meet the 2010 target, which is an extra of about 30 TWh. Even though production rates are increasing, this is simply impossible. The new 2020 targets, however, are still within reach. New targets for the year 2020 are linked to the adoption of a new European Directive on renewable energy in April 2009. The EU-Directive 2009/28/EC of April 29, 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (amending and repealing the Directives
In 2006 the percentage was only 6.2. It was not possible though to obtain data from after 2006 about the percentage of renewables in the gross national energy consumption, but as the percentage in the final energy consumption did not change between 1990 and 2008 – always oscillating around 12 % – I assumed that the other percentage did not change much either. (MEEDDAT e + j, and my own calculations on the basis of Schneider 2008 and MEEDDAT a) 34 Calculated with an average growth rate of 2 % (Dena 2006)
33

68

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC) contains legally binding targets for the first time. Until 2020, 20% of the European gross energy consumption will have to be produced by renewables. The Directive guarantees, among other things, the further use of feed-in tariffs, demands the expansion of the European power supply network, defines specifications for electricity transfer, asks for a reduction of administrative barriers that could hamper the development of renewables, and has to be transposed into national law before the end of 2010. (BWE Europe 2009) In the PPI of 2009, a new and ambitious French target was published, fixing the percentage of renewables in the gross national energy consumption in 2020 at 23%. This target is also referred to in the Grenelle I act. The PPI of 2009 further defines a 25,000 MW wind power capacity target for 2020 (19,000 MW on-shore and 6,000 MW offshore). The SER observes that to achieve this target, an annual increase in capacity of about 2,000 MW would be necessary. (MEEDDAT d, SER/FEE future 2009) The increase does not seem to be very much at first glance, however, the realizability of the target should be approached very critically as historically targets for renewables and for wind energy in France have not been reached in time. Theoretically, the annual increase in capacity to achieve this target needed “only” to be 1,800 MW (calculated from the beginning of 2009 on). This is not impossible, but on December 31, 2009, an additional capacity of only 1,036 MW had been installed (MEEDDM c) – 764 MW less than needed. So even though the French wind energy industry seems to be prepared to increase installation rates (see above, statement of Charles Dugué of the SER), the annual installation rate seems to stabilize around 1,000 MW. The main question is therefore: Is there a maximal amount of renewable energy sources, and especially wind energy, in the French context? (see chapter 6)

4.3 Changes in Actor Constellations and in the Socio-Economic Framework
The “Pre-Phase”
The most important actor through all the constellations was, and still is, the French government. The development in the wind energy niche was already strongly structured by the constitution of the French Republic and by decisions of the government long before it actually took an

69

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 active part in it. The French Republic is a democratic, unitary, centralized state. Its centralism has been embodied in the French Constitution since the Revolution of 1789. Today, France consists of 26 regions (thereof four overseas), 100 departments, and about 36,700 municipalities (communes). In the period after the Second World War, attempts were made to soften this rather rigid structure, for it proved to be an obstacle for modernization, but the reforms only resulted in some kind of deconcentration35. Since the change of government in 1981, President Mitterand declared decentralization to be of great importance; one year later a first comprehensive law on that subject (la loi Defferre) came into effect: regions were declared to be independent territorial and financial authorities with a directly elected regional council and some executive and judicial power. Their autonomy was admittedly still quite limited, but in some domains (e.g. road, culture, or social services) the former power of the Prefect (state representatives at the departmental level) was handed over to regional, departmental, and municipal authorities – in the context of wind power development it is interesting to know that the responsibilities of land allocation, urban development, landscape planning, and preservation of historical monuments were given over to municipal authorities – none of the local authorities received legislative or enacting power, though. The role of the Prefect changed to that of a middleman and coordinator for affairs between the local and the state level. The result of the development of decentralization – activated in 1982 – was a multilayered administrative organization that was embodied in the Constitution in 2003. (Nadai 2007, Müller-Brandeck-Bocquet & Moreau 2000, Diplomatie.gouv.fr a) Competences in energy policy at a local level were practically nonexistent or very small. Production, transport, distribution, import, and export of electricity were nationalized by the government in 1946 with the creation of the two national companies ‘Electricité de France’ (‘EDF’) and ‘Gaz de France’ (‘GDF’) (see also law no. 46-628 of April 8, 1946). Before this state monopoly was transferred to EDF and GDF, local collectives assured the power supply in their respective area. Afterward, they admittedly still had a choice whether to transfer control over this public service to the state companies or not36, but only very few municipal-

Competences of the government are only transferred to another sublayer of the centralized ‘state apparatus’, like for example to Prefects, but they are not passed on to independent local authorities. 36 See article L.2221-1 of the ‘code général des collectivités territoriales’

35

70

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 ities (e.g. Strasbourg or Grenoble37) dared to compete with the two national players and to become a non-nationalized distributer (distributeur non nationalisé, ‘DNN’). (Nadai 2007, Schneider 2008, Senat.fr a) As described in more detail in chapter 4.1, there have been a few early research activities in the domain of wind power development in France, which even involved EDF and thus also the French state. In the 1950s and 1960s, EDF participated and financed research activities that resulted in large-scale wind generator prototypes. One of EDF’s partners was Neyrpic and the other one was the research office BEST (Bureau d'Etude Scientifique et Technique), established by Lucien Romani and commissioned in 1958, that had already been experimenting since the 1940s, together with Aeronautical Institute of Saint-Cyr School at Yvelines (l'Institut Aérotechnique de Saint-Cyr l'Ecole), with several small-scale wind generators. Those early initiatives failed however – EDF ceased its support for wind generators in 1963 when technical problems occurred – and did not have much impact on the future course of French wind power development. It is interesting to see, though, that Vergnet (through BEST/Aérowatt) was already then involved in this early wind power development. Aérowatt, today an independent and integrated wind and solar energy producer in French overseas territories and mainland France, was officially established in 1966, when it replaced BEST (s.o.; Site Cavey, Bonnefille 1974). In 1988 or shortly after, Vergnet bought up the manufacturer of small wind generators and developed them further (ADEME Moci 2008). Aérowatt was transformed into a subdivision for wind power project development and was resold in 2002. Marc Vergnet founded Vergent S.A., another French manufacturer for small-scale wind generators, in 1988. After acquiring Aérowatt, he gave up small-scale wind generators pursued wind generator models with an increased capacity. In 1983, the first experimental wind farm in France was equipped with wind generators from Vergnet. Today, the company is world leader in small and medium-sized machines with a special cyclone protection. (Vergnet.fr, Aerowatt.com, ADEME Moci 2008, Site Cavey) Quite contrary to EDF, Vergnet and Aérowatt maintained their focus on wind energy through all theses years.

Gaz Electricité de Grenoble and Electricité de Strasbourg are two historical gas and power suppliers (Selectra.info)

37

71

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Since the beginning of the 1970s, the state monopolist EDF devoted itself to nuclear energy instead. The decision for nuclear power generation had been made by the government to ensure security of supply (see also chapter 4.2) and had since been defended against all competition. With EDF being a state-owned enterprise, the government had great influence on the question of how electricity in France was to be produced (today about 90% of the electricity produced in France is assured by EDF; and 85% of the electricity produced by EDF is generated by nuclear power; MEDAD e). Nuclear energy in France is supported beyond that however. Development, design and implementation of nuclear policy in France is mainly under the control of the so called ‘Corps des Mines’38. In France, a ‘Grands Corps d’Etat’ is a body of civil servants in positions of power that are historically recruited from graduates of a few French elite schools like the Ecole Polytechnique, the Ecole Nationale d’Adminstration, or the Ecole Normale Supérieure. Members of a corps usually occupy executive positions in the civil service or in general management. Being one of those corps, the Corps des Mines has been accused of consisting of only a few elite technocrats (their cumulated number of living participants is about 700 and their annual admission is about twenty or less) that created, over decades, a well-functioning network of lobbyists. Formally, the Ministry of Industry presides over the Corps des Mines and its General Council, however, the composition of ministries changes every five years (the French government has a five year mandate), whereas the members of the Corps des Mines remain – leaving the most powerful position to the vice-president of the General Mining Council. Over the years, the Corps des Mines has managed to occupy a great many key positions linked with the nuclear sector, like “the nuclear advisors to the President of the Republic, the Prime Minister, the Ministers for Economy, Industry, Environment and Research, the CEOs of the CEA39, AREVA, Framatome and the safety authorities” (Schneider 2008: 6). Thus, the nuclear lobby was able to push through a long-term nuclear policy without having to deal with parliamentary issues. (Schneider 2008, AITEC) A good part of today’s wind energy lobby in Europe originated in the anti-nuclear movement of the 1970s that triggered an upcoming environmental awareness. Many international non-

This is not a legal appellation, but an expression based on habitual language use. Created in 1945, the ‘Commission for atomic energy’ is a French public research establishment related to industrial and commercial activities in the domain of nuclear power. (CEA.fr)
39

38

72

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 profit organizations, like Greenpeace or Friends of the Earth, grew out of this movement and play today an important role in mobilizing the public (Szarka 2007a: 48, Szarka 2007b). It also brought forth the formation of the party ‘Les Verts’ established in 1984 (Paris.LesVerts.fr, Szarka 2007b). The upcoming environmental awareness manifested, as well, in the creation of a French Ministry of Environment in 1971 (see below). Although the majority of French citizens’ opinions regarding nuclear issues are in-line with the rest of Europe40, the anti-nuclear movement could never make real progress in France: “Brittany [...] is the only region in France where the antinuclear movement of the 1970s succeeded in stopping the construction of a nuclear reactor” (Szarka 2007b: 328). (For more information, see chapter 5.2) At the end of the described pre-phase in wind power development in France, there was a clear turning away from wind power by the most important and powerful actors in the sector (the government and EDF), but a first industrial foundation had been created (Vergnet and Aérowatt).

The “Pioneer Phase”
Since the beginning of the 1990s, the development of wind energy in France became a new dimension: new, mainly industrial actors joined the constellation, re-activating the development in the wind energy niche (see also chapter 4.1). The next decade can be described as some kind of pioneer or departure phase (see Ohlhorst 2008). In the early 90s, the newly forming industry of a future wind energy sector did not have much help, least of all from the French government. Most of the early industrial French wind power projects were developed due to support from the European Commission (Nadai 2007: 2717, Energie-Cités.org) as public research grants were mainly allocated to activities on nuclear issues. In 1997, less than 1% of the public funds were spent on energy efficiency and all renewable energies combined (Schneider 2008) and an initial governmental program to promote

“The French public’s attitude towards nuclear energy is similar to the average in the EU. In a 2005 study commissioned by the IAEA only 25% of the French people polled expressed support for additional nuclear power plants [...], while 50% were in favor of operating current units but not building new ones and 16% were in favor of shutting down all operating plants. The result is remarkably close to responses from Germany, with respectively 24% for new built, 50% for operating what’s there but against new built and 26% in favor of closure of existing plants. A 2007 poll carried out on behalf of the European Commission confirmed the trend.” (Schneider 2008: 36)

40

73

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 wind energy did not exist until 1996 (see below). That meant that pioneers in the French wind energy niche had to rely, in some extent, on knowledge from their European and American neighbors – most notably concerning technological issues were concerned. Many of the generators installed in this pioneer phase were small Vergnet-machines, but park developers also used “foreign technology” with more capacity (among them machines from Nordex, Vestas, Gamsea, Lagerwey, Neg Micon, Siemens, Bonus Energy, Turbowinds and Windmaster; see table 3 in the appendix). It is interesting to know that the first wind park developers and operators in France were almost exclusively French enterprises: there are for example La Compagnie du Vent (wind park developer and operator, and studies and measurements agency), Eole technologies (studies and measurements agency), Cégelec (engineering and technical services), JMB Energie (green electricity producer), SINERG (specialized in third-party funds in the energy sector; part of the IDEX-group), SIIF Energies (project developer in the domain of renewables; later EDF-EN), Innovent (wind park developer and operator), or Poweo (power supplier). In the beginning of the development of the French wind sector, there were still quite a few small wind park developers and operators, too (see table 3 in the appendix), like for example so-called ‘sociétés en nom collectif’ (‘SNC’), municipalities, regional associations, or even individuals – this changed, however, with the introduction of a tender scheme (see below). The French governmental Environment Agency ADEME (l’Agence de l'Environnement et de la Maîtrise de l'Energie; ADEME.fr) was founded at the same time as the wind energy development was reactivated in France. The ADEME did not noticeably attend to wind energy issues from the onset, however. The first initiative from the French government for the development of wind energy in France (apart from EDF’s financial support in the 1950s) was a tender scheme named EOLE-2005 initiated by the Ministry for Industry in 1996 (see circular letter no. 68 of February 22, 1999) – the Ministry of the Environment not being in authority for energy decisions, yet (see below). Based on this wind energy promotion program, EDF concluded first purchase agreements for electricity produced by wind energy. About half of the projects built before 2000 (17 out of 30; see table 3 in the appendix) arose within the framework of the EOLE2005 program. They were predominantly developed and realized by larger companies and consortia due to a rather strict, complex, and demanding application procedure (Szarka 2007b). The government claimed (see DGEMP a) that Vergnet could establish itself in the market niche
74

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 ‘small retractable wind generators’ thanks to its wind power promotion program. The government also claimed that the program favored the appearance of the first French large-scale wind generator manufacturer, thus having contributed to the creation of a new trade and having strengthened the emerging French wind power industry. Vergnet developed very well during this first period of wind energy development in France. In 1993, it started to broadly commercialize the first Vergnet wind generator – and that not only in France but also all over the world (Vergnet.fr, Gosset & Ranchin 2006). The new manufacturer on the French market was Jeumont, affiliate to a major player in the French nuclear industry, the Framatome Group (now Areva)41. With a long history in fabrication and installation of industrial goods (such as pumps, motors, and electrical equipment) and with the help of the ADEME that contributed a considerable amount of money, Jeumont Industries built its first prototype wind generator in 1999 and started commercialization in 2001 (see also chapter 4.1). (ArchivesNationales.Culture.gouv.fr, FED, Gosset & Ranchin 2006) The first park equipped with one of the Jeumont-machines was Widehem (commissioned in September 2001). Others followed, but not many: Escales 1, Plougras, Montjoyer, and Rochfort in France, Le Renard in Canada, and Klipheuwel and Peyongchang in South Africa (TheWindPower.net). It was also in 1996 when the emerging French wind power industry began to organize itself. The association France Energie Eolienne (FEE) was founded, bringing together professionals of the French wind energy branch and giving them a voice (Fee.Asso.fr, Szarka 2007a: 47). There was no apparent cooperation between the FEE professionals and the government and between the FEE professionals and public research establishments, though.

The “Progression Phase”
From 2000 on, several changes can be observed in the constellation. 2000 is the year of the abolishment of the EOLE-2005 program, the amplification of the pro-wind lobby, the emergence of the anti-wind-movement, the drop out of an important industrial player, and the creation of a new institutional framework (see chapter 4.2). This has been favored by changes in the French
This shows that actors supporting the wind power development do not have to be against nuclear power. “Wind industry representatives are neither unanimous nor categoric in rejecting nuclear. Electricity majors such as [...] Areva and EdF deal with both nuclear and wind power. Likewise component manufactures sell into a range of markets, whilst the careers of electrical engineers typically embrace different conversion technologies, including nuclear.” (Szarka 2007a: 55)
41

75

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 government and by the EU through the 2001/77/CE directive on renewables. Another EUdirective (Directive 96/92/EC on the Internal Market in Electricity, coming into effect in 1999) ordered the liberalization of the European electricity market, thus helping many new (mainly industrial) domestic and foreign actors to come on the market and into the constellation. On the whole, this second period (2000 - 2005) “can be regarded as one over which actors “trained” in developing real-size wind power projects and experienced institutional learning as regards to local wind power development.” (Nadai 2007: 2719) The second constellation was strongly characterized by the effects of different governmental situations. After fourteen years of socialist presidency (François Mitterand, Partie Socialiste) and a change of government in 1995 (Jacques Chirac, Rassemblement pour la République) the Green party was finally brought into government in 1997 when early parliamentary elections took place. This gave the wind energy development in France a new pulse. The “Gauche Plurielle”, a coalition of Socialistes, Communistes, and Greens under Prime Minister Lionel Jospin, in which the Green party obtained the position of minister of the environment (first Dominique Voynet, then Yves Cochet), brought forward the 2000 Electricity Act and achieved, among other things, the implementation of the feed-in tariff policy (see chapter 4.2). (Nadai 2007, Szarka 2007b, MEEDDM a, LaDocumentationFrancaise.fr, Liternaute.com) From 2002 on, having won both the presidential and parliamentary elections, Chirac and his conservative party (now called Union pour un Mouvement Populaire, UMP) could govern France all by themselves (Archives.Premier-Ministre.gouv.fr). This new government amended and diluted several of the environmental initiatives taken by the former government – like for example, a comprehensive concept to reduce CO2 emissions (Dena 2006) – and was accused of “not making a real effort to abolish the numerous obstacles preventing a breakthrough of renewables in electricity generation, in particular wind” (Brand 2004, s.a. Alternatives-Economiques.fr). The political and intellectual atmosphere during this period was well reflected in two public reports. Yves Cochet, deputy and member of the Green Party, wrote the first report in 2000. It supported a significant development of renewable energy technologies and the adoption of feed-in tariffs. In France however, the Green party was (and presumably still is) the only party that promoted a nuclear phase-out. All the other parties, except for the liberal wing of the UMP that opposed wind power development completely for aesthetic and economical reasons, were basically
76

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 in favor of renewable energies, but only as long as the hegemony of the nuclear was not questioned. This situation made it extremely difficult for the pro-wind lobby to find influential advocates for their cause in ministries or in the policy network in general. A report by the French Commission for the assessment of scientific and technological choices (Office parlementaire des choix scientifiques et technologiques, OPECST) expressed this position that was also more or less shared by the majority of the National Assembly: “While open to the development of renewable energies, it considered that renewable electricity should not be considered the sole room for manoeuvre as regards to CO2 reduction [...] Nuclear technology should keep on securing energy provision and providing France with “clean electricity” [...] Wind power being the most mature RES-E technology but considered as raising landscape and grid management issues […] should only be given a temporary role in fulfilling the Kyoto commitments.” (Nadai 2007: 2718) The second constellation of the wind energy development was also characterized by the effects of the EU-directives 96/92/EC and 2003/54/EC, which specified general conditions for the liberalization of the European electricity and gas market. This implicated the privatization of the state-owned company EDF, thus dissolving the quasi-monopoly that EDF held over the ‘power generation’ and ‘network operation’ divisions, and the creation of an independent regulatory authority, the CRE (‘Commission de Regulation de l'Energie’). In July 2000, EDF was transformed into an anonymous society (whose main shareholder is even today the French state, though) and it disassociated from the transport network and entrusted it to the RTE (‘Réseau de transport de l’électricté’), a quasi-independent administrator of the transport network with a separate balance sheet to guarantee financial transparency. The regulation of the distribution network remained with the municipalities, which assign the right of utilization to EDF or a DNN. The CRE was supposed to guarantee equal access to the grid and to prevent EDF from abusing its market power. (Dena 2006, Gosset & Ranchin 2006, MEDAD e, SortirDuNucleaire.org) The liberalization of the markets should have enabled alternative, non-governmental power producers and providers to enter. In France, this process of market liberalization was performed stepwise. Initially, only business clients could freely choose their suppliers; for private customers the market opened in 2007. (Dena 2006, MEDAD f) Prior to the liberalization of the electricity market the main power producers were EDF, the CNR (Compagnie nationale du Rhône, second largest electricity producer in France due to its hydroelectric power production, founded in 1933), the SNET (Société nationale d'électricité et de thermique, created in 1995),
77

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 and the SHEM (Société hydroélectrique du Midi) (see DGEMP c). In 2003, the SNET was taken over by Endesa, ‘number one’ on the Spanish electricity market and became Endesa France. The major stockholder changed again in 2008 when E.ON, a German electricity provider, acquired 65% of the shares. (Snet-Electricite.fr, Fusacq.com, Actu-Environnement.fr h, Environnement.CCIP.fr) It was also in 2003 that CNR and SHEM became affiliates of Electrable, a historical Belgian power supplier – shortly before Suez became main shareholder of Electrable. With the merger of Suez and GDF (an anonymous society since 2004 with the French state as main shareholder until the merger) in July 2008 they were finally all combined under one label: GDF-Suez. (Environnement.CCIP.fr, CNR.tm.fr, RFI.fr a, LesEchos.fr b, Shem.fr, ActuEnvironnement.fr i, GdfSuez.com) In 2007, the three leading power producers on the French market were still EDF, CNR (GDF-Suez), and SNET (Endesa France) with more than 95% market share (90% of them were assured by EDF; MEDAD e). Aside from these power producers, there are several domestic and international power suppliers active on the French electricity market today, such as: E.ON (Germany), RWE (Germany), Verbund (Austria), Electrabel (Belgium), Iberdrola Generacion (Spain), Union Fenosa Generacion (Spain), Norsk Hydro (Norway), Dynegy (United Kingdom), and TXU EET (United Kingdom) (MEDAD a). The first new domestic power suppliers were Poweo and Direct Energie, created in 2002 and 2003. They both have a low cost profile and provide the possibility to buy electricity entirely obtained by renewables, giving themselves a green image. In addition to contracts with big power producers like EDF, Verbund, Total, or Vattenfall they both possess some production units themselves (Direct Energie in the domain of hydroelectricity, wind and solar energy; Poweo additionally invests in biomass and in traditional thermal power plants). Alterna, Enercoop, and Planet Oui appeared some years later and offered only 100% ‘green electricity’. Alterna, created by Gaz Electricité de Grenobles and Sorgégies, unites more than twenty local electricity providers – thus having the advantage of possessing an already established clientele. Enercoop chose the form of a social enterprise (Société Coopérative d’Intérêt Collectif) including actors like Greenpeace42 or La Compagnie du Vent. The electricity they sell is entirely provided by their members. (Enerzine.com a, Selectra.info, Fournisseurs-Electricite.com)
A Greenpeace Energy branch did not seem to work in France because of an incomplete liberalization of the electricity market. (Heise.de)
42

78

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Not only foreign power suppliers streamed on the French market however – the power purchase obligation and the new legal framework (see chapter 4.2) gave sufficient planning reliability and economic incentives to attract wind park developers and operators from other countries, too (Szarka 2007b). While the first park developers in France were almost exclusively French, there are now numerous examples for foreign park developers: Enertrag (German power supplier), Boralex (Canadian Power Income Fund), Natenco (German power supplier; since 2006 consolidation with the French Theolia SA), WSB Neue Energien (German wind and solar farms developer), ABO-Wind (German wind park developer), Juwi-Gruppe (German wind park developer), Nordex (German manufacturer of wind generators), Volkswind (German wind park developer), Ostwind (German wind park developer), Iberdrola (Spanish power supplier), or Neo Renovaveis (Spanish wind farm developer) (see table 3 in the appendix). The wind generators for those farms are mainly fabricated by German manufactures like Nordex, REpower, and Enercon, but the Danish with Vestas and Neg Micon, the Americans with GE Wind, and the Spanish with Gamsea are well represented, too. (see table 3 in the appendix) The French wind generator industry consisted, at that time, of two enterprises: Vergnet, that was a world leader in its line of business but that did not produce large-scale generators, and Jeumont Industries that could never successfully penetrate the market43. After just four years, Jeumont finally ceased production in 2005 – leaving the French wind energy industry with only one single national manufacturer (Gosset & Ranchin 2006, FED, Chabot 2006). It does not look quite as “bad” in the domain of French component suppliers and equipment manufacturers. Some of them are even internationally known in the wind generator industry, like for example RollixDefontaine, that designs special bearings and slewings, and Leroy-Somer that produces and commercializes motors, alternators, and gear mechanisms. Those companies have experienced some difficulties, though, to establish themselves on the “inexistent” French market forcing them to go into the export trade. (Gosset & Ranchin 2006) Apart from suppliers, park developers also work together with research and development companies. Some French examples are: Abies, Airele, Alternative Technologie, Cabinet Germa (now La Compagnie du Vent), Eiden,

The superiority of Vergnet can be explained with the findings of Garud and Karnoe (2003): Vergnet that followed a bricolage approach could slowly but surely establish itself in the sector whereas Jeumont failed when it tried to penetrate the market with a breakthrough approach.

43

79

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Elsam France (with a Danish parent company), EDF-EN (formerly SIIF Energies), Eole-Res, Espace Éolien Développement, Oser, P&T Technologie SAS (with a German parent company), Sofiva Energie, and Valorem. (Gosset & Ranchin 2006, see also table 3 in the appendix) Park operators, eventually, are those actors that operate and exploit a wind power station or park. In order to benefit from preferential feed-in tariffs, a 12-MW-capacity-limit for wind parks had to be observed (see chapter 4.2). With the growth of the wind power industry and the increasing number and size of wind power stations in France, an anti-movement began to develop, as well. Visibility of the machines and fear of a wind rush in windy regions were the main cause for opposition, but “foreign” ownership of many of the wind parks was relevant, too (Szarka 2007a). In 2001, the national federation ‘Vent de Colère’ was founded with the aim to unite all local associations campaigning against industrial wind energy development in France. Their central arguments against wind energy are: its intermittency, its supposed harmfulness for humans and animals, its impairment of landscape and historical monuments, its assumed economical inefficiency and unjustified enrichment by park developers and operators at the expense of the general public, and an opacity of politics and the media coverage (VentDeColere.org, Brand 2004, Gosset & Ranchin 2006). In practice however, there was no common front in this battle against wind energy development. Actors of the anti-movement involved in the opposition of a project seldom worked together because they were not motivated by the same cause: “[An] overlap between their aims tend[ed] to be coincidental rather than strategic.” (Szarka 2007a: 174) Several public opinion polls supported the pro-wind-lobby in its course, though, and consistently confirmed that the wind energy development in France – in spite of the growing antimovement – was, and still is, well accepted in the population. An opinion survey realized in January 2003 by the leading market research and market information group SOFRES (Société française d'enquêtes par sondages) showed that those who lived nearest to the wind power projects in question were in general the most favorable ones. This survey – requested by SIIF Energies– was undertaken at Bouin in the department Vendée. The percentage of approval in general was 89%, that of the inhabitants of Bouin was even 94%. This confirms results of another opinion survey carried out for the ADEME in department Aude one year earlier. (SER/FEE press release 2003) Another opinion survey realized in 2003 by the global market research
80

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 company Synovate proved that, even at a national level, 92 % of the population approved the development and that residents of the departments Aude and Finistère that lived next to wind energy generators were still more favorable than the national average. Being unaesthetic was the most cited reason for opposition to the development. (ADEME Sondage 2003) In 2005, the FEE was integrated in the ‘Renewable Energies Syndicate’ (Syndicat des Energies Renouvelables, SER). Established in 1993, the SER acts as advocate for the interests of its members (in July 2009 they had more than 400). It is a national organization of industrialists and professionals whose activities are connected to the domains of biomass, wood, bio-fuels, tidal energy, geothermal energy, hydro-electricity, photovoltaics and solar energy (that is to say also enterprises being simultaneously active in the fossil fuel or the nuclear electricity domain like EDF Energie Nouvelle or Total) – contrary to the ‘Committee for the Linkage of Renewable Energies’ (Comité de liaison des énergies renouvelables, CLER) that accepts only smaller renewables supporters. The CLER was created in 1984. It was however not possible to find out when its involvement in the wind energy sector began. (Brand 2004, Enr.fr, Cler.fr, Fee.Asso.fr)

The Tipping Point
About the year 2005, the development of wind energy in France attained a turning point, which was marked by a significant increase in installed capacity and in the number and size of French enterprises and organizations in the wind energy sector – in spite of the lack of a French large-scale manufacturer44. To some extent, those new entrants were enterprises active in traditional branches of industry that capitalized on the emerging wind energy market but there could also be observed another trend in the French wind energy sector. Some French enterprises tried to enter the market and join the competition via acquisition of important foreign manufacturers or via partnerships with such. This showed that the French industry was indeed interested in investing in the wind energy sector. Even major players of the (inter)national energy sector like Areva and EDF participate increasingly in the development.

The only remaining established French manufacturer Vergnet continued to expand distribution of its specialized small- and medium-scale generators. In 2008 it had a 1 % share in the French market of manufacturers (SER/FEE état parc). That is admittedly not much but in his specialized niche Vergnet carried on an excellent export trade with countries in the Pacific, the Caribbean, the Indian Ocean, and in Africa (Vergnet.fr).

44

81

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 “The interest of the national power company [EDF] in renewable energy investments and the fact that the main international groups are now opening up factories and offices in France reflect increased belief in the French market.” (EWEA 2009b) After the Jeumont failure for example, Areva became the major shareholder of the German manufacturer REpower in 200545 and in 2007 it acquired 51% of the German manufacturer Multibrid, specialized in large-scale offshore generators (Gosset & Ranchin 2006, Areva.com, Actu-Environnement.fr c + g). Other examples are the take-over of the Spanish manufacturer Ecotecnia by Alstom in 2007 (SER/FEE kit éolien 2009, Actu-Environnement.fr b) as well as the association of the French wind park developer Valorem and the Canadian manufacturer AAER. The emerging society AAER SAS shall be located in the region of Bordeaux and take care of the fabrication and commercialization of large-scale AAER wind generators in France (GTAI.de, Enviro2b.com a). Those takeovers and associations are accompanied by a general corporate concentration in the European Energy Sector as well as an internationalization of companies that were previously nationally based (EPSU.org). This is also reflected in the development of wind energy in France. Since 2007, GDF (later GDF-Suez) became a major shareholder of the French wind park developers and operators: La Compagnie du Vent, Nass&Wind Technologie, Maia Eolis (only 49%), Erelia, Eoliennes de la Haute-Lys, and the Canadian Ventus Energy (GTAI.de, Actu-Environnement.fr d). EDF on the other hand holds 50% of the shares of its affiliate EDF Energies Nouvelles, which is now managed by Henri Proglio, who is at the same time CEO of Veolia Environnement (a French multinational company in the domain of environmental services). (Veolia.com, Liberation.fr b) EDF is also a fine example for the increasing internationalization of national players in the energy sector. With its American wind energy branch for example, EDF-EN is developing large wind parks in the US. At the end of 2008, EDF owned wind parks with a total capacity of 263 MW in France, 1,001 MW in the rest of Europe, 49 MW in Turkey, and 713 MW in the United States. (Actu-Environnement.fr f, LeFigaro.fr b, Capital.fr, EDF projects)

45

In 2008, Areva ceded its shares to Suzlon.

82

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 ------------------------------------------------------------------- SIDE NOTE: GREENWASHING Although being part of the wind energy constellation and contributing to the sector’s development in France, big enterprises like EDF and Areva are often accused of practicing ‘Greenwashing’. Greenwashing is a term used for certain practices of companies that want to give themselves a ‘green image’ and that are more intent on cultivating that image than actually doing something to earn it. The environmental non-profit organization Friends of Earth France has created the ‘Prix Pinocchio’ to call attention to negative behavior of some French enterprises in the domains human rights, environment, and greenwashing. In 2009, the first prize in the category Greenwashing went to EDF for its campaign “Changer d’énergie ensemble”. This campaign was aiming at showing the public how committed EDF was to renewable energy sources and to the combat against global warming. In its environmental report of 2008, however, the budget for renewables amounted only to 8.9 million EUR, 2.1% of the overall budget (421 million EUR) and it was one million EUR less than the expenses for the whole campaign (about 10 million EUR). (Prix-pinocchio.org) In 2008, it was Areva that won the first place for its slogan “Nos energies ont de l’avenir, un avenir sans CO2”. The eco-balance of its production fleet
lagged far behind of the performance of renewable energy sources, though. (AmisDeLaTerre.org)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- END SIDE NOTE In spite of the lack of a French large-scale manufacturer, as well as the concentration and internationalization on the European energy market, the overall number of French enterprises and organizations in the wind energy sector increased and existing enterprises were able to expand. This development was most notable in the domain of component suppliers and equipment manufacturers (examples are: Aérocomposite occitane, Alstom Power, Areva T&D, Eiffel, SBS Forge, Schneider Electrics, SIAG, SPIE, Stromag France, etc.), which pushed the development of numerous engineering and consulting companies, civil and electrical engineering, and transport and installation works companies. All in all, including park developers, operators, and maintenance works companies, there are now about 380 French enterprises, in 20 different lines of business, on the wind energy market in France – some of whom are even world leader in their domain. Most of the enterprises are relatively young. For instance, in only two
83

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 years, about five factories for the manufacturing of towers and foundations have been built in France. To some extent, new entrants on the market come from traditional industrial domains like metallurgy and metal fabrication, mechanical engineering, the aeronautical sector, and naval architecture. (SER/FEE press release 2009 + kit éolien 2009 + annuaire 2009) All in all, about 2000 full time jobs were created in the wind energy sector in 2007 (with a total of 5,000 jobs in 2006 and 7,000 in 2007). In 2012, the ADEME predicted that on the basis of the planned Grenelle measures there will even be up to 16,000 new jobs (ADEME & Vous 2008, SER/FEE Panorama 2007, EWEA 2009b). The impact that the present financial crisis will have upon this development still remains to be seen (see chapter 5.2). In May 2007, a new French president was elected: Nicolas Sarkozy46. This man, although being from the same party as Jacques Chirac and although continuing to heavily promote nuclear energy, had considerable influence on developments in the renewables sector. A feature of Sarkozy’s energy policy, as he announced it during his run for presidency in 2006, and as he at least partly realized it over the last years, was that he was very favorable of nuclear energy and of renewable energy sources at the same time. It was during his mandate that the construction of a first EPR in France started in 2007 and that that of a second one was decided on in 2009, with the prospect of a third one in the years to come. (DGEMP d, MEEDDAT g, TF1.LCI.fr a); but it was also he that wanted to make France a leader in all ‘clean technologies’ and not only in nuclear energy: “France, a leader in nuclear energies, thought it did not require renewable energy sources. That is a mistake. Today, we are going to take decisions, for renewable energies, that are just as important as have been those taken by General Charles de Gaulle in the 1960s regarding nuclear energy. [...] We have to become tomorrow's leaders of energies that do not emit carbon dioxide without losing anything of our advance in the domain of nuclear energy.” (TF1.LCI.fr b)47 This support manifested in several initiatives like the Grenelle of Environment (see chapter 4.2), the reorganization of the Ministry of the Environment, and in a rise in public research expenditures for renewables (TF1.LCI.fr b, Ecolo.fr, Actu-Environnement.fr q, Actualites-NewsEnvironnement.com, LeDauphine.com a).
His Prime Minister is François Fillon; Sarkozy’s party, the UMP, also won the Parliamentary election in June 2007. (Interieur.gouv.fr, France-Politique.fr) 47 translation by the author
46

84

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 The Ministry of the Environment was created in January 1971 and has, since then, changed names several times and to some extent also its field of activity. In 1997, the Ministry became Ministry of Regional Planning and of the Environment (le ministère de l’Aménagement du territoire et de l’environnement) and in 2001 it changed to Ministry of Ecology and of Sustainable Development (le ministère de l’écologie et du développement durable). In 2007 it was again restructured, by the decree of May 18, 2007 relative to the composition of the government, to become the Ministry of Ecology and of Sustainable Development and Planning (ministère de l’écologie, du développement et de l’aménagement durables, MEDAD). The first minister of this new Ministry was Alain Juppé, but he resigned after the parliamentary election in June, ceding the post to Jean-Louis Borloo that occupies it since. (MEDAD b + c, Actu-Environnement.fr a) President Sarkozy had bigger plans for the Ministry however. In 2006, he announced his plans to create a comprehensive ‘Super Ministry’ (DeveloppementDurableLeJournal.com) with a much larger field of responsibility than before: “I wish for a policy in which the [French] State has a strategic vision based on long-term considerations on its structuring investments. That is why we have suggested the creation of a big ministry that incorporates the Managements in charge of the environment, of water, of transport, and of energy. You have to appreciate that this is a revolution in our administrative landscape.” (BourseReflex.com)48 This meant that the two fields of activity, environment and energy, which have been historically separate, should be brought together under one ministry. After the local elections in March 2008, the new Ministry of Ecology, Energy, Sustainable Development and Local Planning (le ministère de l’Ecologie, de l’Energie, du Développement durable et de l’Aménagement du territoire, MEEDDAT) was created, including then also responsibilities on energy issues49. Its present name is Ministry of Ecology, Energy, Sustainable Development, and of the Sea (Ministère de l’Écologie, de l’Énergie, du Développement durable et de la Mer, MEEDDM), having been reorganized once again in June 2009, adding responsibilities for oceanic development, “green technologies”, and negotiations on climate issues. (MEEDDAT c, DeveloppementDurable.com b, Caradisiac.com, Actu-Environnement.fr e)
translation by the author Analogy with the German case: “In Germany the Ministry of Economy and Labour was responsible for energy politics in general until 2002. This brought up several conflicts with the Ministry of Environment which was responsible for climate change politics [...] The success of the Green party helped the minister of the environment to acquire the responsibility for renewable energy.” (Brand 2004)
49 48

85

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 The Grenelle of Environment (see chapter 4.2) was a national convention on sustainable development organized by Nicolas Sarkozy that took place in October 2007 and was followed by a great many political meetings and discussions. The name of the convention refers to the “Accord of Grenelle in May 1968” (LaDepeche.fr) and symbolizes the will of the government to integrate representatives of concerned non-profit organizations and of professional associations in its decision making process on renewable energies and environmental issues. This kind of cooperation is still quite unusual in France. It remains to be seen whether the newly found basis for cooperation between the government, the economy, and associations will be a permanent one. (BourseReflex.com, Alternatives-Economiques.fr b, Assemble-Nationale.fr, DGAP) In addition to those measures, Nicolas Sarkozy has recently declared that he intended to raise public investment in renewable energy resources to the same level as those the government spends on nuclear energy. (LeDauphine.com a + b) “I thought to myself that we will put the same amount of money which we invest in new third generation European Pressurized water Reactors in renewable energy sources, this is an objective of parity and I reconfirm it, not within 2015 or 2020 but right away, right now.” (Liberation.fr a)50 Until now, the French research landscape on renewables has been hardly supported by public money. Between 1985 and 2001 up to 93% of public funds went into nuclear fission and nuclear fusion (OECD-IEA figures based on data transmitted by the French government). In 1997, less than 1% of these funds were allocated to energy efficiency and renewable energies. In recent years however, the situation has changed only marginally. In 2006 about 800 million EUR were provided for research on energy issues. Thereof, 477 million (about 60%) went into nuclear energy, 106 million into fossil fuels (13%), and only 52 million (6.5%) into all renewables combined (Senat.fr b). Those investments seem even more disproportionate when considering the fact that nuclear energy does not provide more than 16 % of the final energy consumption in France. (Schneider 2008, Wissenschaft-Frankreich.de, UsineNouvelle.com a, Senat.fr b) The

French research landscape on renewables is not only poorly provided with public funds, it is badly organized and insufficiently linked, as well. In 2006, Jérôme Gosset and Thierry Ranchin published a report on the condition and prospects of the French wind energy sector (Gosset & Ranchin 2006). Among the weak points of the French research landscape on wind energy they
50

translation by the author

86

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 described was, on one hand, the limited number of public and private laboratories and organizations that actually participate in the development of the sector and, on the other hand, the lack of interconnectedness as well as a lack of organization and structuring among them. This goes along with the lack of a common research program or even a common goal. They further pointed out that France, contrary to other European countries like Denmark, Germany, or Spain, had no national institution responsible for scientific and technological research on and development of wind energy. They finally remarked that in other countries, research activities have largely been supported by the wind energy industry. In the absence of a significant industry, this cooperation between the private sector and academic research institutes turned out to be very weak in France. This lack of structuring and organization has been reconfirmed in 2007 by the government in a short article on the national strategy on wind energy research on the website of the Ministry of Environment (MEDAD d) and it is again criticized in a report of the OPECST of 2009 (Senat.fr b). Sarkozy now promises to raise public investment in renewables – for him, it is a question of parity that has to be approached now and not in ten years. These developments are quite positive for the French wind energy – not everything is running smoothly, though (Actu-Environnement.fr j). In 2008, the ‘Institut Montaigne’ published a very unfavorable report on wind energy development in France. Moreover, the anti-windmovement seems to be becoming stronger and, most notably, better organized. The Institut Montaigne is a think-tank that was created in 2000 by Claude Bébéar, president of the board of directors at AXA. It emphasizes ideological, political, and financial independence; other sources (Arte.tv, NonFiction.fr) classify it as liberal and point out that large and influential consortia support it. In July 2008, it published a report (see InstitutMontaigne.org) named “Wind Generators: A Fresh Breath or Hot Air?”51, an evaluation on wind energy as it is intended in the Grenelle roadmap. The report mainly criticizes the supposed economical inefficiency of wind energy and the associated additional cost for society. The Federation Environnement Durable (FED) was created in January 2007 on the initiative of Jean-Louis Butré and is another organization (alongside the federation ‘Vent de Colère’; see above) that unites associations that are opposed to the development of industrial wind energy in France. In addition to this new organization, the anti-wind-movement has a new hero: the
51

translation by the author: “Eoliennes : nouveau souffle ou vent de folie ?”

87

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 former president Valéry Giscard d’Estaing. Since 2007, he has been presiding over the strategic orientation committee (Comité d’orientation stratégique) of the FED. When asked in an interview with Libération, why this committee was created, d’Estaing answered: “When I was President, I was highly involved in the protection of the French landscape. And, in the last six months, whilst I was crossing France in a TGV, I saw appearing wind power stations in La Beauce [a region south of Paris]. The French landscape is however, along with its language and its cultural heritage, one of the most precious things that we have. The second reason is the financial opacity in this matter. Nobody ever wants to put a figure on it, nobody knows who is paying for it, and psychological arguments are used without explaining the consequences to the citizens. Why do we produce electricity that is more costly when we have a surplus due to nuclear energy production?” (Adeva-Villebeon.org)52 Renewables in general are not criticized by the movement, but exclusively wind energy and that because of its assumed unjustified hegemony in politics compared to other renewables and because of landscape protection issues. (Actu-Environnement.fr t, LeMonde.fr b) Public opinion polls on wind energy in France continue to provide positive numbers, though. In a press release of November 2006 (ADEME Sondage 2006) the ADEME declared that 93% of the interviewed people gave a favorable opinion on wind energy. And in April 2009, the French Ministry of the Environment published a poll on social acceptability of wind energy in France (MEEDDAT i) that ascertained that only 5% of local residents perceive wind generators as disturbing.

4.4 Summary
On the whole, five interwoven core transformation processes can be identified in the development: a technological innovation process, changes in energy policy and legal conditions, a transformation of the economical context, alteration of social relationships, as well as a modification of the normative basis. Together they make the emergence of the wind energy sector in France possible. In France, just as in other countries (cf. wind parks in California in the 1980s or the GROWIAN in Germany), early large-scale wind generator projects did not lead to success. Instead, installation rates showed a steady shift from small and simple wind generators to

52

translation by the author

88

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 large-scale wind power stations with ever increasing size and capacity, which, from 1991 on, followed approximately the same development curve as in neighboring countries because most of the installed machines (except for Vergent) came from abroad and had not been developed in France. The result of this technological transformation is most evident in the current offshore development (with prototype machines of 5 MW or higher), which is, in contrast to the on-shore development, still in a premature state. According to Ulrich Dolata (Dolata 2007, 2008a, 2008b), technological changes entail transformations in other areas, too. The growing size of today’s wind generators and parks is accompanied by the need for capital-intensive investors that can bear the risks and requirements of such projects. Simultaneously, park developers, operators, and the supplier industry also increased in size. The industrial French wind energy sector that, in the beginning, was almost none existent, could establish itself more and more, trying to defy its foreign competitors. Furthermore, major international players are becoming interested in the wind energy sector, for it now promises to yield profits. Thus, the sector became more and more organized by a market-based rationality. The increasingly internationalized and outcome-oriented development demanded a change in actor constellations, too. Small organizations and individuals were never well represented in the wind energy development in France but recently it has become even more difficult for them to participate. With the transformation of the actor constellations in the sector, motives for support of the development changed as well. In the beginning, the development of the French wind energy sector was mainly being pushed by European and international agreements on climate protection and promotion of renewables. Today however, economical issues have become an additional incentive to participate in the development. Those transformations reciprocally influenced and intensified each other. The most important transformation for the development of the wind energy sector in France was, however, the steady alteration of the political and legal framework. Beginning fairly indifferent of wind energy with mediocre support for wind energy only coming through international pressure, today the French government shows ambitions to assume a leading role in all ‘clean’ energy sources, including wind. The development in France demonstrated that governmental support and an adequate regulation are very important for the sector’s evolution.

89

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010

5 Constricting and Enabling Factors of the Niche-Sector-Transformation
After the detailed description of several aspects of the development in the wind energy niche in France it is time to deal with the question of why the development proceeded in this particular way. To answer it, one has to look for enabling and constraining factors at all the theoretical levels: niche, regime, and landscape. Where and when arose the so-called ‘windows of opportunity’ for the niche constellation and which structures and constellations limited the development of the niche? These positive and negative factors can be of natural, economical, political, social, and technological quality and can be explained by either niche-intern mechanisms that enable it to expand or by developments and structural tensions at the regime and the landscape level that open up windows of opportunity for niche expansion (discussed in chapter 2.3).

5.1 Geographical Preconditions
Having enough wind and enough land are two natural conditions that must be ensured first when looking for adequate sites to built wind generators upon. France has the advantage of featuring the second best wind potential in Europe after Great Britain. With its three different, complementary wind regions – the English Channel, the Atlantic, and the Mediterranean regime (see figure 11) – the problem of intermittence53 is much less important than for example in Germany. (EWEA 2009a, ADEME colloque + guide) In contrast to Germany and other European countries, France’s regions are also rather sparsely populated. With a surface of 551,000 km2, France’s population density (residents per square kilometer) was only 105.7 in 1999 and 111 in 200554. In theory, this low population density should leave more space for a harmonic wind energy development that does not clash with landscape, housing, and economic interests. Landscape protection and the (un-)aesthetic
An energy source is intermittent when it is unintentionally unavailable from time to time (that is when the wind does not blow) and when the amount of electricity produced consequently shows undesired changes in output. An intermittent energy source can be highly predictable, though. 54 For comparison: the EU-average in 1999 was 121.6 and Germany’s population density in 2007 was 230 (with a surface of 357,000 km2). (Diplomatie.gouv.fr b, UN Population Division, Statistik-Portal.de)
53

90

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 aspect of wind generators are, however, a central argument in the French discussion about wind energy development (Brand 2004, Gosset & Ranchin 2006, Jobert et al. 2007, EWEA 2009a; see chapter 5.4).

figure 11: French wind regimes (ADEME guide: 7)

5.2 Events at the Landscape Level
Events at the landscape level are deep structural trends or shifts of, for example, cultural patterns, demographical developments, the macro-economical context, or the macro-political framework. They take place very slowly and have the power to destabilize socio-technical regimes, thus, opening up ‘windows of opportunity’ for niche expansion. Beyond direct influence of niche and regime actors, they can eventually be altered through the successful establishment of a new regime (like for example a new aesthetical perception; see chapter 5.4). One such transformation was the gradual emergence of a public environmental awareness from the 1960s and 70s on. This change of awareness went hand in hand with an anti-nuclear

91

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 movement in the Western society. The movement was pushed by the nuclear reactor accident in Chernobyl in 1986, the most disastrous nuclear power plant accident in history. A good part of today’s wind energy lobby in Europe originated in this movement but those events did not have the same impact in France. Nuclear opponents could not prevail in their battle even though the movement was at least as big as in other countries (Kitschelt 1986) and even though the majority of French citizens have and had an opinion on nuclear issues that is in line with the rest of Europe (Schneider 2008). This failure was due to several political reasons. The French state led a determined and heavy police action against demonstrations and civil disobedience so that anti-nuclear activities have been effectively discouraged. Another reason was the closed political system with a strong executive branch, which limited participation in decisionmaking processes to a very small group of actors. Thus, the anti-nuclear movement could not make its voice heard through a national referendum, nor were there possibilities for accessing political licensing procedures and applications. The fact that no general legislative act on nuclear energy issues existed until 1991 made it, above all, impossible to challenge licensing procedures in court. A last reason was the partisan organization of the French party system. Both of the two major parties were reluctant to represent the anti-nuclear movement, concerned about losing voters and giving up power. (Kitschelt 1986) Further international events that resulted from the shift in public awareness – like the UN Conference on Environment and Development in Rio in 1992, pointing out the importance of a turnaround in international energy policy – had a very limited impact on the French development of wind energy, too. The climate argument was much less predominant in the discussion on the French electricity mix than in other countries because its electricity was and still is mainly produced by nuclear energy and partly by hydropower. In comparison to CO2 emissions of coal or oil, France’s electricity production park is therefore almost free of greenhouse gases (at the point of electricity generation). Thus, one of the major mobilizing discourses55, which had been successfully used by other wind energy movements in Europe (that of CO2 economization), could not be used in France because it was already occupied by the nuclear lobby. (Brand

“[...] mobilizing discourses serve to rally actors and aggregate resources. [... ‘story lines’ are] ‘the medium through which actors try to impose their view of reality on others, suggest certain social positions and practices, and criticize alternative social arrangements’” (Szarka 2007b: 327f)

55

92

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 2004, Szarka 2007b) The French government made its first regulatory move in the domain of wind power in 1996 and introduced a tender scheme for the promotion of wind energy projects. It arose in the context of the elaboration of the Kyoto Protocol of 1997 (an additional protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) that aimed at combating global warming and defined international targets for the limitation of greenhouse gases and in the context of the EU-White Paper of 1997 that defined the first, but non-binding collective climate targets of the EU. It was not until the new environmental orientation in international and European climate policy finally resulted in a collective EU-directive on the promotion of electricity produced from renewable energy sources in the internal electricity market (see chapter 4.2) that France was ready to introduce development targets for renewable energy sources and to provide the industry with instruments to realize those targets. Over the last few years, climate protection has become more and more important in national and international policy. Even the USA no longer disputes that climate change is underway and that it is a man-made phenomenon: “Humans cause global warming, US admits” (News.BBC.co.uk). The actions recently taken by the Sarkozy-Fillon-government, which increasingly support the deployment of renewable energy sources (see below), have to be seen in this context. In parallel to the emerging environmental awareness, oil supply shortages occurred from time to time. The oil crises did not always have the same effect in France as they did have in other countries however. In Germany for example, the oil crisis of 1970 activated an increasing interest in wind energy (Schön et al. 2008: 29). In France however, the story line of energy independence was at that time already occupied by the nuclear lobby that was massively supported by the government from the 1970s on to render France independent from fossil fuels. Today, France’s energy independence is stabilized ostensibly around 50% – officially. In his report ‘Nuclear Power in France, Beyond the Myth’, Schneider (2008) demonstrated that the adjusted level of France’s energy independence in 2007 was only 8.5% because the calculations did not take into account some important criteria and were highly biased: “It is remarkable to what extent the myth of “energy independence” through nuclear power has survived the last 35 years. One of the reasons is the artistic manipulation of basic data by the State administration and the energy industry.” (ibid.: 25) So, even in France, renewable energy sources can still make a significant contribution to energy independence. It will however be very difficult for the French wind lobby to seize the argument
93

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 from the control of the nuclear lobby – that publicly holds on to the story line – because in the short term the impact of wind energy is rather small (Szarka 2007b). In recent years, during the course of the overall shortage of many natural resources, the oil price (and with it, gas prices) rose again. The big difference to former oil price increases was that this time, prices were not assumed to go down again – due to the shortage of resources – but to settle down at a high level. (Zeit.de a, Sueddeutsche.de) The still very high dependency of all countries on natural resources shows itself in armed conflicts and heated political debates as seen in the repeating gas supply problems between Russia and the Ukraine56, a trade dispute that also affected Europe because of disruptions in its gas supply. Those developments can turn out to be a window of opportunity for renewable energy sources for they can help to become more independent from gas and oil supplies. In the French case, there was no obvious proof though that wind energy in particular would benefit from it. The current financial crisis temporarily interrupted the trend of constant price increases for raw materials in general. Price levels dropped significantly, but are expected to go up again to their former level when the crisis finishes (Focus.de, Spiegel.de). The crisis had a massive impact on global economics, but the wind energy sector was apparently hit much less than other sectors. Certainly, banking institutions will be cautious regarding credit in the near future, but the slowdown in financing does not appear to be very dramatic in France (RTE 2009a, EWEA 2009a). There has been a slowdown in production rates, too, but international wind energy markets are intact and employment figures in France indicate a positive trend in the sector (Enerzine.com b, Liberation.fr c, BWE press release 2009). Some wind park developers even hope “that the lack of wind turbines in the market thus will have an end and that they will get the wind turbines they need for the realization of their projects much earlier than expected.” (Molly 2009, see also RTE 2009a) A potential negative effect of the financial crisis on the French wind energy sector – that will however only be as durable as the crisis itself – is that there could be a decrease in power consumption by the French industry (RTE 2009a). As the annual increase in the French power consumption can be seen as a window of opportunity for the French wind energy sector (see below) this can constitute an obstacle. The potential
For more details see e.g. Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, Center of Security Studies, www.res.ethz.ch
56

94

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 window of opportunity should not be a reason to maintain a constant rise in power consumption, though, for power savings are also an important element in the battle against climate change. The price level of raw materials can influence wind power development in two different ways. A drop in prices for building materials, as observed during the recent crisis, can impact manufacturing cost of wind power stations (RTE 2009a) making them cheaper. As costs for a wind park operator mainly consist in expenditures for the wind generators (and not for fuel) this can raise ‘competitiveness’57. The ‘competitiveness’ of electricity generation by wind energy also increases with rising prices for fossil fuels because there is no price on renewable energy sources like wind and sun. In October 2009 the Ministry of the Environment published a study on bench-line costs for electricity generation (MEEDDAT b). In this comparison of different energy sources it becomes apparent that electricity generated by wind energy is moreor-less competitive these days: Estimated production costs for electricity generated by wind energy in 2012 (for a machine with 2,200 full load hours, which is the French average) are 79.4 EUR/MWh. In October 2009, prices on the French electricity market Powernext were much higher than that: the average price for electricity was 90 EUR/MWh and 84 EUR/MWh were payed for wind energy (SER/FEE press release 2008b). Those prices are however highly fluctuating. On December 12, 2009 the spot price for electricity was only 41.75 EUR/MWh but on December 15, 2009 it had again risen to 70.51 EUR/MWh (see Powernext.com). So, ‘competitiveness’ of wind energy depends on the one hand on electricity stock markets but it is also dependent on the various factors that are included in the calculation of costs (or not). External or social costs like impairment of physical health and degradation of the environment are often disregarded and falsify comparisons of different energy sources (Gosset & Ranchin 2006). Nuclear energy is generally said to be the most competitive energy source. When amortized, nuclear energy plants can indeed produce electricity at very low prices (28.4 EUR/MWh for nuclear electricity produced in France in 2015; DGEMP b). The low price can, however, only be maintained when producing base load power. With a huge overcapacity in base load power, France has a highly uneconomic load curve, because it has to import high-priced peak load

It is important to distinguish ‘competitiveness’ and profitability. Due to the feed-in tariffs for renewables wind parks can be profitable for operators even though wind energy may not be entirely competitive on the electricity market, yet. (Gosset & Ranchin 2006)

57

95

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 power (Schneider 2008). In comparison to fossil fuels, CO2 emissions58 of nuclear energy production are low but the harm to humans of nuclear energy is many times worse. The inclusion of health risks through possible accidents, security gaps, and the unsolved problem of waste disposal into the calculation would increase costs considerably. French nuclear operators are obligated to reserve sufficient funding for nuclear decommissioning and waste management, but calculations for those reserves are non-transparent, data is not publicly accessible, and “risk insurance levels have never reflected any realistic assessment of the potential consequences of a major accident. France has persistently practiced the lowest maximum liability limits in Europe.” (Schneider 2008: 39) The competitive advantage of nuclear energy over renewable energy sources must therefore be questioned.

5.3 Niche Factors
Possible causes for change in the French energy sector can also come from the niche level. Radical innovations may build up internal momentum and break out of their niche to form a new or at least change the constellation of the old regime. According to Hughes, system builders try to stabilize new technological systems and minimize uncertainties by getting more and more components under the control of the system. An important factor in this process is the commitment of groups or individuals to the new system. Other mechanisms can be: ‘technological add-on’ or ‘hybridization’, a physical link-up of an innovation with established technologies to form some kind of symbiosis; ‘free-riding’, which can be found when a niche technology is benefiting from an increased demand in an established market and is riding along with this growth; and ‘niche-piling’ or ‘niche-cumulation’, the branching out of an innovation into further varieties and the transfer of their specific mode of application to other domains or markets like the exploitation of economies of scale and scope of wind power generators in a variety of different landscapes and the development from small and decentralized wind power generation to profit-oriented parks and industrial applications. Those niche-mechanisms did not play a major role in the growth and the stabilization of the French wind energy sector, though. ‘Hybridization’
The new French ‘carbon tax’, an environmental tax on emissions of CO2, should have come into effect in the summer of 2010; however, the project was abandoned in March 2010. Even so, it would probably have had no impact on the competitiveness of wind energy, for electricity would not have been assessed by the tax. (NouvelObs.com; see also footnote 83)
58

96

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 for example cannot be found in the French wind energy context at all59 and ‘niche-piling’ is rather something that can be found in the overall wind energy development but does not distinguish the French wind power sector in particular because the sector’s industry was, for a long time, dominated by foreign technology and foreign enterprises. Only ‘free-riding’ played an important part in the stabilization of the French niche, this will however be discussed in the next chapter (see chapter 5.4) as it is strongly dependent on developments on the regime level. So, in other words, the French wind energy niche was initially not able to break out by itself. Explanations for this failure are: unavailability of important story lines (see above), lack of committed actors and inefficient networking, missing experience and knowledge, insufficient funds, and an inadequate legal framework. As already described in the chapter 5.2 on landscape factors, wind lobbyists in different countries have brought forward a number of mobilizing discourses or ‘story lines’. Each of the story lines could indeed be found in the French context, too, but as their power was diminished by contextual factors they only exerted a limited influence on reforms in France (Szarka 2007b): when the wind energy sector developed in France, the story lines of greenhouse emissions and that of energy independence were already monopolized by the nuclear lobby (see above), and the story line of an energy gap and that of job creation (see below) only existed in a scaled-down form. Next to motivating discourses, the emerging sector was also in need of motivated and committed actors that possessed sufficient knowledge and experience on the subject: The antinuclear movement for example had been suppressed very early (see chapter 5.2) and could therefore not contribute much to the development of the wind energy sector. The French government was for a long time quite indifferent towards wind energy and even its first supporting program in 1996 seemed a half-hearted initiative. This limited political support was also reflected in the share renewable energy source had in public research funds (see also chapter 5.4). Not only were public research activities on wind energy marginal, but private research institutes of the French industry were underrepresented as well. What is more, the population as a whole and residents in particular were not significantly involved in the emerging sector.
A technology in the domain of renewable energies that could profit from the diffusion of nuclear energy in France was hydropower; hydropower provides peak load power, which nuclear power plants cannot produce.
59

97

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 This was, first of all, due to marginal financial participation of individuals in wind energy parks. “[...] in France apart from a few examples individual persons cannot yet invest in renewable funds in their particular region as this is done in Germany and still more in Northern Europe” (Brand 2004: 11) – it is an approach more developed in Germany than in France (Jobert et al. 2007) – nor have there been realized wind energy projects solely by cooperatives of individual citizens60, so-called “citizen wind parks” (Mairesse 2009). Secondly, the lack of involvement of the population was due to a small, specialized, and undeveloped industry that could initially only provide a small amount of domestic jobs (Szarka 2007b, Gosset & Ranchin 2006). In recent years, the situation has changed, in the beginning however the sector could not benefit from the story line of job creation (Szarka 2007b). Principal initiators in the French wind energy niche were industrial actors. At the beginning of the 1990s, the French wind energy industry was very small and specialized, as were wind generators and parks, developers, and operators. The size of developers and operators began to grow, when the EOLE-2005 program was implemented, which had a rather strict, complex, and demanding application procedure (see chapter 5.4). Vergnet was then the only producer of wind generators in the French sector and was one of the only actors that had experience in the field (see chapter 4.1). Why interest in wind power technologies reappeared at that time in France remains ambiguous. Maybe initiatives were stimulated by financial support of the EU, which was not very high, though – most of the early industrial French wind power projects were developed due to support from the European Commission (Nadai 2007: 2717, EnergieCités.org) as public research grants were mainly allocated to activities on nuclear issues – or maybe some of the actors were interested in keeping up with technology development in other countries. Ranchin and Gosset assumed, however, that this interest was mainly due to climate and environmental concerns: “Unlike other countries, France has never been pushed to complete the fleet of its production facilities. This wish appeared later and has mainly been motivated by environmental challenges” (Ranchin & Gosset 2006: 46)61. This was also the official reason given by the government when launching its EOLE-2005 program (see chapter 5.4). At the outset, the French market was still unattractive for foreign park developers, which must be
60 61

A reason for this is, among others, the absence of adequate financial instruments (Mairesse 2009). translation by the author

98

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 the reason why first wind park developers and operators in France were almost exclusively French. In 2000 however, when the government implemented the first legal framework and introduced financial incentives, their interest was aroused as well. The legal framework (see chapter 4.2) imposed a 12-MW-capacity-limit for operators who wanted to benefit from the power purchase obligation. It was imposed to restrict the development of wind energy to small wind farms. Thus, it became feasible for small enterprises, organizations, and individuals – which had been the main promotors of early wind energy development in Denmark and Germany – to become wind park operators. Due to the fact that France’s industry lacked a kind of middle class, small and medium-sized French enterprises were however underrepresented (Dena 2006: 24). Consequently, foreign enterprises tried to take over this place. Another reason why small operators could not gain ground in France was fact that large developers and operators that wanted to build bigger parks and that did not want to renounce the special tariffs have often dodged the 12-MW-regulation. Many of the installed wind parks have thus been chopped up into smaller branches to avoid limitations and were actually much bigger than the prescribed 12 MW. (Gosset & Ranchin 2006, Szarka 2007b, see also table 3 in the appendix) On the whole, the French wind energy sector was for a long time very reliant (around 90%) on imported know-how, work force, and technology (Szarka 2007b) and French enterprises initially could not, or would not, benefit from the emergence of the sector in France – irrespective of their size. In Spain, the development of the sector was massively supported from the beginning by major national players of the energy sector (Szarka 2007a). The national French power company EDF, however, was not very pleased about the emergence of a wind energy sector in France. The company had indeed been involved in early research projects in the 1950/60s but suspended all sponsorship in 1963. EDF had to return into the wind-power-constellation in 2001 when the power purchase obligation became effective, but did not do so enthusiastically (LeMonde.fr a)62. It actively joined the development of wind energy in 2004 when taking over
62

Today, EDF-EN is developing large wind parks in several European countries (Europe 1,264 MW, thereof France 263 MW) and in the US (713 MW). This development seems similar to the case of the German power utilities that primarily, in the beginning of the 1990s, opposed the implementation of a feed-in law in court; after having lost the case they tried to shape the situation according to their preferences instead and started to build up wind portfolios – initially not in Germany though, but in the UK. Contrary to the German feed-in law the UK Renewables Obligation (a form of trade with “green certificates”) reinforced the established structure of the electricity supply industry and privileged large enterprises. Thus the supply industry was in

99

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 SIIF Energies that then became EDF Energies Nouvelles (EDF-EN). Framatome (later Areva), another important player in the traditional French energy sector, tried to enter the wind energy market in 2001 with a large-scale wind generator fabricated by its affiliate Jeumont Industries, but after just four years they already ceased production. The reason was probably underestimation of the complexity and problems it can cause when trying to fabricate a new, large-scale, direct-drive wind power station without experience to build on (see also Garud & Karnoe 2003). In any case, this happened ten years after the first industrial wind power station had been built in France, that is to say, much delayed. All in all, it can be resumed that the French wind energy development has been advanced, to a large extent, by non-domestic enterprises. The power purchase obligation and the new legal framework (see chapter 4.2) gave sufficient planning reliability and economic incentives to attract wind park developers and operators from other countries (Szarka 2007b). Another shortcoming of the French wind sector was that the few actors of the constellation were not sufficiently connected among each other. A first attempt was made in 1996 when the FEE was founded, but that was a very uniform network of actors from the same domain. Connections between the wind energy industry and scientific research organizations and between the industry and the governmental institutions did not seem to exist during the first periods of wind energy development in France. A further brake for the already hesitant dynamic of renewables in France is established by the fact that the supporters of renewable electricity are not very often received by the governmental institutions like ministries, in particular the influential ministries like the ministry of Economy, Industry and Finance […] the network supporting the transformation of the highly centralized French electricity system has difficulties in exerting its influence in the policy network. (Brand 2004: 10) It was in 2007, due to the Grenelle of Environment, that a basis for cooperation and networking between the government, the economy, and associations was finally created, but it remains to be seen whether this newly found basis will be a permanent one. When looking at technological issues and problems of the niche, it is at first somewhat surprising that they do not seem to excessively restrain the sector’s deployment; it is logical

favor of the Renewables Obligation. Due to a wave of takeovers most of the wind park developers and operators in the UK are now in possession of foreign enterprises such as the German power utilities RWE and E.ON. (Szarka 2007a: 33, 36, 93)

100

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 though when considering the fact that, at the time when France joined the wind energy development, technological formation had already passed through a standardization process (see Danish model) and improved designs had been developed to adjust major drawbacks such as noise emissions, security issues, and feed-in problems. Due to France’s tardiness and its reliance on imported know-how, the emerging French wind energy niche could benefit from the preliminary work of other countries but could not take credit for this technological development itself. The problem of light reflection on rotor blades for example does not exist any more as non-reflecting paint has been used for a long time now (BWE A-Z). Modern wind generators are also acoustically optimized so that mechanically and physically induced noises can hardly be heard any more from a short distance away. Aerodynamically induced noises are still audible by residents that live nearby, but have also been significantly reduced and are subject of comprehensive regulations on noise emissions (BWE A-Z, SER/FEE kit éolien 2009). Studies showed that noise emissions by wind generators are significantly lower than that of road traffic and that there is no significant impairment on the health of humans and animals (ADEME colloque 2006, Gosset & Ranchin 2006). The same goes for infrasound. No frequencies that could be classified as harmful have been measured near wind generators (BWE A-Z, SER/FEE kit éolien 2009). Accident risks of wind generators cannot categorically be excluded, but serious risks like the collapse of the whole structure, or the breaking off of components, are, statistically speaking, very rare and only affect the immediate surroundings. Besides, modern wind generators are equipped with lightning conductors that prevent them from being seriously damaged by lightning strokes. They are also equipped with ice sensors and heated rotor blades that impede the icing of important machine parts and prevent snow from accumulating and dropping off the blades (BWE A-Z). A subject of controversy has been the impact of wind generators on birds and bats. The problem of bird and bat strikes can apparently been considered as marginal (about 10 thousand in comparison to 5 to 10 million dead birds through high-voltage lines and road traffic). The impact on different species of birds and on migration and breeding breading behavior has however not been sufficiently studied, yet. The protection of animals should be taken into account when looking for building sites. It is safe to say though that no basic antagonism can be found between wind energy and birds. (BWE Vogelschutz 2005,

101

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Gosset & Ranchin 2006) Problems concerning aeronautical and military radar installations can be mainly ascribed to administrative barriers (BWE News 2008, ADEME colloque 2006). So, technological problems of the core technology do not constitute a ‘reverse salient’ of the wind energy sector in France – although they are persistently brought forward in argumentations of anti-wind movements. It was a mixture of all the other weaknesses that have been identified, which contributed to the fact that the French wind energy sector could not establish itself by its own means. The sector was instead highly reliant on processes and events that occurred on the regime and the landscape level and on windows of opportunity that thusly appeared.

5.4 Impact of the Regime Level
The dominant constellation of the French energy sector played an important role in the development of the wind energy niche. Several structural lock-ins and special characteristics of the French political and its energy supply system limit possible courses of action for the niche. So, the established system must either be challenged by the niche via exploitation of weaknesses in its structure (see chapter 2.3 on reverse salients, tensions in the regime, and mismatches) or, its actors must change the regime’s structure through intentional modifications. The wind energy sector would most likely not be where it is today without the willingness of actors of the regime to modify the energy sector. The definition of climate targets and targets for renewables, the introduction of incentives to realize those targets, the elaboration of a legal framework and adequate planning tools, and a real support from governmental institutions were, and are, fundamental factors for the deployment and competitiveness of wind energy. Additionally, the degree of local acceptance and opposition of wind energy has to be considered. The nuclear sector is well established in the French energy sector, a constellation carried by different social groups that are dominated by nuclear power production. The decision for the creation of such an energy sector was undertaken in the early 1970s and it “has been embedded in French culture for more than 30 years” now (EWEA 2009a). This lock-in is well reflected in special political and industrial structures. The centralized political culture in France contributed significantly to the present-day structuring of the French energy sector. As local authorities had no legislative or enacting power and as their competences in energy policy had nearly all been taken away with the creation of the
102

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 two national and state-run power companies EDF and GDF, the power of decision on energy matters lay in the hands of the government. Their decision for and commitment to nuclear power in the 1970s was additionally facilitated through the absence of legislation on nuclear matters and by the fact that “the elected representatives [members of parliament] always had and have a very minor influence on the development, orientation, design and implementation of energy and nuclear policy in France” (Schneider 2008: 6). Ever since its emergence, the constellation supporting this technological choice expanded and solidified into an institutional lock-in. Nuclear policy in France is supported by a large number of enterprises, associations, political parties, and also individuals, it is however mainly controlled by the ‘Corps des Mines’ (see above). Over the years, the Corps has managed to occupy a great many key positions linked with the nuclear sector. Formally, the Corps des Mines and its General Council is presided over by the Ministry of Industry. As the composition of the ministry changes ever few years though, the most powerful position of the Corps des Mines is the vice-president of the General Mining Council. Thus, “this state organized elite clan has made it possible to push through long-term policy orientations like the nuclear program, entirely outside election concerns” (Schneider 2008: 7). The “problem” is that thus, democratic decision-making is completely undermined and policy adaption or reorientation is seriously hampered (Schneider 2008, AITEC). All the members are historically recruited from graduates of a few French elite schools, restricting access to the Corps to a very limited and exclusive group of people. This group constitutes a very powerful lobby for nuclear energy that the emerging wind energy sector has to cope with. Another lock-in can be found on the French electricity market; it is closely linked to the impact of political structures I described above. For a long time, EDF and GDF virtually monopolized the French electricity and gas market. In consequence of pressure exerted by the EU (in form of directives) electricity and gas markets were slowly deregulated in France from 2000 on. EDF was transformed from a national power company into an anonymous society, whose main shareholder is however still the French state, and it disassociated from its transport network, entrusting it to the quasi-independent network administrator RTE. An independent regulatory authority, the CRE, was created to guarantee equitable access to the grid and to prevent EDF from abusing its market power. Thus, the liberalization of the markets should have enabled
103

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 alternative, non-governmental power producers and providers to enter. This proved very difficult, though. EDF, although formally not a state-run company anymore, is still the exclusive operator of the 58 operative (and amortized) French nuclear reactors (see IAEA), it produces about 90% of France’s electricity demand (MEDAD e), and it is the only power provider in France that can offer the so-called ‘tarif réglementé’63. This tariff is fixed by the Minister in charge of Energy and Economy. It is usually lower than the market price and should have been abolished with the liberalization of the European energy markets for individual consumers in 2007 it is however still in operation (Euractiv.fr, LeFigaro.fr a).64 This institutional lock-in has limited, still to this day, the possibility for the renewables sector to profit from the liberalization of the electricity market and to use it as a window to break out of the niche. (q.v. Nadai 2007) The technological lock-in in French industry structures is still more apparent. In summary, there are five important structural factors that reduce the scope for wind power expansion: competitive advantage of amortized nuclear power stations, a scaled-down energy gap, structural over-capacity, the inflexibility of nuclear base-load, and an insufficiently upgraded power supply network (Szarka 2007b, Brand 2004). An advantage of this technological lock-in is the rather low electricity price that can be achieved due to economies of scale in amortized nuclear reactors. Another advantage of the present industry structures in the energy sector is the quite small energy gap France is facing in comparison to other countries. “Whilst France is encountering similar sourcing problems, their scale and timing are different. The French are less reliant on ensuring adequate gas and coal supplies, and they have not taken a political decision to phase out nuclear. On the contrary, they will extend the lifetimes of the current fleet and replace it with more nuclear in the next decade” (Szarka 2007b: 328) This competitive advantage of nuclear energy and the absence of a “real” energy gap constitute a disadvantage for the French wind energy sector. As nuclear energy is seen as the solution to energy problems among French policy makers, the ‘energy gap’ discourse does not meet with the same response in France as it does in other countries, although it exists even in France, but only in a scaled-down form. Rising electricity demands and the lengthy period needed to build
Except for Electricité de Strasbourg (see Fournisseurs-Electricite.com) In summer 2010, this situation may change. The French government is about to devise a new regulation that would give EDF’s competitors access to its nuclear base load power. This measure should encourage more competition, reduce EDF’s hegemony, and satisfy the European Commission that already criticized the situation on the French electricity market. (UsineNouvelle.com b)
64 63

104

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 the new European Pressurized Reactors created a small window of opportunity for wind energy. (Szarka 2007b) One could say that the wind energy sector rode along with a growth in electricity demand that could not be satisfied by the existing market participants – it is a combination of a window of opportunity produced by developments on the regime level and of one of the niche-mechanisms described above (see chapter 5.3). A fundamental weakness of the French electricity supply system is its structural overcapacity (Szarka 2007b, Schneider 2008). France has a very large nuclear reactor park with fifty-eight plants that have a lifespan of forty years (Brand 2004). Those existing nuclear reactors produce far more electricity than actually needed to satisfy domestic consumption. As nuclear power reactors produce only base load power an important part in the domestic electricity demand can however not be met by the power they produce; their output has to be regulated and balanced with additional peak load power. In France, nuclear base load power has usually been balanced with hydropower. Due to its significant surplus in capacity in base load power, France has however to resort to additional mechanisms to stabilize the system. The main solutions have been: export of electricity to neighboring countries and encouragement of domestic usage of electricity by lowering electricity tariffs and thus substituting electricity for other energy sources, especially in the domain of space heating. As a consequence of largescale introduction of electric space heating65 – once even called a “French folly” by the Secretary of State for Ecology, Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet (Schneider 2008: 23) – seasonal peak load demands increased significantly from the 1980s on; instead of downsizing its nuclear park though, EDF maintained its strategy even when the problem became so urgent that it had to restart old, inoperative oil fired power plants to meet seasonally fluctuating electricity demands. This kind of load curve, with high cost for peak load imports and additional oil fired plants, is very uneconomic66 – “Without power exports and electric space heating an economically optimized French nuclear program would have been limited to less than 30 GW, the equivalent of the 34 x 900 MW reactors, the last of which was connected to the grid in 1987” (ibid.: 24).

Today, over one quarter of French apartments are equipped with electric heating systems (Schneider 2008). The encouragement of electric space heating is not only uneconomic, it is also highly polluting because approximately three quarters of the primary energy, like e.g. natural gas, oil, or biomass, is lost when burning it to generate electricity instead of using it directly. (Schneider 2008)
66

65

105

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 – but structural characteristics of the French energy system seem to self-perpetuate and did create a ‘path dependence’ that influences decisions not only for this but also for the next generation (Szarka 2007b: 329). It is evident that the French power supply system is organized to fit demands of nuclear power plants and that it forces other energy sources to adapt to the system. “The nuclear sector is set to dominate the French ESI [electricity supply industry] in a way that is not the case in the leading wind power countries” (ibid.: 331). Wind power does not fit very well in the existing structure. Its integration is considered problematic because wind power usually substitutes load-following power plants that run on coal or gas67. As it would not make much sense, in a comprehensive view of the French energy system and in relation to climate issues, to substitute capacities of hydropower for wind power – hydropower being a renewable energy source, as well – and as the replacement of nuclear power by wind power seems out of question in the French context, the wind energy sector was not given much room to expand. (Szarka 2007b) Another fundamental, technological weakness of the French electricity supply system is its degree of saturation. The network’s absorption capacity of electricity generated by wind energy is very limited. In their report on the French wind energy sector, published in 2006, Gosset and Ranchin (2006) assumed it to be smaller than 7,000 MW (taking into account only those capacities situated in adequate regions for wind power generation). This is clearly not enough to connect the 10,000 MW of wind energy projects needed to meet 2010 climate targets (Szarka 2007b). Besides, those 7,000 MW, or less, are diminishing yearly and are not exclusively allocated to wind energy68 but also to other power generation plants. Particularly problematic for wind energy is the network’s regional saturation69 (Szarka 2007b, Gosset & Ranchin 2006, Enerzine.com c, RTE 2008a + 2009c). This is so because, first of all, wind energy generators cannot be erected everywhere on French terrain but only in regions with enough wind and in

Base load power plants generate electricity continuously and at maximum output. Peak load power plants operate only during certain times of peak demand. Load-following power plants are a kind of power plant situated in between the other two. Its time of operation depends on several factors, but mainly on their efficiency of electricity production at a certain time. 68 Unlike in Germany, wind energy projects in France do not have priority access to the power supply system (Nadai 2007). 69 There are regions in France that have very weak power supply networks, irrespective of the recent wind power development.

67

106

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 regions that are not protected or used otherwise (for example nature protection or military areas). It is also problematic that wind parks have been built predominantly in regions with low power consumption (far from populated areas and on wind-disposed sites). Until 2007, wind parks were rarely bigger than 12 MW (see chapter 4.1) but with increasing size and capacity (as the 12-MW-limitation does not exist anymore) the situation will still be aggravated. To better anticipate the situation and to make it manageable, ZDEs have been implemented but the impeding bottleneck can only be overcome by grid reinforcements. Reinforcements or extensions of the transmission network go at the expense of the grid operator RTE and require about seven or eight years. With such long delays, grid operators have to think far ahead, the RTE refused to spend money on the extension of its grid for a long time, though70 (Gosset & Ranchin 2006, Szarka 2007b). This strategy complicated the procedure for obtaining a grid connection immensely. The procedure is very strict, complex, and tedious and can take several years (due to lacking capacities). The delay for the extension of the transmission network by far exceeds the time needed to build a wind park though and is also longer than the validity period of several of the authorizations needed for the construction. Thus, park developers usually have to abandon their project when the waiting time for a grid connection is too long. If, on the other hand, a planning permit for a project has not been obtained within four months after the application for a grid connection, developers lose their place in the queue and start again (Szarka 2007b). This incompatibility of delays is one of the obstacles for the expansion of the wind energy sector. “On an industrial level, it is this incompatibility that blocks, nowadays, the deployment of this branch in France that is on the whole ready to takeoff [...] The question on the integration of renewable energies and in particular wind energy into the grid is therefor a central question in regards to the development of this branch in France.” (Gosset & Ranchin 2006: 47)71 To better integrate electricity generated by wind energy into the grid not only the French power supply system should be extended and upgraded but also international transmission lines.

The situation improved from 2007 on, when the RTE changed its investment strategy and increased expenses significantly: from a relatively low level of 500 - 600 EUR during several years to 792 EUR in 2007, 840 EUR in 2008, and 1030 EUR in 2009, and from 100km of new or renewed lines in 2006 to 785km in 2008 (RTE 2008b + 2009b). 71 translation by the author

70

107

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Thus, balancing power for the integration of wind power and other intermittent energy sources will decrease. Wind energy is an intermittent energy resource, that is to say, wind does not blow all the time and it does not do so on demand (see above). Calms and lulls in the wind stream have to be balanced by energy produced in other power plants. The problem of its integration into the grid is solved much easier though than generally suggested by wind energy opponents. Fluctuation in power output is not a problem specific to wind energy (even traditional power plants can fail unexpectedly) and just because an energy source is intermittent, it is not automatically unpredictable. Solar energy, for example, is highly predictable and also wind can be forecasted very reliably. In a time frame of 48h to 72h, wind speeds can be predicted with an average deviation of only 7%, that is to say, balancing energy has to be kept ready merely for those 7%, the not predictable part of the wind energy that will be fed into the grid (BWE A-Z). In the years to come, the amount of balancing power will still decrease due to further development of forecasting methods. (Gosset & Ranchin 2006, BWE A-Z + Mythen, Environnement-Magazine.fr) So, instead of endangering the grid stability, wind energy contributes today to the compensation of differences in demand and supply (RTE 2009a: 69) even though the available capacities do not always match consumer demands. To further improve the stability of the power supply network it is important to establish a mix of different energy sources that can compensate their respective weaknesses. Balancing power does not need to come solely from traditional energy plants; renewable energy sources can balances each other just as well (BWE Mythen). Another possibility to minimize the need for additional balancing power, and to reinforce stability, is to integrate different national grids. A European power supply network with numerous interconnections between the different countries would have a much higher performance in distributing unused electricity to where it is needed, reducing the need for balancing power and storage capacities72 to a minimum. (Gosset & Ranchin 2006, RTE 2009a) In summary: special structural characteristics in the French industry and politics gave hard limits for the development of wind energy with only minor weaknesses that could have been

Storage mechanisms do exist, they are however not able to store large quantities of energy and above all not for a long time because storage of electricity usually leads to a significant losses of energy (see chapter 4.1).

72

108

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 exploited by the newly emerging sector. Tensions, mismatches, and deliberately created openings in the established system, like the (incomplete) liberalization of the European electricity and gas markets, the rising demand for electricity and a small energy gap, led only to a small expansion of the wind energy niche in France.

French policy design and governmental support
As weaknesses in the French energy supply system did not contribute to a large extent to the deployment of the wind energy niche, let us take a closer look at the development and the influence of the French policy design on wind energy and on the governmental support of the newly emerging sector. “Expansion in capacity is causally linked to policy design: in general, the more supportive the policy, the bigger the expansion, and the more predictable and continuous the scheme is, the stronger the rate of expansion.” (Szarka 2007b: 322) The first supporting program for wind energy, a tender scheme named EOLE-2005, turned out to be a poor choice. The program was implemented by the government in 1996 to meet obligations it had incurred in the context of the Kyoto protocol and the EU-White Paper of 1997. “According to the recent commitments taken during the Tokyo and Buenos Aires conferences regarding the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the European Commission has suggested to the member states in its White Paper on Energy Policy to increase the share of renewable energies in the gross national energy consumption of the [European] Union from 6 to 12%, from now on until 2010. In that context, France [...] wished to promote and develop the recourse of power production by wind energy.” (Ineris.fr)73 The program was, however, aborted five years before its completion because of its ineffectiveness. Major problems were: a ‘stop and go’ process in the calls for tender, a complex administrative procedure, intransparent application conditions, a strong competitive aspect that caused financing problems because of cost understatements, limited attention to other, mainly social and environmental aspects, and unequal distribution of risks due to high rejection rates, meaning that only large companies could get involved. Some of those problems could have been anticipated given what was known from the poor performance of the ‘Non-Fossil Fuel Obligation’ in the UK, which was based on the same principle. The success of feed-in tariffs in other

73

translation by the author

109

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 countries made it additionally clear that the EOLE-2005 program was a comparatively bad choice to promote wind energy development in France. (Nadai 2007, Szarka 2007b, Chabot 2001) A change in the composition of the National Assembly laid the foundation for a new legal framework. As a result of snap elections in 1997, the constellation of actors in the energy sector became penetrable and opened up to let in pro-wind actors. In coalition with Socialistes and Communists, the French Greens were brought into the government for the first time and achieved, in the position of minister of the environment, the implementation of guaranteed feed-in tariffs for wind energy in the 2000 Electricity Act. This comprehensive law was the national implementation of the 2001 EU-directive on ‘the promotion of electricity produced from renewable energy sources in the internal electricity market’ initiated by changes on the landscape level, namely the diffusion of a new environmental orientation in international and European climate and energy policy. It was not until then that the French government was willing to introduce fixed development targets for renewable energy sources and to provide the industry, by and by, with appropriate instruments to realize them. Over the years, the legal framework concerning wind energy became more and more comprehensive and explicit. One of the first measures was the implementation of feed-in tariffs. Due to remarkable results in other countries, the feed-in support mechanism was expected to cause a significant expansion in installed wind power. “French policy makers have sought to learn from renewables policy making elsewhere – notably Germany – and adapt the lessons to a different national context, using a policy instrument reputed for its effectiveness in the expansion of capacity, namely the feed-in tariff.” (Szarka 2007b: 322) Monetary incentives were indeed a very important factor in the emergence of a wind energy sector and for its expansion but they were not sufficient to trigger a “real” takeoff74. Their main achievement was the increasing profitability of wind energy projects. (Nadai 2007, Szarka 2007b, Chabot 2001, Fröding 2006) Although said to be basically fair, they were particularly criticized for being still too low and decreasing too rapidly though (Szarka 2007b), thus again affecting the projects’ rentability. Moreover, the tariffs did not give any planning security to

In Germany, an important factor for the breakthrough of the niche-technology was the fact that during a limited period of time two different financial support mechanisms could be combined and accessed at the same time, making wind energy more profitable than before (Schön et al 2008: 38).

74

110

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 park developers because once an installed capacity of 1,500 MW would have been reached in France an overall reduction of the tariffs of 10% would have come into effect. A further obstructive element for the French wind energy development was the 12-MW-limitation of the tariffs that impeded economies of scale, raised transaction costs, and increased complexity in application procedures. (EWEA 2005, Gosset & Ranchin 2006) So, while being definitively a step in the right direction, the tariffs were still in need of improvement and adjustment. When the capacity for potential wind energy projects rose first after the implementation of the tariffs in 2001, it became clear that monetary incentives had to be completed with control mechanisms. Fear of uncontrolled growth triggered local opposition and it became necessary to introduce planning tools to counter this development and to give security to the concerned population and to park developers. (Nadai 2007, Jobert et al. 2007) First regulations on landscape issues and spatial planning have been introduced with the Urbanism and Habitat Act and the Electricity and Gas Act of 2003. Among them were regional schemes for wind power, which were however still voluntary at the time. The 2005 Energy Act further improved the regulation on wind energy. One of the measures to promote wind energy was the basic increase of the level in support in the tariff system and its adjustment to inflation. The new tariffs will be effective until at least 2012 (MEEDDAT d) and give higher planning reliability to project developers and higher profitability to wind park operators because the 1,500-MW-regulation had been abolished. At the same time, the 12-MWlimit had been abolished, too. This measure permitted big wind farms and large-scale industrial projects to profit from the power purchase obligation and to become profitable in France, as well75 (Fröding 2006, Nadai 2007). Thus, the ‘dual regime’ of tariffs and calls for tender was finally abandoned. New decisive conditions that had to be met in order to benefit from the power purchase obligation were defined by the newly introduced ZDE regulation. In order to be
It remains to be seen whether this development was beneficial for the French wind energy sector because it stimulated the growth of the size of wind parks (to be observed most notably in the offshore sector), which further encouraged a general corporate concentration in the European Energy Sector as well as an internationalization of companies that were previously nationally based (see chapter 4.3). The development towards ever-bigger parks impedes the participation of small- and medium-sized organizations and companies in the development because of difficulties to find investors and because of increasing costs for research and development activities. It thus limits the entry to the market and raises the question whether the future development of wind energy will be more about money and profit than about the environment and climate issues.
75

111

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 entitled, a new wind park had to be situated inside such a ‘wind power development zone’. The problem with this energy policy instrument was that it was perceived, in practice, as part of local planning law although it had nothing to do with obtaining a building permission or the like. This kind of usage demonstrated the need for a “real” and mandatory planning instrument; the concept of new regional wind power schemes has however not been introduced before the end of 2009. Those are additionally defined through concerns of the neighborhood, security issues, farming interests and aspects of health protection. New planning instruments for offshore installation are currently elaborated as well. New regulations did not only specify application and planning procedures and give more legal security, the alteration process in the legal framework also made it possible for the French population to participate more actively in the development. A first measure had been introduced in 2003, when public inquiries among the residents became compulsory for wind power installations with a capacity of 2.5 MW or more. In 2005 the communication with and participation of residents and local associations was further improved when those groups were to be included in the process of developing ZDEs in order to intensify understanding. It was also the new ZDE regulation that gave more autonomy in the area of energy policy to local authorities (that are also in charge of land allocation, urban development, landscape planning, and preservation of historical monuments) for the initiative for devising such zones was given to them. Central government still controls the process though because it is the Prefect of the concerned department that eventually assigns the permission for a ZDE, or not (Nadai 2007). The new and demanding regional wind power schemes will have to be established in compliance with the ZDEs (it will become impossible to create a ZDE outside such a regional scheme). This will probably lead to a better integration of ZDEs at the regional level for neighborhood issues, security issues, farming interests, and aspects of health protection will have to be considers as well. The environment minister Jean-Louis Borloo also requested to develop the schemes in cooperation with all relevant local parties concerned: communities, representatives of the local economy, associations, and residents. These developments made it possible for them to become more involved in the development of wind energy in France.76
The trend to increasingly integrate non-governmental associations, non-profit associations, and the general public into political decision making processes was also reflected in the Grenelle of Environment. Until then,
76

112

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 All those regulations contributed to the constant improvement of the rentability of wind projects in France, to a refinement of planning conditions, to an enhancement of legal security for park developers, operators, and other interest groups like the French population, and to the integration of new actors into the ‘wind-constellation’. Sometimes, the application and planning procedures are made very complex and cumbersome though. (Gosset & Ranchin 2006, ADEME colloque 2006). The multitude of applications and preliminary studies, the consultation of a plurality of agencies, the lack of coordination between authorities, and partly also their ignorance of certain operations and procedures, make the obtaining of a building permit and other associated authorizations a very tedious undertaking (Brand 2004, Gosset & Ranchin 2006, Szarka 2007b). Application procedures for wind power projects in France are said to be the most rigid and severe in the world (SER/FEE press release 2008a). An examination of administrative procedures for renewable energy projects in France in the context of the implementation of the EU-directive 2001/77/CE showed however that there were no specific obstacles for wind energy from public authorities (Gosset & Ranchin 2006: 36). The abolition of the 12-MW-limit in 2005 brought a simplification of procedures, as applications did not need to be requested for several small projects anymore. Some relief also resulted from the reformed procedure for building licenses77 that was profoundly modified in October 2007 reducing the multitude of different forms of licenses there were to three applications and one single works declaration. The ZDE regulation complicated procedures again however. It is also possible that the new regional wind power schemes shall lead to a lengthening of the planning and establishing of new ZDEs for they will have to be established in compliance with each other. Besides, procedures will be “enriched” even further when the altered ICPE regulation will be applied on wind power installations, as will probably happen in 2011. Professionals of the wind energy sector fear that this will have an adverse effect on the development of wind power in France and that the prospering, but still fragile, sector will suffer a severe setback. (Actu-Environnement.fr u) Some even raise concerns about the lawfulness of the regulation with reference to the EU

this integration was quite unusual in France and it remains to be seen whether this newly found basis for cooperation between the government, the economy, and associations will be a permanent one. 77 This reform did not only concern wind energy projects, though.

113

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Directive 2009/28/EC, which demands a reduction of administrative barriers in the EU that could hamper the development of renewables78. (see above) Nevertheless, most of the discussed tools and regulations helped the wind energy niche to expand. In order to take a real effect, though, an additional condition had to be met: namely, genuine support from the established political regime. During early development, the government only half-heartedly supported wind energy (see also chapter 5.3) and the initial choice for a tender program to support wind energy revealed a “long lasting ambiguity of the French authorities as regards to the development of RES-E technologies” (Nadai 2007: 2717). This changed somewhat with the emergence of the Greens in Parliament, but after five years of “Green influence” the conservative party UMP was back in power in all the main French institutions and with it came amendments of several of the environmental initiatives taken by the former government (Dena 2006). None of the parties actually argued against the importance of climate protection and promotion of renewables, but the ‘nuclear option’ was definitely favored as a cheap, safe, and eco-friendly energy source to prevent climate change. Wind energy was apparently regarded as an auxiliary and temporary instruments to cope with increasing power consumption and to fulfill commitments resulting from the EU White Paper, the Kyoto protocol, and the 2001-EU-Directive79 (see above; Nadai 2007). The government was hence being accused of “not making a real effort to abolish the numerous obstacles preventing a real breakthrough of renewables in electricity generation, in particular wind” (Brand 2004: 13). Renewable supporters requested more practical support from the government instead of rhetorical promises and criticized that “Official rhetoric [was] simply not supported by action on the ground” (EWEA 2005: 24). The governmental focus on nuclear energy was also based on fear of a widening competence problem and a generational gap in the nuclear sector. In order to remain world leader in the domain of nuclear energy, France constantly had to enlarge and update the knowledge and skills needed to built and design nuclear plants.
Together with other unfavorable events (like the strengthening of the anti-movement; see below) this can lead to a phase called ‘development slump’, which can be just a temporal lean period but can also become very critical for the niche-technology and even threaten its existence. How fast obstacles can be overcome depends mainly on the constellation’s ability to rearrange and re-stabilize itself. (see chapter 3.2) 79 During the devising of this EU-Directive in 2000 France held the presidency of the EU Commission, thus being able to influence targets and the choice of instruments to achieve them. (Nadai 2007, Brand 2004)
78

114

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 The situation began to change somewhat in the year 2007 when Nicolas Sarkozy became President. Although continuing to heavily promote nuclear energy Sarkozy publicly admitted that it was a mistake to rely only upon nuclear power and announced that he wanted to make France a leader in all ‘clean technologies’ and not only in nuclear energy. This support manifested in several initiatives like the Grenelle, the reorganization of the Ministry of the Environment, or the promise to raise public research expenditures for renewables to the same level as for nuclear energy. In practice, this equal treatment has however not been realized. Besides, Sarkozy was quite unspecific when speaking about the equal treatment in public funding for nuclear energy and for renewables, … “«If he wants to spend the same amount of money for renewables as he is going to spend for the two new French EPRs [10 thousand millions, editor's note], we will have to hold on tight», states Areva amused.” (Liberation.fr a)80 … nor did he apparently explain his intentions to his ministers:
“On the 10th of June, on the TV-channel Canal+, Jean-Louis Borloo affirmed that the objective of parity had been widely exceeded: «today, we are far beyond a one-to-one allocation. The figures in the field of renewable energies have got nothing to do with those of nuclear energy. For nuclear energy, mere replacements are carried out, something comparatively marginal.» Two days later, on the TV-channel LCI, the undersecretary of state in charge of environmental issues Chantal Jouanno asserted exactly the contrary: «The President said, “As soon as we put one euro in nuclear energy we will also put one euro in renewable energies.” We are presently still very far from that.»” (Liberation.fr a)81

Chantal Jouanno eventually specified that the parity was to be reached on research investments and that today the ratio was two to one with a budget of 400 million EUR for research on nuclear issues and 200 million EUR on renewables. When verifying those numbers, Libération (a well-known French daily newspaper) discovered that in 2009, 440 million EUR were provided for research on nuclear energy. On the side of renewables public support was mainly taking place through the National Agency of Research (Agence nationale de la recherché, ‘ANR’) and the ADEME: the ANR annually obtains 70 - 80 million EUR and the ADEME a total of 450 million EUR every four years – but, these sums are not only dedicated to research on renewables but also on energy storage, energy efficiency, or fuel cells. So, parity is still far-off and even the amount of 200 million EUR for renewables is not reached, yet. (Liberation.fr a) Maybe, however,

80 81

translation by the author translation by the author

115

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 patience will provide the answers. In a press release by the Ministry of the Environment on June 3, 2009 concerning the direction of France’s energetic infrastructure originating from the Grenelle (MEEDDAT j), it was confirmed that an unprecedented effort will be undertaken in the domain of renewables by means of an additional one billion EUR research budget, and by the creation of a fund for renewables endowed with an annual budget of 100 million EUR. The potential of a positive image as a possible leader in renewable energy technologies, and the prestige and the economical advantages that would come with it, seemed to play an important role in the governmental decision to increase support for renewables in France. The question remains however: is there actually a rethinking process happening among politicians or did some of them merely discover that the ‘green’ subject is popular today and will way voters? Nicolas Sarkozy’s emerging interest in ecological matters is a prime example for this discussion. It cannot be denied that he really has managed to implement some important measures in the domain of climate and environment protection (see chapter 4.2 and 4.3) but many of his opponents still doubt that he has a genuine interest in ecology and that he will realize all his announcements. They bring up his preconceived and partisan attitude in nuclear matters, his desire to be the center of general attention instead of pleading a case for renewables (like at the Copenhagen Climate Conference 2009), inconsistently elaborated measures in environmental protection (like for example the French carbon tax82), or some rather pedantic regulations on wind energy (like the ICPE). It does not help that it is widely known that Nicolas Sarkozy did not show any interest in ecological topics during his political career until Nicolas Hulot – a journalist, writer, and lobbyist for environmental matters – showed up in the campaign for the 2007 presidential elections with rather flattering results in public-opinion polls. It was rumored that he would run for office, which he denied, but he could successfully direct the attention of the public, the media, and of politics to ecological topics and make a lot of the candidates sign an ‘Ecological Pact’ (Pacte-Ecologique.org), amongst them Nicolas Sarkozy.
82

The new French tax on consumption of fossil fuels (carbon tax) should have come into effect on January 1, 2010 but had been declared non-compliant with the principle of equality of the Human Rights Declaration and with the French 'Charte de l'Environnement' by the Constitutional Court. The Court further criticized numerous exceptions that had been negotiated with several industrial and agricultural sectors. Therefore, the tax had to be revised and should have been applied from July 2010 on. (Actu-Environnement.fr v + w) On March 23, 2009 however, Prime Minister Francois Fillon announced that the tax would be suspended ‘sine die’. (LeFigaro.fr c)

116

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 So, his sincerity is indeed debatable, but some say that it does not really matter if his motive is political calculation or personal conviction – what matters are results. At the third round table of the DGAP (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Auswärtige Politik e.V.) Laure Kälble, director of the French-German coordination body for wind energy, confirmed that there really are new tendencies relative to renewable energies in France. Those tendencies are still far away from being a “green revolution” but “a stronger focus on new energy forms, especially in the domain of Offshore-wind, can clearly be identified” (DGAP). (FranceSoir.fr, RFI.fr b, ParisMatch.com, Liberation.fr d) All in all, institutional learning83 and increasing political support for wind energy brought about a rearrangement of the regime as well as of the niche constellation and removed some of the obstacles discussed above that had prevented the French wind energy industry from becoming an important player in wind energy. It also led to the integration of the French government into the niche constellation.

Local acceptance and opposition of wind energy
From the hesitant and sometimes inconsistent behavior of the government concerning wind energy, one could conclude that this technology may be rather unpopular among its voters, too. The opposite is the case however. The acceptance of wind energy among actors of the regime that are not part of the government is much higher. Public opinion polls on wind energy persistently provide very positive results among the French population. The general perception of wind generators among residents is actually even better the closer one gets to the installations (Gosset & Ranchin 2006) and that even though the possibility to directly benefit of wind parks via public access to shares is not very prevalent in France84. The much-discussed NIMBY (‘Not In My Backyard’) syndrome can therefore be ruled out as a limiting factor for wind energy development (Jobert et al. 2007). Even with this favorable public opinion however, “social acceptance at the local level represents an important challenge for the developers of wind-

It is not always easy for governments to find the right way to support new technologies. The question of how such innovation processes can best be controlled and directed in the desired direction is not part of my study. To pursue the matter see e.g.: Dolata 2005, 2008b, Rip & Schot 2002, Kemp, Schot & Hoogma 1998 84 In this context, the influence of business taxes that are raised by the communities should be additionally studied.

83

117

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 energy parks” (ibid.: 2751)85. Several case studies of Arthur Jobert and his colleagues on local acceptance of wind energy (ibid.) showed that conflict resolution and networking at the local level should still be worked on. Decisive factors for a successful development of wind energy are: the former use and perception of the territory, the integration of the wind park into the local tourism concept and the local economy, the origins and local integration of the park developers, the creation of networks and of trust between the developers and the local population, information of the public and the quality of communication, public participation in the planning process, and ownership of the wind energy project or the rented territory (Jobert et al. 2007, Gosset & Ranchin 2006). Despite this fundamental acceptance of wind energy amongst the population, the anti-wind movement in France has become stronger and better organized in recent years. The protection and preservation of French heritage sites and its landscape is, one of the main concerns of this movement. Its new hero is the former president Valéry Giscard d’Estaing that is now presiding the strategic orientation committee of the FED. In their study on ‘Wind power planning in France (Aveyron)’, Alain Nadai and Oliver Labussière (2009) observed however that, on a regular basis, local opposition only occurred “in some tourist and secondary residence areas or in places where landscape is particularly valued (e.g., Provence Alpes Côtes d’Azur, Basse Normandie, Rhône Alpes)” (Nadai & Labussière 2009: 4). The engineer Jean-Louis Gaby, whose business in the renewables sector has been accredited by the ADEME, also observed a seasonal aspect in this opposition to wind energy: “Those weekend-vacationists that wish to benefit fully from their country house don’t want their landscape destroyed by the setting up of wind power stations, they however do not care about their way of living and the harm they inflict upon the environment throughout the whole year.”86 (SOLAIRE2000)87

This is even more the case, as the French policy framework makes developers much more dependent on local acceptance than for example the German policy framework does. “The major difference is that local authorities in Germany can be forced to accept wind turbines on their territory (§ 35 of the building code)” (Jobert et al. 2007: 2753). In France, with the creation of new regional wind energy schemes, the situation is probably about to change as well. 86 Seen thusly, the visibility problem of wind power stations becomes a “luxury problem” that is subordinate to other more pressing climate and environment problems. 87 translation by the author

85

118

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 as did Soazig Quemener in the article ‘Wind power stations: Why so much hatred’88 in the web newspaper ‘Le Journal du Dimanche’: “The supporters of wind energy stations see it as seasonal phenomenon. An estival 'wind of hatred' that arises once a year at the arrival of the summer visitors in their vacation homes.” (LeJDD.fr)89 Alain Nadai and Oliver Labussière (2009) further discovered that the hesitant development of wind energy in France is not notably caused by anti-wind movements, but is partly a result of “a diffuse pattern of administrative landscape protection” (ibid.: 2). Due to their far-reaching visual impact, industrial wind generators are seldom compatible with currently established representation of landscape in Europe. However, “if new energy landscapes are to become “sustainable”, new landscape representations have to emerge with the development of these [sustainable] energies” (ibid.: 22). Such a change in the perception of appropriate and aesthetical landscape representation, that has to be assigned to the landscape level of deep structural trends or shifts, seems to be a generational issue for children generally like the sight of wind generators (ADEME colloque 2006). – And besides, are there not other man-made structures, such as cathedrals and even the Eiffel Tower, that have initially been perceived as unappealing? (ADEME colloque 2006, Energie.LesVerts.fr)

5.5 Summary
Enabling and constraining factors for niche expansion can be of natural, technological, economical, political, and social quality. To explain the development of a niche it is important to look at mechanisms on all levels, the niche, the regime, and the landscape. Due to a variety of reasons, the wind energy niche in France was not able – or only to a small extent – to utilize niche-intern mechanisms. One of the reasons was the unavailability of important story lines, which strongly hampered the recruitment of supporters for the niche. The lack of committed supporters increased through the fact that it was difficult and very uncommon in France for individuals to get involved in the development, that the French government was rather uninterested in wind energy, and that the anti-nuclear movement had been suppressed very early in France. So at first, the French wind energy industry was very small and
88 89

translation by the author translation by the author

119

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 specialized, was insufficiently networked, was missing experience and knowledge on the subject, and was thus highly reliant on imported know-how, technology and work force. Insufficient funds and an inadequate legal framework did nothing to improve the situation either. The reliance on imported technology and know-how had one major advantage, though: when France joined the wind energy development, technological formation had already passed through a standardization process so that technological issues did not excessively restrain the sector’s deployment anymore. So, as niche-mechanisms were very weak, developments and conditions at the regime and the landscape level became all the more important. The gradual emergence of a public environmental awareness in the 1960s and 70s and international events that resulted from that shift, like the Kyoto Protocol, had only a limited impact on the development of wind energy in France, as did have recurrent price increases and bottlenecks in the global oil supply. The main reason for it is the fact that the climate and the security of supply argument have always been less predominant in the discussion on the French electricity mix because the French government had decided in the 1970s to secure their energy independence with nuclear energy whose production generates far less greenhouse gases than coal or oil. Thus, developments at the landscape level have surely brought forward the general awareness for “clean” energies but did not promote the French wind energy sector in particular. In order to explain the development of the French wind energy niche, the regime level is essential because several lock-ins and solidified paths in the established energy sector – like the centralized French government, a very strong nuclear lobby, the quasi monopoly of EDF and a just partly liberalized electricity market, a very large fleet of mostly amortized nuclear power plants, and the high inflexibility of the French grid due its predisposition towards a nuclear base-load – strongly constrained the niche’s expansion. These established structures are surely not flawless, but weaknesses and tensions in the system could not be capitalized by the wind energy niche, for it could neither solve the problem of structural over-capacity of electricity production nor could it supply peak load power to minimize the grid’s inflexibility. The insufficient upgrading and regional saturation of the grid was, and still is, another bottleneck for wind energy development in France. Only the small (but all the same existing) energy gap in the French energy supply, which originated from a constant increase in demand, seems to have
120

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 positively influenced the niche’s expansion. So, as actors of the wind energy niche could not alter the established regime through exploiting the weaknesses in its structure, the niche’s expansion depended largely on the goodwill of actors of the dominant regime. Some of them intentionally and willingly created an institutional and legal framework, helping the niche to develop, and thus becoming themselves a part of the wind energy constellation. The institutional learning process – from the implementation of monetary incentives, over the elaboration of planning tools and landscape regulations, and the inclusion of the public into decision making, to the creation of responsible authorities – contributed to: a constant improvement of the rentability of wind projects in France, a refinement of planning conditions, an enhancement of legal security, and to the integration of new actors into the wind energy constellation, but it also made application and planning procedures very complex and cumbersome. In order to take a real effect though, increasing support from the established political regime was very important, which had been quite indifferent to wind energy development for a long time. This situation has changed quite recently; it has to be seen whether the promised governmental support will be maintained. A last important factor of the regime level is that of local acceptance. Although landscape protection is a much discussed issue among the opponents of wind energy, public opinion polls on wind energy persistently provide very positive results among the French population. The general perception of wind generators among residents actually improves with physical proximity to the installations. Nevertheless, the hesitant development of wind energy in France is apparently caused to some extent by the result of certain patterns in administrative landscape protection. This summary makes it clear that although conditions in France for the development of wind energy clearly improved, the niche has been given a very hard time and its expansion still is constricted. So, the question where the development will lead in future remains. In chapter 6 I will now discuss the question of what effect wind energy development has had until now on the established French energy system and to what extent both sectors have been transformed and adapted; and I will then try to find an answer to the question whether a regime shift is actually possible in the French context.

121

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010

6 Transformation of the French Energy System
For a long time, modern energy systems like the one of Germany or France have been characterized by a heavy use of carbon-rich fossil fuels, a “centralised generation and distribution of electricity within an interlocking technical system” (Mautz 2007) and a demand-oriented design (Rohracher 2007: 134). In the light of impeding environmental risks like the climate change process, many supporters of renewable energies demand a restructuring regarding energy issues and a rebuilding of the energy sector (see also chapter 1). Early advocates of wind energy in Germany were mainly driven by the idea of a radical paradigm shift that was defined by three principles: a decentralization of energy production, an extension and pluralization of relevant actors in the energy sector, and environment and climate protection as the guiding theme in energy policy. The emergence and expansion of protected niches for renewables was and is – next to more developed solutions for energy storage and an improvement of energy efficiency – very important for the realization of this potential energetic revolution. (Ohlhorst 2008, Mautz 2007) The development of the wind energy niche in France however does not seem to be driven to the same extent by the above-mentioned principles and is seeking peaceful co-existence with, rather than challenging the nuclear regime. As it is clear that a nuclear phase-out is currently still unthinkable in France, due to the fact that all political parties, except for the Greens, are in favor of a strong nuclear sector, a turnover of the strongly locked-in French energy system would be extremely ambitious and chances of success would be very unlikely. “Thus, the French wind industry sees itself as complementary to nuclear, rather than as a replacement for it. It seeks peaceful coexistence, whereas greens militate for the elimination of nuclear.” (Szarka 2007b: 327) So, a radical transformation of the French energy sector is apparently not the ambition of the wind energy niche in France. As Raven showed in a study on biomass, niche-regime interactions need not always be about competition though (Raven 2006, Geels & Schot 2008). Niches can instead be incorporated into existing regimes and may thus transform the regime from within. I will now approach the question of what effect wind energy has had until now on the

122

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 established French energy system by drawing upon Dolata’s concept of technology driven sectoral change. I will further look into the question of how, and to what extent, the niche itself had to adapt to the existing regime to achieve a certain success. According to Dolata, new technologies can affect sectors in very different ways (see chapter 2.3.3). To identify and analyze technology-driven sectoral change, several factors have to be considered: where the technology originates from (endogenous vs. exogenous technologies), whether it has a low or a high transformative capacity, and how open and adaptable towards path-deviant development the sector and its actors are. The current transformation of the modern energy systems is based on “the system-internal development of new decentralized and flexible energy production technologies”90 like wind energy and on “the implementation of new system-external founded information and communication technologies” (Dolata 2008a: 10). Information and communication technologies open up new possibilities in the management of the grid and may increasingly include energy consumers in a comprehensive energy management but they do not necessarily require the energy system to change very much; they can be integrated and adapted without transforming the basic structure of the system. The diffusion of new decentralized and flexible energy production technologies, like wind energy, puts pressure on established energy systems to change. The decentralized electricity production and distribution of wind energy stations, their supply-oriented mode of production, and their intermittency are not compatible with existing structures in modern energy systems. Combined with the idea of a radical paradigm shift towards a sustainable energy system such potential system innovations can entail a radical transformation of the energy sector at large. The French wind energy niche began to develop rather late but managed to attain a respectable size today that cannot simply be ignored by the actors of the established energy system anymore. Even if the niche is not challenging the established energy system (see above), the wind generators and the electricity they produce still have to be integrated in the French energy system, somehow. This system is not very transformation-supportive: it has no strong dynamics of economic competition, mechanisms of transfer between academia and industry are very weak, focal actors are not horizontally structured and collaboratively embedded, and the sector’s institutions have been very stable and change resistant over a long time (see chapter
90

In other words: the core technology of the respective niche

123

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 4.2 and 4.3). The French energy system is in no case a well-balanced and unstrained constellation, though. Even without the feeding-in of new, renewable energy sources it has to cope with large surplus capacities of base-load electricity, a significant lack of peak load energy, and regionally underdeveloped power networks (see chapter 4.2). Dolata now claims that “The more a new technology affects the existing patterns of economic activity in a given sectoral system and the less it is able to be implemented, used, and efficiently exploited within its existing institutional framework, the greater the pressure is on the sector to undergo significant change” (Dolata 2008a: 13). So far, resistance from the dominant constellation in the French energy sector has however been very strong and successful despite of the high transformative capacity of wind energy, despite the limited openness and adaptability of the established system, and despite of its structural problems. So, from an empirical point of view, no support can be provided for this claim (cf. Meister & Ohlhorst 2008). One of the reasons for this successful resistance is the fact that the structural problems of the sector cannot be solved by wind energy and therefore, cannot be exploited by it either. Other reasons are the strong political support for the nuclear regime, the “non-existence” of a real energy-gap, the occupancy of important story lines by the nuclear regime, and the unsuccessfully implemented liberalization of the electricity market in France91 (see chapter 5). Thus, only one of the three principles of the new paradigm (see above) can be found to some extent in France: the importance of environmental and climate issues in the French energy policy increased perceptibly. The centralized energy supply system and the quasi monopoly of EDF in the French electricity market have not been affected very much. The question is then: Can we actually speak of a transition process towards another regime in the French energy sector or, are new renewable energy production technologies, like wind energy, simply integrated in a system that did not basically change? To be able to break out of the niche and to eventually stabilize into a new and replace the old regime, wind energy development has to offer a strong expansion and a wide implementation of the technology. The French wind energy sector has grown markedly over the last few years. In order for this expansion to occur, the integration and adoptability of the niche-technology into
In the course of the liberalization process of the European electricity and gas markets, the structure of the French electricity market had been formally changed (see creation of RTE and CRE, and privatization of EDF). This did however lead neither to a “real” opening of the market for alternative providers nor to competitive market structures.
91

124

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 existing patterns was crucial: the better and more predictable the regulation of the electricity output of wind generators, the easier the feed-in into the grid (cf. Meister & Ohlhorst 2008; see also chapter 4.1). To achieve the needed integration, not only the niche-technology was adapted though, the existing energy supply system was modified as well – however changes were marginal (e.g. a modified load management and a general improvement of the grid). In addition, these technological developments were accompanied by an adaption of the niche’s institutional and socio-economic structures to the established regime, which was mainly encouraged by the general growth of the size of technical units and wind parks and their concentration into large parks. The upscaling process was justified by efficiency criteria and by the avoidance of urban sprawl and adverse effects on the countryside, the patrimony, and on residents through a concentration of negative impacts92. Basically leading to an increase in installed capacity in France, increasingly centralized and capitalized market and operator structures of the niche impeded the participation of small- and medium-sized organizations and companies, which have so far been the main forces in the German movement for a paradigm shift in the energy sector93. Actors of the dominant regime seem to “take over” more and more control of the wind energy development, most notably in the offshore sector, but also on-shore through buy-outs and acquisitions. These developments – transfer of “traditional” structures to the wind energy niche and a gradual adaptation of the potential system innovation ‘wind energy’, which could have been the basis for a new and sustainable energy system, to the established system – suggest that the chances for a regime shift in the near future are quite low. In the French context other circumstances, like the categorical ‘no’ to a nuclear phase-out and the scheduled expansion of the

Such a “high quality development” of wind energy was encouraged by the French government in official documents (see chapter 4.2; see also: ‘Circulaire relatif à la planification du developpement de l’energie eolienne terrestre du 26 février 2009’, ‚Note permettre un développement soutenu et maîtrisé de l'énergie éolienne par une amélioration de la planification territoriale, de la concertation et de l'encadrement réglementaire du 14 avril 2009’, and ‚Circulaire relatif à la planification du developpement de l’energie eolienne terrestre du 19 mai 2009’). 93 A structural revolution in energy production had been a central objective of many wind energy pioneers in Germany (Ohlhorst 2008). “The former clear-cut profile of the new socio-technical paradigm meanwhile has become more or less diffuse” though (Mautz 2007: 127). The German protagonists of renewable energies (just as protagonists in France) are confronted with new challenges, like the tendency towards ever increasing technical units and centralization. So, in the course of the transformation process of the German electricity sector, “the principles of the alternative paradigm have been modified significantly” (Mautz 2007: 128).

92

125

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 already oversized nuclear power production fleet, additionally complicate matters. So, how does the future of the French wind energy niche look like? Is a regime shift actually possible? Will the French wind energy niche continue to grow or will there perhaps never be a “real” breakthrough? And are the French wind energy targets for 2020 achievable or not? As the power consumption of the population and the industry cannot, and must not, increase without limit (which would give wind energy a small window of opportunity to further expand, however, without basically changing the French energy system), two scenarios as highly possible: either France will fulfill its obligations, produce more and more electricity (renewable and nonrenewable) without changing the basic structure of the energy sector, and will have to somehow find a way to cope with the energy surpluses – this will prove difficult because of the structural problems of the French grid mentioned above – or the development of renewables in France will abate and stagnate, thus leading to targets not being reached once again because the wind energy niche could not find a place to expand in the established energy system. For all the reasons given in this study, I predict that the probability of France reaching their targets is rather low and assume that, at the current state of affaires, the French development curve of installed wind energy capacity is capped at a certain point, which again limits the possibility of the niche to breakthrough. To truly cause a shift in the established French energy sector there probably have to occur more favorable events at the regime and the landscape level, like a rethinking on nuclear matters in French politics, a further shortage of fossil fuels, a genuine liberalization of the French electricity market, or a fundamental change in the aesthetical perception of wind generators in the population.

126

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010

References, Indexes, and Appendix
Index: Figures and Images
figure 1: Sectoral systems - analytical categories ...................................................................................... 14  figure 2: Multi-level-perspective on transitions ......................................................................................... 18  figure 3: Phases of the innovation process of wind energy in Germany ................................................ 30  figure 4: Annual and cumulated wind development in MW .................................................................... 33  figure 5: Installed wind power by country on December 31, 2008 ......................................................... 34  figure 6: Wind power development in France and Germany ................................................................... 37  figure 7: Schematic representations of nacelles, with and without gears ............................................. 41  figure 8: Diagram of the grid after the power outage ................................................................................ 45  figure 9: Development of the average potential of single wind power stations (on the left) and of whole wind parks (on the right) in MW ................................................................................. 53  figure 10: Butoni Wind Farm on the Fiji Islands (Vergnet) ....................................................................... 54  figure 11: French wind regimes .................................................................................................................... 91 

Index: Tables
table 1: Table view of the French wind energy development from 1996 to 2008 ................................ 35  table 2: Calculations on the share of renewable energy sources in the french gross electricity consumption............................................................................................................................................. 68  table 3: French wind farm database, March 2009 . .................................................................................. 153 

127

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010

List of Abbreviations94
kW – kilowatt MW – megawatt GW – gigawatt MWh – megawatt hour GWh – gigawatt hour TWh – terawatt hour ANT – Actor-network-theory CEO – Chief executive officer DNN – Distributeur non nationalisé (non-nationalized distributer) DOM-TOM – Départements et territoires d'outre-mer (overseas departments and territories) EPR – European pressurized water reactor ICPE – Installation classée pour la protection de l’environnement (classified installation for environmental protection) MLP – Multi-level perspective NFFO – Non fossil fuel obligation NIMBY – Not-in-my-backyard PPI – Programmation pluriannuelle des investissements (multi-annual roadmap on investments) RES-E – Electricity production from renewable energy sources TPP – Technological product and process innovation TT – Technological transition SCOT – Social construction of technology SNC – ‘Société en nom collectif' SNM – Strategic niche management WPS – Wind power station ZDE – Zone de développement de l’éolien (wind power development zones)

References
Arthur, W. Brian (1994): Increasing Returns and Path Dependence in the Economy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. van den Belt, Henk, and Arie Rip (1989): The Nelson-Winter-Dosi model and synthetic dye chemistry. 135-158, in: The Social construction of technological systems. Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press. Brand, Ruth (2004): Networks in renewable energy policies in Germany and France. Paper presented at the 2004 Berlin Conference on the Human Dimension of Global Environmental Change: Greening of Policies – Policy Integration and Interlinkages. Berlin, 3-4 Dec 2004.

94

List contains no proper names.

128

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Chabot, Bernard (2001): La nouvelle tarification de l'énergie éolienne : genèse, description et première analyse. Revue de l'énergie 528: 390-395. Paris: Editions techniques et économiques. Chabot, Bernard (2006): Le développement de l’énergie éolienne en France en 2005. DewiMagazin 29 August 2006: 49-55. Cochet, Yves (2000): Stratégie et moyens de développement de l'efficacité énergétique et des sources d'énergie renouvelables en France. Rapport Officiel. Paris: Ministère de l'Economie, des Finances et de l'Industrie. Réf. : 9782110047182.
David, Paul A. (1985): Clio and the Economics of QWERTY. American Economic Review, 75 (2): 332-337.

Dolata, Ulrich (2005): Soziotechnischer Wandel, Nachhaltigkeit und politische Gestaltungsfähigkeit. Artec-paper Nr.124 Sept. 2005, Uni Bremen, Forschungszentrum Nachhaltigkeit. Dolata, Ulrich, and Raymund Werle (2007): »Bringing technology back in«: Technik als Einflussfaktor sozioökonomischen und institutionellen Wandels. 15-43, in: Gesellschaft und die Macht der Technik. Sozioökonomischer und institutioneller Wandel durch Technisierung (58), Schriften aus dem Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung. Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag. Dolata, Ulrich (2007): Technik und sektoraler Wandel. Technologische Eingriffstiefe, sektorale Adaptionsfähigkeit und soziotechnische Transformationsmuster. MPIfG Discussion Paper 07/3, Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung Köln. Dolata, Ulrich (2008a): The Transformative Capacity of New Technologies. How Innovations Affect Sectoral Change: Conceptual Considerations. MPIfG Discussion Paper 08/2, Max-PlanckInstitut für Gesellschaftsforschung Köln. Dolata, Ulrich (2008b): Technologische Innovationen und sektoraler Wandel. Eingriffstiefe, Adaptionsfähigkeit, Transformationsmuster: Ein analytischer Ansatz. Zeitschrift für Soziologie 37 (1): 42-59. Stuttgart: Lucius & Lucius Verlag. Fröding, Véronique (2006): La France – Zone de développement de l'éolien?. Dewi-Magazin 29 August 2006: 57-65. Fröding, Véronique (2009): “Development Zones for Wind Energy (ZDE) in France”. DewiMagazin 34 February 2009: 66-74. Garud, Raghu, and Peter Karnoe (2003): Bricolage versus breakthrough: distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship. Research Policy 32: 277-300. Geels, Frank W (2002): Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study. Research Policy 31: 1257-1274.

129

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Geels, Frank W., and Johan W. Schot (2008): Strategic niche management and sustainable innovation journeys: theory, findings, research agenda, and policy. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 20 (5): 537-554. Gosset, Jérôme, and Thierry Ranchin (2006): Bilan et prospective de la filière éolienne française, Rapport final. Contrat ARMINES/ADEME n°50722, Centre Energétique et Procèdes, Ecole des Mines Paris. Hughes, Thomas P. (1989): The Evolution of Large Technological Systems. 51-82, in: The Social construction of technological systems. Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press. Jobert, Arthur, Pia Laborgne, and Solveig Mimler (2007): Local acceptance of wind energy: Factors of success identified in French and German case studies. Energy Policy 35: 2751-2760. Kemp, René, Johan Schot, and Remco Hoogma (1998): Regime shifts to sustainability through processes of niche formation: The approach of strategic niche management. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 10 (2): 175-195. Kitschelt, Herbert P. (1986): Political Opportunity Structures and Political Protest: AntiNuclear Movements in Four Democracies. British Journal of Political Science 16 (1): 57-85. Cambridge University Press. Latour, Bruno (1991): Nous n'avons jamais été moderns. Essai d'anthropologie symétrique. Paris: La Découverte. Mairesse, Chantal (2009): L'éolien : les citoyens s'en mêlent !. 26-27, in: PARISBERLIN n°39 Avril 2009. Martinez de Alegría, Iñigo, Jon Andreu, José Luis Martin, Pedro Ibañez, José Luis Villate, and Haritza Camblong (2007): Connection requirements for wind farms: A survey on technical requierements and regulation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 11: 1858-1872. Mautz, Rüdiger (2007): The Expansion of Renewable Energies in Germany between Niche Dynamics and System Integration – Opportunities and Restraints. Science, Technology & Innovation Studies 3 (2): 113-131. Meister, Martin, and Dörte Ohlhorst (2008): Different Levels of Technology Development and their Role for Sectoral Change. A Comparison of Four Case Studies from Renewable Energy. Draft Paper for Panel Session “Bringing Technology Back in” at EASST/4S Conference Rotterdam, August 20-23, 2008. Meyer, Uli, and Cornelius Schubert (2005): Die Konstitution technologischer Pfade. Überlegungen jenseits der Dichotomie von Pfadabhängigkeit und Pfadkreation. TUTS Working Paper 6-2005, Technical University Berlin, Technology Studies.
Molly, Jens-Peter (2009): Wind Energy – Quo Vadis?. Dewi-Magazin 34 Februrary 2009: 6-15.

130

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Müller-Brandeck-Bocquet, Gisela, and Patrick Moreau (2000): Frankreich, Eine politische Landeskunde. 2nd edition. Opladen: Leske und Budrich. Nadai, Alain (2007): “Planning”, “siting” and the local acceptance of wind power : Some lessons from the French case. Energy Policy 35: 2715-2726. Nadaï, Alain, and Olivier Labussière (2009): Wind power planning in France (Aveyron), from state regulation to local planning. Land Use Policy 26: 744-754. Ohlhorst, Dörte (2008): Die Entwicklung der Windenergie in Deutschland – Eine Konstellations- und Policy-Analyse. Doctoral Thesis, Free University Berlin, Department of Political Sciences. Pinch, Trevor J. and Bijker, Wiebe E. (1989): The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit of Each Other. 17-50, in: The Social construction of technological systems. Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press. Persem, Mélanie (2008): The Coordination Centre for Wind Energy. Dewi-Magazin 33 August 2008: 58-64. Rammert, Werner (2003): Technik in Aktion: Verteiltes Handeln in soziotechnischen Konstellationen. TUTS Working Paper 2-2003, Technical University Berlin, Technology Studies. Rammert, Werner (2008): Technik und Innovation. TUTS Working Paper 1-2008, Technical University Berlin, Technology Studies. Raven, Rob (2006): Towards alternative trajectories? Reconfigurations in the Dutch electricity regime. Research Policy 35: 581-595. Rip, Arie, and René Kemp (1998): Technological Change, in: Rayner, S., and E.L. Malone (eds): Human Choice and Climate Change. Volume 2. Columbus, Ohio: Battelle Press. 327-399. Rip, Arie, and Johan W. Schot (2002): Identifying Loci for Influencing the Dynamics of Technological Development. 155-172, in: Shaping Technology, Guiding Policy: Concepts, Spaces and Tools. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. Rohracher, Harald (2007): Die Wechselwirkung technischen und institutionellen Wandels in der Transformation von Energiesystemen. 133-152, in: Gesellschaft und die Macht der Technik. Sozioökonomischer und institutioneller Wandel durch Technisierung (58), Schriften aus dem Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung. Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag. Schneider, Mycle (2008): Nuclear Power in France. Beyond the Myth. Comissioned by the Greens-EFA Group in the European Parliament, Brussels. Schön, Susanne, Dörte Ohlhorst, Elke Bruns, and Johann Köppel (2008): Die Innovationsbiographie der Windenergie: Absichten und Wirkungen von Steuerungsimpulsen. Münster: Lit Verlag

131

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Schulz-Schaeffer, Ingo (2000): Sozialtheorie der Technik. Campus Verlag. Schulz-Schaeffer, Ingo (2008): Technik als Gegenstand der Soziologie. TUTS Working Paper 3-2008, Technical University Berlin, Technology Studies. Szarka, Joseph (2007a): Wind Power in Europe: Politics, Business and Society. Palgrave. Szarka, Joseph. (2007b): Why is there no wind rush in France?. European Environment 17: 321-333. van de Ven, Andrew, Douglas Polley, Raghu Garud, and Sankaran Venkataraman (2008): The Innovation Journey. Oxford University Press. Weyer, Johannes (2008): Techniksoziologie: Genese, Gestaltung und Steuerung soziotechnischer Systeme. Weinheim / München: Juventa Verlag.

Internet Sources
Actualites-News-Environnement.com: Nucléaire et énergies renouvelables, Sarkozy veut une France leader, par Pierre Melquiot, 10/06/2009, www.actualites-news-environnement.com/ 20779-nucleaire-energies-renouvelables-sarkozy-france-leader.html (Accessed on July 8, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr a: Jean-Louis Borloo devient le ministre de l'écologie du gouvernement Fillon 2, 19/06/2007, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/morizet_borloo_ecologie _environnement_ministre_gouvernement_2888.php4 (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr b: Alstom se lance dans l'énergie éolienne et acquiert Ecotècnia, 26/06/2007, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/alstom_eolien_acquisition_ecotecnia _2932.php4 (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr c: Areva se renforce dans l'éolien avec Multibrid, 17/09/2007, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/areva_eolien_allemand_multibrid_3422.php4 (Accessed on September 16, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr d: GDF réorganise ses filiales dédiées aux ENR, 26/02/2008, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/GDF_rachat_nass_wind_filiale_GDF_futures_ energies_4590.php4 (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr e: Remaniement ministériel : le MEDAD devient le MEEDDAT, 19/03/2008, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/remaniement_MEEDDAT_4736.php4 (Accessed on September 20, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr f: EDF EN va construire un nouveau parc éolien en Californie, 17/04/2008, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/EDF_EN_enXco_californie_eolien _4918.php4 (Accessed on July 8, 2009).

132

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Actu-Environnement.fr g: Eolien : Areva cède sa participation dans REpower, 06/06/2008, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/areva_repower_eolien_offshore_5209.php4 (Accessed on July 8, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr h: Energie : le groupe allemand E.ON acquiert 65% de la SNET, 26/06/2008, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/EON_acquisition_SNET_ENDESA _5359.php4 (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr i: La fusion de SUEZ et Gaz de France est approuvée, 16/07/2008, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/suez_gdf_fusion_environnement_5476.php4 (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr j: Vents contraires autour des éoliennes, 25/07/2008, www.actuenvironnement.com/ae/news/polemique_eolien_5523.php4 (Accessed on August 14, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr k: L'éolien à nouveau dans la tourmente avec l'annulation du décret fixant les tarifs de rachat, 20/08/2008, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/annulation _decret_fixant_tarif_achat_5554.php4 (Accessed on August 14, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr l: Projet de loi « Grenelle 2 » : tour d'horizon des mesures proposées, 12/11/2008, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/detail_projet_loi_grenelle2_6179.php4 (Accessed on August 14, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr m: Le nouvel arrêté fixant les conditions d'achat de l'électricité éolienne est paru, 15/12/2008, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/publication_arrete _tarif_eolien_6402.php4 (Accessed on August 14, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr n: Le projet de loi Grenelle 2 présenté le 7 janvier en Conseil des ministres, 05/01/2009, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/FNE_projet_loi_grenelle_2 _conseil_ministre_plan_relance_6468.php4, (Accessed on December 19, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr o: Lancement d'une concertation pour développer l'éolien offshore, 11/03/2009, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/concertation_eolien_6901.php4 (Accessed on July 8, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr p: Valoriser les pylônes électriques en y installant des éoliennes, 25/05/2009, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/projet_wind-it_elioth_7439.php4 (Accessed on August 15, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr q: Nicolas Sarkozy veut faire de la France un pays leader dans les énergies renouvelables, 10/06/2009, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/annonces _sarkozy_ines_enr_7561.php4 (Accessed on July 8, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr r: Dictionnaire Encyclopédique, Définition de Installations classées pour la protection de l'environnement (ICPE), www.actu-environnement.com/ae/dictionnair _environnement/definition/installations_classees_pour_la_protection_de_l_environnement_ic pe.php4 (Accessed on July 8, 2009).

133

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Actu-Environnement.fr s: ICPE : l'ordonnance prévoyant un troisième régime est présenté en Conseil des Ministres, 10/06/2009, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/icpe_ordonnance _conseil_jouanno_7566.php4 (Accessed on July 8, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr t: Valéry Giscard d'Estaing s'affiche contre le développement éolien, 13/06/2008, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/eolien_fed_ademe_emission_co2 _5261.php4 (Accessed on August 14, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr u: Le classement des éoliennes dans les ICPE sera-t-il le sujet d'un futur contentieux avec l'Europe ?, 30/06/2009, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/icpe _eolienne_grenelle_7777.php4 (Accessed on August 17, 2009). Actu-Environnement.fr v: Taxe carbone : la copie devra être révisée, 04/01/2010, www.actuenvironnement.com/ae/news/contribution_carbone_taxe_conseil_constitutionnel_9263.php4 (Accessed on January 6, 2010). Actu-Environnement.fr w: La nouvelle taxe carbone entrera en vigueur le 1er juillet 2010, 06/01/2010, www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/taxe_carbone_sarkozy_9285.php4 (Accessed on January 6, 2010). ADEME.fr: Agence de l'Environnement et de la Maîtrise de l'Energie, www.ademe.fr (Accessed on October 20, 2009). ADEME guide: Dans l’air du temps, l’énergie éolienne, www.ademe.fr/particuliers/fiches/pdf /eoliennes.pdf (Accessed on November 5, 2009). ADEME & Vous 2008: Maîtrise de l’énergie et développement des énergies renouvables, ADEME & Vous N°13, 07/2008, www2.ademe.fr/servlet/getBin?name=8F243FB0B92B5807D 18C96429578352A1216383221181.pdf (Accessed on August 18, 2009). ADEME colloque 2006: L'éolien : un atout pour les territoires – Synthèse, 5e colloque national éolien à Amiens, 16-18 Nov. 2006, www2.ademe.fr/servlet/getBin?name=9940E953 AACDABABC91C8E6EF25770D91192524993046.pdf (Accessed on March 22, 2010). ADEME lettre 1999: L’éolien français vole de ses propres ailes, Nord-Pas-de-Calais, La Lettre N°60, 09/1999, www.ademe.fr/htdocs/publications/lettre/60/60init.htm (Accessed on September 18, 2009). ADEME Moci 2008: PME à l’international, Les secrets des entreprises françaises qui gagnent à l’export, Cas n°7: Vergnet, Le MOCI N° 1825, 18/09/2008, www2.ademe.fr/servlet/getBin? name=6E531AA051E4E677A3088DFF3BB0B0291228816672521.pdf (Accessed on September 13, 2009). ADEME Sondage 2003: Sondage Perception de l'Energie Eolienne en France, ADEME/Synovate, 01/2003, www.ademe.fr/presse/Communiques/Documents/20-03RAP.pdf AND http://fee.asso.fr/content/download/505/2012/file/Communique_eolien_sondage_07.02.03.pdf (Accessed on September 16, 2009).

134

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 ADEME Sondage 2006: Les Français plébiscitent à nouveau l’éolien!, 16/11/2006,
www2.ademe.fr/servlet/getBin?name=8D929FA74F4F3022F51C1626FD3EE0351163772158772.pdf

(Accessed on September 16, 2009). Adeva-Villebeon.org: Association de Défense de l'Environnement de Villebéon et des Alentours. « Le sujet mérite un grand débat national », Interview avec Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, Article publié sur Liberation.fr, 13/06/2008, www.adeva-villebeon.org/eoliennes/medias /liberation080613.php (Accessed on August 15, 2009).
Aerowatt.com: Independent and integrated wind and solar energy producer, www.aerowatt.com (Accessed on October 20, 2009).

Afsset.fr: Agence française de sécurité sanitaire de l'environnement et du travail (un établissement public administratif de l’État placé sous la tutelle des ministres chargés de la santé, de l’écologie et du travail). Impacts sanitaires du bruit généré par les éoliennes, 03/2008, www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/energie/renou/bruit_eoliennes-afsset.pdf (Accessed on June 19, 2009). Agentur für Erneuerbare Energien: Wie funktioniert eine Windkraftanlage?, Technische Szizze, www.unendlich-viel-energie.de/de/windenergie/detailansicht/article/48/wiefunktioniert-eine-windkraftanlage.html (Accessed on March 3, 2010). AITEC: Association Internationale de Techniciens, Experts et Chercheurs (Groupe Service Public). Grands corps de l'Etat et démocratie, Dossiers de l'AITEC, débat au Forum Social Européen, 04/10/2000, www.globenet.org/aitec/chantiers/sp/resumsp/grandscorps.htm (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Alternatives-Economiques.fr a: Une rupture (très) attendue, de Guillaume Duval, Alternatives Economiques n° 262, 10/2007, www.alternatives-economiques.fr/une-rupture--tres— attendue_fr_art_475_31705.html (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Alternatives-Economiques.fr b: Energies renouvelables : l'alternative n'est pas toute verte, de Bernard Devin et Patrick Piro, Cet article est issu du dossier Gaz à effet de serre, pétrole cher : peut-on se passer du nucléaire? Alternatives Internationales n°33, 12/2006, www.alternatives-economiques.fr/energies-renouvelables---l-alternative-n-est-pas-toute-verte _fr_art_324_27624.html (Accessed on August 23, 2009). AmisDeLaTerre.org: Et les lauréats des Prix Pinocchio du développement durable 2008 sont…, par Gwenael Wasse, une campagne des Amis de la Terre, 17/12/2008, www.amisdelaterre.org/Et-les-laureats-des-Prix-Pinocchio.html (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Apple-Wind.fr: Apple-wind : l'avenir éolien, www.apple-wind.com (Accessed on October 20, 2009). ArchivesNationales.Culture.gouv.fr: Archives de France. Jeumont industrie, n° 1998004, www.archivesnationales.culture.gouv.fr/camt/fr/inventaires1998/1998004-2.html (Accessed on August 23, 2009).

135

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Archives.Premier-Ministre.gouv.fr: Histoire des chefs de gouvernement, La biographie de Jacques Chirac, dans La base de données des sites archivés des prédédents Gouvernements, 27/07/2004, www.archives.premier-ministre.gouv.fr/villepin/acteurs/premier_ministre /histoire_chefs_gouvernement_28/jacques_chirac_55/index.html (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Areva.com: Ouverture de la période d'offre publique sur les actions de REpower Systems AG, Communiqués, 05/02/2007, www.areva.com/servlet/news/pressroom/pressreleases/cp_repower _05_02_2007-c-PressRelease-cid-1170259269262-p-1028798801512-fr.html (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Arte.tv: Carte d’identité : Institut Montaigne (France), www.arte.tv/fr/Regards-croisesn_C2_B0-4/1239008,CmC=1238094.html (Accessed on August 14, 2009). Assemblee-Nationale.fr: Le Grenelle de l'environnement, Commission des affaires économiques, www.assemblee-nationale.fr/13/controle/com_affeco-grenelle_environnement.asp (Accessed on October 20, 2009). Blog Gossement: Lois Grenelle et Eoliennes…des points en suspens…, sur le blog de d'Arnaud Gossement (Avocat en droit de l'environnement et de l'énergie, Docteur en droit, Maître de conférences à Sciences Po Paris), 03/02/2010, www.arnaudgossement.com/archive /2010/02/03/lois-grenelle-et-eoliennes-des-points-en-suspens-nicolas-sma.html (Accessed on February 20, 2010). BMU 2008: Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit. Die Dritte Industrielle Revolution – Aufbruch in ein ökologisches Jahrhundert, BMU-Broschüre, 09/2008, http://klima-media.de/material/die-dritte-industrielle-revolution-aufbruch-in-ein-oekologischesjahrhundert-bmu-broschuere/ (Accessed on March 4, 2010). Bonnefille, R. (1974): Wind Power Projects of theFrench Electrical Authority (Translation of ‘Les réalisations d’Electricité de France concernant l’énergie éolienne. La Houille Blanche N°1 d’EDF). NASA Technical Translation (NASA-TT-F-16057). http://ia600509.us.archive.org/17 /items/nasa_techdoc_19750005312/19750005312.pdf BourseReflex.com: Ecologie : les discours et les actes de Sarkozy (4/4), 19/08/2009, www.boursereflex.com/actu/2009/08/19/Ecologie_les_discours_et_les_actes_de_Sarkozy_4_4 (Accessed on September 15, 2009). Bureau Lefebvre: Adoption par le Sénat du projet de loi « Grenelle II » : quelles conséquences pour les éoliennes ?, Paroles d’experts, Service en ligne du cabinet d'avocats CMS Bureau Francis Lefebvre, 11/12/2009, www.cms-bfl.com/Adoption-par-le-Senat-du-projet-de-loi-Grenelle-II---quelles-consequences-pour-les-eoliennes--12-11-2009 (Accessed on February 20, 2010). BWEA 2009: British Wind Energy Association. BWEA Small Wind System UK Market Report 2009, 04/2009, www.bwea.com/small/articles/bwea_small_wind_system_uk_mark.html (Accessed on November 5, 2009).
136

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 BWE A-Z: Bundesverband WindEnergie. Fakten zur Windenergie, 08/2005, www.windenergie.de/fileadmin/Shop/Broschueren/A-Z/BWE_A-Z_interaktiv.pdf (Accessed on August 17, 2009). BWE Mythen: Bundesverband WindEnergie. Mythen & Fakten der Windenergie, BWE-Flyer, www.wind-energie.de/fileadmin/dokumente/Kurzinfos/BWE-Flyer_Mythen%2BFakten_web.pdf (Accessed on August 18, 2009). BWE News 2008: Bundesverband WindEnergie. Militärische Radaranlage kein Hindernis für Windenergieanlage, News, 04/09/2008, www.wind-energie.de/de/aktuelles/article /militarische-radaranlage-kein-hindernis-fur-windenergieanlage/498/browser/1199142000 /31622399/1/category/7 (Accessed on August 20, 2009). BWE press release 2009: Bundesverband WindEnergie. Windindustrie trotzt Wirtschaftskrise, Pressemitteilung, 23/07/2009, www.wind-energie.de/de/aktuelles/article /windindustrie-trotzt-wirtschaftskrise/145 (Accessed on September 18, 2009). BWE Technik: Webseite des Bundesverband WindEnergie, Rubrik Technik, www.windenergie.de/de/technik/ (Accessed on September 1, 2009). BWE Vogelschutz 2005: Bundesverband WindEnergie. Vogelschutz und Windenergie – zwei ökologische Themen, die sich nicht widersprechen müssen, Hintergrundinformation, 05/2005, www.wind-energie.de/fileadmin/dokumente/Presse_Hintergrund/HG_Vogelschutz.pdf (Accessed on August 20, 2009). BWE Europe 2009: Bundesverband WindEnergie. EU-Richtlinie für erneuerbare Energien final verabschiedet, Thema Europa, 04/2009, www.wind-energie.de/de/themen/windkraftinternational/europa (Accessed on August 14, 2009). Bundesnetzagentur 2006: Bericht der Bundesnetzagentur zum Stromausfall vom 4. November 2006, www.bundesnetzagentur.de/media/archive/9347.pdf AND www.bundesnetzagentur.de/media/archive/9007.pdf (Accessed on September 13, 2009). Capital.fr: EDF Energies Nouvelles en hausse, L'actualité Bourse, 04/07/2008, www.capital.fr/bourse/actualites/edf-energies-nouvelles-en-hausse-324767 (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Caradisiac.com: Remaniement ministériel/Environnement : le nouveau MEEDDAT accueille 4 secrétaires d'État, 20/03/2008, http://ecologie.caradisiac.com/Remaniement-ministerielEnvironnement-le-nouveau-MEEDDAT-accueille-4-secretaires-d-Etat-680 (Accessed on September 20, 2009). CdV press release: La Compagnie du Vent en pleine ascension, 30/01/2006, http://lacompagnieduvent.free.fr/biocar/docs/dossier_presse_lcv_biocarburant_janvier_2006.p df (Accessed on September 2, 2009).

137

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 CEA.fr: Commissariat à l'Énergie Atomique, www.cea.fr (Accessed on October 20, 2009). Cler.org: Comité de Liaison Energies Renouvelables, www.cler.org (Accessed on October 20, 2009).
CNR.tm.fr: La Compagnie Nationale du Rhône, www.cnr.tm.fr/fr/categorie.aspx?idcategorie=61 (Accessed on October 20, 2009).

DDE Drôme: Direction Départementale de l'Equipement, Eoliennes et Urbanisme du Drôme. Eoliennes et Urbanisme, 15/09/2005, www.drome.equipement.gouv.fr/article.php3?id _article=153 (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Dena 2006: Deutsche Energie-Agentur / Exportinitiative Erneuerbare Energien. Länderprofil Frankreich (French Republic), 10/2006, www.exportinitiative.de (Accessed on August 20, 2009). DeveloppementDurable.com a: Eolien : pas de changements des tarifs de rachat par EDF, 16/12/2008, www.developpementdurable.com/politique/2008/12/A538/eolien-pas-dechangements-des-tarifs-de-rachat-par-edf.html (Accessed on August 14, 2009). DeveloppementDurable.com b: MEEDDM : de nouvelles attributions pour Jean-Louis Borloo, 27/07/2009, www.developpementdurable.com/politique/2009/07/A2482/meeddm-denouvelles-attributions-pour-jean-louis-borloo.html (Accessed on September 20, 2009). DeveloppementDurableLeJournal.com: Présidentielle : Ce qui attend Nicolas Sarkozy, 07/05/2007, www.developpementdurablelejournal.com/spip.php?article404 (Accessed on August 23, 2009). DGAP: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Auswärtige Politik. Environmental policy in France, roundtable in Berlin, 16/12/2009, http://en.dgap.org/dgap/events/archive/view /1def85d48555068f85d11dea7a88b44c1f3909b909b.html (Accessed on February 20, 2010). DGEMP a: Direction Général de l'Energie et des Matières Premières. Éole 2005 : le bilan, Extrait du rapport 2000 de la DGEMP, 22/05/2001, www.industrie.gouv.fr/energie/renou/textes /se_bilan_eole.htm (Accessed on June 19, 2009). DGEMP b: Direction Général de l'Energie et des Matières Premières. Une énergie nucléaire compétitive, 04/2004, www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/energie/nucleair/epr_2_8.htm (Accessed on August 20, 2009). DGEMP c: Direction Général de l'Energie et des Matières Premières. La production d'électricité en France et dans les régions – Statistiques de 2000 à 2003, 10/2005, http://eedd.scola.acparis.fr/res/prod-elec-00-03.pdf (Accessed on August 20, 2009). DGEMP d: Direction Général de l'Energie et des Matières Premières. Le suivi de l'implantation d'un réacteur EPR en France, 12/04/2007, www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/energie /nucleair/suivi-epr.htm (Accessed on August 20, 2009).

138

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Diplomatie.gouv.fr a: Ministère des affaires étrangères et européennes. Die französischen Institutionen, Eine dezentralisierte Republik in Europa, www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/de/frankreich _3/frankreich-entdecken_244/die-institutionen-und-das-politische-leben_250/einedezentralisierte-republik-in-europa_44.html (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Diplomatie.gouv.fr b: Ministère des affaires étrangères et européennes. Die Wirtschaft, Die großen Wirtschaftssektoren, www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/de/frankreich_3/frankreichentdecken_244/die-wirtschaft_256/die-groben-wirtschaftssektoren_84.html (Accessed on August 20, 2009). DRIRE Pays de la Loire: Directions Régionales de l'Industrie de la Recherche et de l'Environnement du Pays de la Loire. Dispositions relatives à la création des zones de développement de l’éolien (ZDE), Présentation diaporama, 17/08/2006, www.drire.gouv.fr/pays-de-laloire/energie/Eolien/DRIRE_PL_ENE_ZDE_17082006.pdf (Accessed on August 17, 2009). Droit-Finaces.net: Code de l'urbanisme, http://droitfinances.commentcamarche.net/legifrance/10-code-de-l-urbanisme; Code de l'Environnement, http://droit-finances.commentcamarche.net/legifrance/22-code-de-l-environnement (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Droit-Nature.free.fr: La Droit de la Protection de la Nature en France. Historique de l'élaboration du Code français de l'environnement, 11/2008, http://droitnature.free.fr/Shtml/Naissance DroitEnvFr.shtml (Accessed on August 19, 2009). Ecolo.fr: La politique énergétique du nouveau Président de la République, AEPN-INFOS, Lettre d'information de l'association des écologistes pour le nucléaire, 08/05/2007, www.ecolo.org/archives/archives-nuc-fr/2007-05-08-Nouveau-Presiden.htm (Accessed on August 23, 2009). EcoSources.info: Eolienne à axe vertical de type Darrieus, www.ecosources.info/dossiers /Eolienne_verticale_Darrieus (Accessed on August 15, 2009). EDF press release: Les énergies marines : une nouvelle source d’énergie renouvelable pour une production d’électricité sûre et sans CO2, 16/10/2008, http://presse.edf.com/fichiers /fckeditor/File/press/cp_2008/dp_20081017.pdf (Accessed on August 17, 2009). EDF projects: La production d'électricité d'EDF – L'éolien – Projets et réalisations, 31/12/2008, http://energies.edf.com/edf-fr-accueil/la-production-d-electriciteedf/eolien/projets-et-realisations-120149.html (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Energie-Cités.org: Case study on Wind Energy at Dunkerque, France, by the association of European local authorities promoting local sustainable energy policies and the city Dunkerque, 1999, www.energie-cites.org/db/dunkerque_120_de.pdf (Accessed on September 2, 2009). Energie2007.fr: Vers des schémas régionaux éoliens, 01/04/2009, www.energie2007.fr /actualites/fiche/1642/eolien_schemas_regionaux_circulaire_meeddat.html (Accessed on August 20, 2009).
139

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Energie.LesVerts.fr: Commission Energie des Verts, Confédération écologiste – Parti écologiste. Gustave Eiffel et Zéphirin Phébus, même combat, par Zéphirin Phébus (avec l’aide de Paul Gipe et du Monde), 08/04/2004, http://energie.lesverts.fr/article.php3?id_article=119 (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Enerzine.com a: Les fiches E.nergiepedia – Les Organismes, www.enerzine.com/energipedia /les_organismes/rubrique (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Enerzine.com b: EWEA: Le secteur éolien sortira le 1er de la crise, 18/03/2009, www.enerzine.com/3/7208+ewea---le-secteur-eolien-sortira-le-1er-de-la-crise+.html (Accessed on September 18, 2009). Enerzine.com c: Fragilité du réseau : la Région PACA sous surveillance, 06/02/2008, www.enerzine.com/15/4080+Fragilite-du-reseau-la-Region-PACA-sous-surveillance+.html (Accessed on March 2, 2010). Enertrag.com: Geschäftskontakt – Systemtechnik – Komponenten für sichere Energie, www.enertrag.com/de/systemtechnik.html (Accessed on September 8, 2009). ENR.fr: Syndicat des Energies Renouvelables, www.enr.fr (Accessed on October 20, 2009). Enviro2b.com a: Eolien : Valorem et AAER créent une coentreprise, 29/02/2008, www.enviro2b.com/2008/02/29/eolien-valorem-et-aaer-creent-une-coentreprise (Accessed on September 16, 2009). Enviro2b.com b: Energie éolienne : les tarifs d’achat publiés au JO, 17/12/2008, www.enviro2b.com/2008/12/17/energie-eolienne-les-tarifs-dachat-publies-au-jo/ (Accessed on September 16, 2009). Envirolex.fr: Adoption d'un 3ème régime pour les ICPE, 16/06/2009, www.envirolex.fr /presse/environnement/actualites/1471/installations-classees/adoption-d-un-3eme-regimepour-les-icpe (Accessed on August 19, 2009). Environnement.CCIP.fr: Chambre de commerce et d'industrie de Paris. Définition et identité des producteurs d'énergie, 10/12/2009, www.environnement.ccip.fr/Thematique/Energie /Marche-de-l-energie-comment-ca-marche/Producteurs/Definition-et-identite-des-producteurs-denergie (Accessed on December 20, 2009). Environnement-Magazine.fr: 'L'éolien s'intègre sans tension' (36f) & 'Prédire la production' (43), in: Environnement-Magazine : Energie & environnement, Hors-Série N°9 – 05/2009, http://archives.environnement-magazine.fr/store/window/product_details?idP=488&idSW=2 (Accessed on October 20, 2009). Eolinfo.com: website of the association KIPROKO (belonging to Vent de Colère and FED), LISTE PARCS ÉOLIENS EXISTANT ET FUTURS 1993-2010, http://eolinfo.com/franceparcs eoliens.xls (Accessed on April 6, 2009).

140

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 EPSU.org: Corporate concentration in the EU energy sector, by Professor Steve Thomas, Report commissioned by the European Federation of Public Service Unions, 02/2007, www.epsu.org/IMG/pdf/Corporate_concentration_in_the_EU_energy_sector_2.pdf (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Espace-ENR.com: Les nouveaux schémas régionaux d'énergies pour l'éolien sur les rails..., 08/04/2009, http://news.espace-enr.com/2009/04/que-dit-la-circulaire-de-jl-borloo-auxpr%C3%A9fets-sur-l%C3%A9olien-.html (Accessed on August 20, 2009). EU Paper 2006: Hintergundinformationen, Für Eine Europäische Energiepolitik, Parlamentarisches Treffen: Die Zukunft Europas – von der Reflexion zur Aktion, 4-5 Dec. 2006, Brussels, www.futureofeurope.europarl.europa.eu/future/webdav/site/event2/shared/import/Home/Bac kgroundNote2/EnergieDE.pdf (Accessed on September 15, 2009). EU Paper 2009: Commission publishes its 2009 progress report on renewable energy, IP/09/639, Brussels, 24/04/2009, http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP /09/639&format=PDF&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en (Accessed on August 17, 2009). EU White Paper KOM97: Energie für die Zukunft: Erneuerbare Energieträger, Weißbuch für eine Gemeinschaftsstrategie und Aktionsplan, Mitteilung der Kommission, 1997, http://europa.eu /documents/comm/white_papers/pdf/com97_599_de.pdf (Accessed on August 27, 2009). EUR-Lex, Access to European Union law. All European Directives are accessible via this website in the respective Official Journals of the European Communities, http://eurlex.europa.eu (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Euractiv.fr: Les tarifs réglementés pour les particuliers maintenus au-delà de 2010, 24/06/2008, www.euractiv.fr/energie/article/tarifs-reglementes-particuliers-maintenus-audela-2010-luc-chatel-000904 (Accessed on August 14, 2009).
EWEA 2003: Edition Spéciale France, Wind Directions magazine Nov./Dec. 2003, www.ewea.org /fileadmin/ewea_documents/documents/publications/WD/WD22vii_FOCUS_nov_dec.pdf AND www.ewea.org/fileadmin/ewea_documents/documents/publications/WD/WD22vii_FRANCE.pdf (Accessed on August 23, 2009).

EWEA 2005: The Second Wave: Europe’s Growing Markets, Focus on growing markets, Wind Directions magazine Mar./Apr. 2005, www.ewea.org/fileadmin/ewea_documents /documents/publications/WD/WD24iii_FOCUS.pdf (Accessed on August 23, 2009). EWEA 2009a: Wind Energy and the Financial, Focus on wind and finance, Wind Directions magazine May 2009, www.ewea.org/fileadmin/ewea_documents/documents/publications /WD/2009_may/Focus_Wind_energy_and_the_financial_crisis_May_2009.pdf (Accessed on August 23, 2009). EWEA 2009b: Wind at Work, Wind energy and job creation in the EU, Report 01/2009, www.ewea.org/fileadmin/ewea_documents/documents/publications/Wind_at_work_FINAL.pdf AND www.ewea.org/index.php?id=178 (Accessed on August 18, 2009).

141

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 EWEA 2010: Wind in power, 2009 European statistics, 02/2010, www.ewea.org/fileadmin /ewea_documents/documents/statistics/general_stats_2009.pdf (Accessed on February 20, 2010). FED: Fédération Environnement Durable. Jeumont SA: arrêt définitif pour l'éolien, article Article publié sur: La Voix du Nord, 26/11/2005, www.environnementdurable.net/vdb /jeumont1.htm (Accessed on August 23, 2009). Fee.Asso.fr: France Energie Eolienne, http://fee.asso.fr (Accessed on October 20, 2009). Focus.de: Ölpreis so tief wie zuletzt 2005, Focus Online Money, 13/11/2008, www.focus.de/finanzen/news/energie-oelpreis-so-tief-wie-zuletzt-2005_aid_348219.html (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Fournisseurs-Electricite.com: Comparatif des fournisseurs d'électricité sur Internet édité par la société Sélectra SARL (www.selectra.info, see below), www.fournisseurs-electricite.com (Accessed on October 20, 2009). France-Politique.fr: Le site d'information sur la vie politique française, www.francepolitique.fr (Accessed on August 20, 2009). FranceSoir.fr: Copenhague – Sarkozy l’écolo met en garde contre “un échec historique”, 06/12/09, www.francesoir.fr/politique/2009/12/07/copenhague-sarkozy.html (Accessed on December 20, 2009). Fusacq.com: La Snet passe sous le contrôle de l'espagnol Endesa, L'actualité des FusionsAcquisitions Newsletter N°104, 17/09/2004, www.fusacq.com/fr/newsletter/newsletter _104.html (Accessed on August 20, 2009). GdfSuez.com: Assemblées générales mixtes de fusion du 16 juillet 2008, Rubrique Finances, 16/07/2008, www.gdfsuez.com/fr/finance/investisseurs/assemblees-generales/ag-16-juillet2008/ag-de-fusion-du-16-juillet-2008 (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Gralon.net: Qu'est-ce que le Code de l'urbanisme ?, 30/05/2008, www.gralon.net/articles /immobilier--location-vacances/liens-utiles/article-qu-est-ce-que-le-code-de-l-urbanisme-1615.htm (Accessed on August 20, 2009). GreenUnivers.com: Eolien : le Sénat durcit les conditions d’installation, Publié par GreenUnivers, la référence du Green Business, 05/10/2009, www.greenunivers.com/2009/10 /senat-vote-eoliennes-20922/ (Accessed on February 20, 2010). GTAI.de: Germany Trade and Invest. Frankreich macht Dampf in der Windenergie, 03/2008, www.gtai.de/DE/Content/__SharedDocs/Links-Einzeldokumente-Datenbanken /fachdokument.html?fIdent=MKT200803148014 (Accessed on August 30, 2009). GWEC 2008: Global Wind Energy Council. Tables and Statistics 2008, www.ewea.org /fileadmin/ewea_documents/documents/press_releases/2009/GWEC_Press_Release__tables_and_statistics_2008.pdf (Accessed on September 2, 2009).
142

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Heise.de: Liberalisierung der Strom- und Gasmärkte, von Craig Morris, Telepolis, 02/07/2007, www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/25/25620/1.html (Accessed on August 14, 2009). Husum WindEnergy 2008: The Leading Wind Energy Trade Fair. WindEnergy-Studie 2008, Press Release, www.husumwindenergy.com/typo3temp/Zusammenfassung_WindEnergy _Studie1.pdf (Accessed on August 18, 2009). IAEA: International Atomic Energy Agency. France (French Republic): Nuclear Power Reactors – Alphabetic, www.iaea.org/cgi-bin/db.page.pl/pris.powrea.htm?country=FR&sort =&sortlong=Alphabetic (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Ineris.fr: Institut National de l'EnviRonnement industriel et des rISques (Établissement Public). Circulaire n° 68 du 22/02/99 relative au Programme EOLE 2005 et environnement (Texte non paru au JO), www.ineris.fr/aida/?q=consult_doc/version_imprimable /2.250.190.28.8.3359/true (Accessed on August 20, 2009). InstitutMontaigne.org: Eoliennes : nouveau souffle ou vent de folie ?, La Contribution au Débat Public de l'Institut Montaigne, Amicus Curiae, 07/2008, www.institutmontaigne.org /medias/amicus_eolien-bd.pdf (Accessed on August 15, 2009). Interieur.gouv.fr: Ministère de l’intérieur, de l’outre-mer et des collectivités territoriales. Résultats électoraux en France, www.interieur.gouv.fr/sections/a_votre_service/elections/resultats (Accessed on August 20, 2009). IWRPressedienst.de: Presse- und Maildienst des Internationalen Wirtschaftsforum Regenerative Energien IWR. Modifiziertes Baugenehmigungsverfahren in Frankreich bringt Vorteile für die erneuerbaren Energien!, 04/07/2007, www.iwrpressedienst.de/Textausgabe.php?id=2559 (Accessed on September 2, 2009). Koordinierungsstelle Windenergie: Informationspapier ICPE und Windenergieanlagen, 18/05/2009, www.wind-eole.com/index.php?id=67&no_cache=1 (Accessed on August 19, 2009). LaDepeche.fr: Les accords de Grenelle: une référence historique, 27/09/2007, www.ladepeche.fr/article/2007/09/27/23947-Les-accords-de-Grenelle-une-referencehistorique.html (Accessed on September 20, 2009). LaDocumentationFrancaise.fr: Les Présidents et Premiers ministres des législatures 1 à 12 : 1958-2002, un site de la Direction de l'information légale et administrative, www.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr/dossiers/cohabitation/president-legislature.shtml (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Lajartre 2007: Présentation d'Arnaud de Lajartre (Maître de conférences à l'Université d’Angers) au colloque 'Les approches volontaires et le droit de l'environnement' à Rennes : La régulation de la nouvelle « acupuncture » du paysage : un exemple de gestion volontaire en environnement, 08/03/2007, www.iode.univ-rennes1.fr/digitalAssets/43/43336 _De_Lajartre.pdf (Accessed on August 20, 2009).

143

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 Landtag Nordrhein-Westfahlen Drucksache: Stromausfall am 04.11.2006: Der Kreuzzug der NRW-Landesregierung gegen die Windkraft geht weiter, Antwort der Landesregierung auf die Kleine Anfrage 1192, 10/01/2007, www.gruene.landtag.nrw.de/cms/archiv/dokbin/176 /176199.stromausfall_am_04_11_2006_der_kreuzzug.pdf. (Accessed on September 13, 2009). LaTribune.fr: Le petit éolien français peine à décoller, 28/10/2009, www.latribune.fr/greenbusiness/l-actualite/20091028trib000437959/le-petit-eolien-francais-peine-a-decoller.html (Accessed on November 5, 2009). LeDauphine.com a: À de Gaulle le nucléaire, à Sarkozy les énergies renouvelables, Environnement, 10/06/2009, www.ledauphine.com/environnement-a-de-gaulle-le-nucleaire-asarkozy-les-energies-renouvelables-@/index.jspz?chaine=17&article=145430 (Accessed on August 19, 2009). LeDauphine.com b: Nicolas Sarkozy veut une France leader des énergies renouvelables, Video : Environnement, 10/06/2009, www.ledauphine.com/environnement-br/-nicolassarkozy-veut-une-france-leader-des-energies-renouvelables-@/index.jspz?article=145424 (Accessed on July 8, 2009). LeFigaro.fr a: Electricité : retour au tarif réglementé jusqu'en 2010, 14/01/2008, www.lefigaro.fr/conso/2008/01/10/05007-20080110ARTFIG00497-electricite-retour-au-tarifreglemente-jusqu-en-.php (Accessed on August 20, 2009). LeFigaro.fr b: EDF EN, nouveau parc éolien aux USA, par Pierre Tricoire, 24/04/2008, www.lefigaro.fr/societes-francaises/2008/04/24/04010-20080424ARTFIG00538-edf-ennouveau-parc-eolien-aux-usa.php (Accessed on August 18, 2009). LeFigaro.fr c: Le gouvernement reporte sine die la taxe carbone, 23/03/2010, www.lefigaro.fr/impots/2010/03/23/05003-20100323ARTFIG00518-le-gouvernementabandonne-la-taxe-carbone-.php (Accessed on March 23, 2010). Legifrance.Gouv.fr, Le service public de la diffusion du droit. All French Laws and Regulations are accessible via this website, www.legifrance.gouv.fr (Accessed on August 20, 2009). LeGrenelle-Environnement.gouv.fr: Ministère de l’Écologie, de l’Énergie, du Développement durable et de la Mer. Le Grenelle Environnement, www.legrenelle-environnement.gouv.fr (Accessed on August 20, 2009). LeGrenelle-Mer.gouv.fr: Ministère de l’Écologie, de l’Énergie, du Développement durable et de la Mer. Le Grenelle de la Mer est lancé !, 03/04/2009, www.legrenelle-mer.gouv.fr /spip.php?rubrique38 (Accessed on July 8, 2009). LeJDD.fr: Le Journal Du Dimanche. Eoliennes: Pourquoi tant de haine ?, 08/08/2009, www.lejdd.fr/Ecologie/Energie/Actualite/Eoliennes-Pourquoi-tant-de-haine-125254/ (Accessed on August 20, 2009). LeMonde.fr a: Vents contraires sur les éoliennes, par Benoit Hopquin, 07/11/2002, www.lemonde.fr/cgi-bin/ACHATS/779866.html (Accessed on August 20, 2009).
144

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 LeMonde.fr b: La croisade de Valéry Giscard d'Estaing contre l'essor « irresponsable » de l'éolien, par Jean-Michel Bezat, 03/10/2008, www.lemonde.fr/cgi-bin/ACHATS/acheter.cgi ?offre=ARCHIVES&type_item=ART_ARCH_30J&objet_id=1053195 (Accessed on August 14, 2009). LeMoniteur.fr: Apple Wind : une éolienne innovante made in France, 24/03/2009, www.lemoniteur.fr/183-recherche-developpement/article/actualite/603658-apple-wind-uneeolienne-innovante-made-in-france (Accessed on August 15, 2009). LesEchos.fr a: Areva vend les activités historiques de Jeumont, 23/05/2006, http://archives.lesechos.fr/archives/2006/LesEchos/19672-114-ECH.htm (Accessed on August 23, 2009). LesEchos.fr b: L'historique de Suez, 28/02/2006, http://archives.lesechos.fr/archives /2006/lesechos.fr/02/28/200072513.htm (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Liberation.fr a: Les mauvais comptes verts de Sarkozy, 20/06/2009, www.liberation.fr /terre/0101575149-les-mauvais-comptes-verts-de-sarkozy (Accessed on August 14, 2009). Liberation.fr b: Henri Proglio, un électricien très connecté, 25/11/2009, www.liberation.fr /economie/0101604912-henri-proglio-un-electricien-tres-connecte (Accessed on December 1, 2009). Liberation.fr c: L'embellie des emplois verts, 30/11/2009, www.liberation.fr/terre /0101605919-l-embellie-des-emplois-verts (Accessed on December 1, 2009). Liberation.fr d: Taxe carbone: «Sarkozy est allé loin dans le cynisme», 23/03/2010, www.liberation.fr/terre/0101626267-taxe-carbone-sarkozy-est-alle-loin-dans-le-cynisme (Accessed on March 23, 2010). Liternaute.com: Jospin premier ministre d'un gouvernement de gauche plurielle, 1997, Rubrique Histoire, www.linternaute.com/histoire/motcle/evenement/234/1/a/52595 /jospin_premier_ministre_d_un_gouvernement_de_gauche_plurielle.shtml (Accessed on August 20, 2009). MEDAD a: Ministère de l'Ecologie, du Développement et de l'Aménagement Durables et DGEMP. L’ouverture des marchés français de l’électricité et du gaz, Extrait du rapport annuel de la DGEMP pour 2001, 30/04/2002, www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/energie/gaz /textes/ouvert_marches.htm (Accessed on August 20, 2009). MEDAD b: Ministère de l'Ecologie, du Développement et de l'Aménagement Durables. Alain Juppé, ministre de l’Écologie, du Développement et de l’Aménagement durables, 18/05/2007, www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/article.php3?id_article=2262 (Accessed on August 20, 2009). MEDAD c: Ministère de l'Ecologie, du Développement et de l'Aménagement Durables. Historique des missions et attributions du ministère, 21/05/2007, www.ecologie.gouv.fr/article.php3?id_article=168 (Accessed on August 20, 2009).

145

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 MEDAD d: Ministère de l'Ecologie, du Développement et de l'Aménagement Durables. La recherche en matière d'énergie éolienne, Extrait de la stratégie nationale de recherche énergétique, Approche thématique : les énergies renouvelables, 06/2007, www.developpementdurable.gouv.fr/energie/recherche/energie-eolienne.htm (Accessed on March 25, 2009). MEDAD e: Ministère de l'Ecologie, du Développement et de l'Aménagement Durables et DGEMP. La structure et le fonctionnement du marché de l’électricité en France, 20/09/2007, www.develop-pement-durable.gouv.fr/energie/electric/structure-fonct.htm (Accessed on August 20, 2009). MEDAD f: Ministère de l'Ecologie, du Développement et de l'Aménagement Durables et DGEMP. Les étapes de l'ouverture à la concurrence du marché de l'électricité, 20/09/2007, www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/energie/electric/etapes-ouverture.htm (Accessed on August 20, 2009). MEDAD g: Ministère de l'Ecologie, du Développement et de l'Aménagement Durables. Urbanisme, Permis de construire et autres autorisations d’urbanisme, 10/2007, www.urbanisme .equipement.gouv.fr/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=87 (Accessed on September 2, 2009). MEEDDAT a: Ministère de l’Ecologie, de l’Energie, du Développement durable et de l’Aménagement du Territoire. L'énergie en France, Repères – Edition 2008, www.developpement -durable.gouv.fr/energie/statisti/pdf/reperes.pdf (Accessed on August 17, 2009). MEEDDAT b: Ministère de l’Ecologie, de l’Energie, du Développement durable et de l’Aménagement du Territoire. Synthèse publique de l’étude des coûts de référence de la production électrique (2008), www.industrie.gouv.fr/energie/electric/cout-ref-synthese2008.pdf (Accessed on August 20, 2009). MEEDDAT c: Ministère de l’Ecologie, de l’Energie, du Développement durable et de l’Aménagement du Territoire. Deux nouveaux secrétaires d’Etat entrent au ministère, 20/03/2008, www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/article.php3?id_article=2983 (Accessed on September 20, 2009). MEEDDAT d: Ministère de l’Ecologie, de l’Energie, du Développement durable et de l’Aménagement du Territoire. Rapport au Parlement, Programmation pluriannuelle des investissements de production d’électricité Période 2009 – 2020, 11/07/2008, www.developpementdurable.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/rapport_ppi_electricite_cle06849b.pdf (Accessed on August 17, 2009). MEEDDAT e: Ministère de l’Ecologie, de l’Energie, du Développement durable et de l’Aménagement du Territoire. Grenelle Environnement : 50 mesures pour un développement des énergies renouvelables à haute qualité environnementale, 17/11/2008, www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/article.php3?id_article=3901 (Accessed on August 26, 2009). MEEDDAT f: Ministère de l’Ecologie, de l’Energie, du Développement durable et de l’Aménagement du Territoire. Energie éolienne : le nouvel arrêté fixant les tarifs d’achat, 16/12/2008, www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/article.php3?id_article=4063 (Accessed on August 15, 2009).
146

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 MEEDDAT g: Ministère de l’Ecologie, de l’Energie, du Développement durable et de l’Aménagement du Territoire. Lancement de la réalisation d’une deuxième centrale nucléaire de type EPR en France, 04/02/2009, www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr /article.php3?id_article=4218 (Accessed on August 20, 2009). MEEDDAT h: Ministère de l’Ecologie, de l’Energie, du Développement durable et de l’Aménagement du Territoire. Jean-Louis Borloo engage une large concertation sur chaque façade maritime pour accélérer le développement de l’éolien en mer, 10/03/2009, www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/article.php3?id_article=4470 (Accessed on June 3, 2009). MEEDDAT i: Ministère de l’Ecologie, de l’Energie, du Développement durable et de l’Aménagement du Territoire / Commissariat Général au Développement Durable. L’acceptabilité sociale des éoliennes : des riverains prêts à payer pour conserver leurs éoliennes, LePointSur n°12, Mar./Avr. 2009, Economie et Evaluation Développement Durable, www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/Le_point_sur_Eoliennes_cle7555f3.pdf (Accessed on August 23, 2009). MEEDDAT j: Ministère de l’Ecologie, de l’Energie, du Développement durable et de l’Aménagement du Territoire. Dossier de presse, Jean-Louis Borloo présente la feuille de route issue du Grenelle Environnement pour les infrastructures énergétiques de la France, 03/06/2009, www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/Dossier_de_presse_-_2Jun09-2 _cle543e9c.pdf (Accessed on August 18, 2009). MEEDDM a: Ministère de l’Écologie, de l’Énergie, du Développement durable et de la Mer. Répertoire d’archives détaillé : cabinets Dominique Voynet et Yves Cochet : courriers parlementaires 1997-2002, 08/07/2009, www.ecologie.gouv.fr/article.php3?id_article=10133 (Accessed on August 20, 2009). MEEDDM b: Ministère de l’Écologie, de l’Énergie, du Développement durable et de la Mer. Communiqué de presse, Adoption définitive, à la quasi-unanimité, du projet de loi Grenelle 1, 23/07/2009, www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/_affiche_article.php3?id_article=5450 (Accessed on August 18, 2009). MEEDDM c: Ministère de l’Écologie, de l’Énergie, du Développement durable et de la Mer / Commissariat Général au Développement Durable. Tableaux de bord éolien-photovoltaique 2009, Chiffres et Statistiques Energie, www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/spip.php ?page=searchSalleLecture&query=tableau+bord+%C3%A9olien-photovolta%C3%AFque&motcle saisi=tableau+bord+%C3%A9olien-photovolta%C3%AFque AND www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/CS101.pdf (Accessed on March 3, 2010). Ministère en charge de la santé: Textes législatifs et réglementaires, La loi « bruit », www.sante.gouv.fr/htm/dossiers/bruit/textes.htm (Accessed on June 19, 2009). News.BBC.co.uk: Humans cause global warming, US admits, BBC News World Edition, 03/06/2002, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2023835.stm (Accessed on August 20, 2009).

147

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 NonFiction.fr: Institut Montaigne, par Rémi Raher, 11/12/2007, www.nonfiction.fr/article649-institut_montaigne.htm (Accessed on July 8, 2009). NouvelObs.com: Taxe carbone: absence « choquante » de l'électricité, 29/09/2009, http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/actualites/sciences/nature/20090911.OBS0833/taxe_carbone _absence_choquante_de_lelectricite.html (Accessed on March 1, 2010). OECD.org: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Oslo Manual, The Measurement of Scientific and Technological activities, Proposed Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Technological Innovation Data, 2nd Edition, 1997, www.oecd.org/dataoecd/35/61/2367580.pdf (Accessed on August 13, 2009). Pacte-Ecologique.org: Charte environnementale élaborée par la Fondation Nicolas-Hulot, www.pacte-ecologique.org (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Paris.LesVerts.fr: Histoire de Verts, 22/10/2005, http://paris.lesverts.fr/spip.php?article876 (Accessed on August 20, 2009). ParisMatch.com: Sarkozy président écolo. Secrets d’une metamorphose. 02/12/2009, www.parismatch.com/Actu-Match/Politique/Actu/Sarkozy-president-ecolo.-Secrets-d-unemetamorphose-149391/ (Accessed on December 20, 2009). Prix-Pinocchio.org: Les prix Pinocchio du développement durable, organisés par les Amis de la Terre (France), www.prix-pinocchio.org (Accessed on October 20, 2009). RFI.fr a: Radio France Internationale. Suez s’offre l’électricien belge Electrabel, par Myriam Berber, Archive, 10/08/2005, www.rfi.fr/actufr/articles/068/article_37955.asp (Accessed on August 20, 2009). RFI.fr b: Radio France Internationale. Nicolas Sarkozy écolo ?, par Thomas Legrand, l’édito politique, 10/06/2009, http://sites.radiofrance.fr/franceinter/chro/edito/index.php?id=80445 (Accessed on August 20, 2009). RTE 2008a: Bilan 2008 de la sûreté du système électrique francais, R AUDIT SG – DAR – MAS 09, 24/06/2009, www.rte-france.com/uploads/media/pdf_zip/publications-annuelles /bilan_surete_2008.pdf (Accessed on March 2, 2010). RTE 2008b: Le bilan électrique français 2007, Dossier de presse, 15/01/2008, www.rtefrance.com/uploads/media/pdf_zip/presse/dp_bilan_electrique_2007__15_01_2008.pdf (Accessed on August 27, 2009). RTE 2009a: Bilan Prévisionnel de l'équilibre offre-demande d'électricité en France, édition 2009, www.rte-france.com/uploads/media/pdf_zip/publications-annuelles/bilan _previsionnel_2009.pdf (Accessed on September 16, 2009). RTE 2009b: Le bilan électrique français 2008, Dossier de presse, 14/01/2009, www.rtefrance.com/htm/fr/journalistes/telecharge/dossiers/DP_Bilan_electrique_2008_14janv09.pdf (Accessed on August 27, 2009).
148

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 RTE 2009c: L'énergie électrique, un enjeu au centre des préoccupations régionales. Bilan et projets en Bretagne, en 2009, Dossier de Presse, 23/04/2009, www.rte-france.com/uploads /media/pdf_zip/presse/Dp_RTE_ouest.pdf (Accessed on March 2, 2010). Selectra.info: Comparatif des fournisseurs d'électricité et de gaz, un projet Xavier Pinon & Aurian de Maupeou, www.selectra.info (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Senat.fr a: Energies renouvelables et développement local : l'intelligence territoriale en action, 2. Les collectivités territoriales, acteurs de l'offre énergétique, www.senat.fr/rap/r05436/r05-43612.html (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Senat.fr b: L'évaluation de la stratégie nationale de recherche en matière d'énergie, Rapport de MM. Claude Birraux, député et Christian Bataille, député, fait au nom de l'Office parlementaire d'évaluation des choix scientifiques et technologiques, n° 238 (2008-2009), 03/03/2009, www.senat.fr/noticerap/2008/r08-238-notice.html (Accessed on September 20, 2009). Senat.fr c: Les procédures administratives préalables à l'implantation des éoliennes, Les documents de travail du Sénat, Série législation comparée, Étude de législation comparée n° 197, 06/2009, www.senat.fr/lc/lc197/lc197.pdf (Accessed on August 18, 2009). Senat.fr d: Grenelle II, projet de loi portant engagement national pour l'environnement, 25/02/2010, www.senat.fr/dossierleg/pjl08-155.html#item_manuelbas (Accessed on March 2, 2010). SER/FEE annuaire 2009: Annuaire des fabricants et fournisseurs de l’industrie éolienne, 2009, www.enr.fr/docs/2009152723_ProofBDNEW.pdf (Accessed on August 17, 2009). SER/FEE contre-vérités 2008: Les contre-vérités sur le coût de l’énergie éolienne, Réponse à l’exercice anti-éolien de Vincent le Biez publié le 21 juillet 2008 par l’Institut Montaigne, 09/2008, http://fee.asso.fr/content/download/1616/6545/version/2/file/SER-FEE+-+R%E9 sum%E9+-+Pour+en+finir+avec+les+contrev%E9rit%E9s+sur+le+co%FBt+de+l'%E9nergie +%E9olienne.pdf (Accessed on August 17, 2009). SER/FEE état parc 2009: Etat du parc éolien, 02/2009, http://fee.asso.fr/content /download/1760/7049/version/1/file/SER-FEE_Parc_%E9olien_Fev_2009.pdf (Accessed on August 17, 2009). SER/FEE futur 2009: 23% d’énergies renouvelables à l’horizon 2020, Présentation au Colloque éolien Région Pays de la Loire, 26/03/2009, www.wind-eole.com/fileadmin/user_upload /Downloads/Futur_eolien_FEE.pdf (Accessed on August 17, 2009). SER/FEE kit éolien 2009: Tout le kit éolien, 02/2009, www.enr.fr/docs/2009204307 _FichesSERFEEINTEGRALITE.pdf (Accessed on August 17, 2009). SER/FEE liste parcs 2009: Liste des parcs éoliens français raccordés, 02/2009, http://fee.asso.fr/content/download/1523/6218/version/14/file/Donn%E9es+parc+%E9olien +France+-+F%E9vrier+2009.xls (Accessed on April 6, 2009).

149

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 SER/FEE Panorama 2007: Panorama 2007 de la filière éolienne, La lettre du SER n°11, 12/2007, http://fee.asso.fr/content/download/1227/5113/file/lettreSER11.pdf (Accessed on August 20, 2009). SER/FEE press release 2003: Un Nouveau Sondage Confirme d'Adhesion des Populations Riveraines à la Réalisation de Parcs Eoliens, 17/02/2003, http://fee.asso.fr/content/download /505/2012/file/Communique_eolien_sondage_07.02.03.pdf (Accessed on September 16, 2009). SER/FEE press release 2008a: Les éoliennes soumises à la procedure ICPE : un projet de décret incompréhensible et inadmissible !, 16/07/2008, www.enr.fr/dossiers-presse/CP_commun _decret_ICPE_eolien_16.07.08.pdf (Accessed on July 8, 2009). SER/FEE press release 2008b: Publication par l’état des coûts de référence : l’éolien, une source d’énergie compétitive, 31/10/2008, http://fee.asso.fr/espace_presse/communiqués _de_presse/publication_par_l_etat_des_couts_de_reference_l_eolien_une_source_d_energie _competitive (Accessed on August 20, 2009). SER/FEE press release 2009: EWEC 2009 : La conférence européenne de l’énergie éolienne a été l’occasion de rappeler l’enjeu de l’éolien en matière d’emploi et d’industrie, 17/03/09, http://fee.asso.fr/espace_presse/communiques_de_presse/ewec_2009_la_conference_europee nne_de_l_energie_eolienne_a_ete_l_occasion_de_rappeler_l_enjeu_de_l_eolien_en_matiere_d _emploi_et_d_industrie (Accessed on May 31, 2009). Shem.fr: La Société Hydro Electrique du Midi, www.shem.fr/ms-11-Historique.htm (Accessed on October 20, 2009). Cahiers d’Eole: Les quatre âges d’Eole – Succession et concomitances, par Claude Rivals, CAHIERS D’EOLE 02/2000 N°1, Publications de l’Agence Méditerranéenne de l'Environnement du Languedoc-Roussillon, 02/2000, www.ame-lr.org/publications/patrimoine/cahiereole/01 /cahiereole1.pdf (Accessed on August 27, 2009). Feuille sur le Vent: La situation de l'éolien dans l'Aude et la region, La Feuille sur le vent n°5 janv. 2003, note d'information sur l'énergie éolienne dans l'Aude du Conseil d'Architecture d'Urbanisme et de l'Environnement 11, 01/2003, http://aude.eolienne.free.fr/pages /journal.htm#num5 (Accessed on August 27, 2009). Site Cavey: L'aérogénérateur 800 KVA BEST – Romani, Nogent-le-Roi (France) 1955-1966, private hompage of the son of an engineer that has been highly involved in the wind energy project of Nogent-le-Roi, http://eolienne.cavey.org/ (Accessed on June 6, 2009). Snet-Electricite.fr: La Société Nationale d'Electricité et de Thermique, producteur et fournisseur, www.snet-electricite.fr (Accessed on October 20, 2009). SOLAIRE 2000: Et le tout éolien et le tout nucléaire : en 2004, la contestation s'installe!, hompage de Jean-Louis Gaby, premier installateur Qualisol d'Auvergne, http://pagespersoorange.fr/solaire2000%20/DEBAT/EOLIEN_NUCLEAIRE.htm (Accessed on August 20, 2009).

150

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 SortirDuNucleaire.org: Ouverture du marché de l'énergie au 1er juillet : Le Réseau “Sortir du nucléaire” conteste la “compétitivité” de l'électricité nucléaire, Communiqué, 26/06/2007, www.sortirdunucleaire.org/actualites/dossiers/energie/flop-economique.pdf (Accessed on December 2, 2009). Spiegel.de: Öl, Lebensmittel, Gold. Experten stimmen auf weltweit steigende Rohstoffpreise ein, von Hasnain Kazim, 07/08/2008, www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/0,1518,570673,00.html (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Statistik-Portal.de: Statistische Ämter des Bundes und der Länder, Gebiet und Bevölkerung, www.statistik-portal.de/Statistik-Portal/de_inhalt01.asp (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Sueddeutsche.de: Steigende Ölpreise. Bangen um den Wohlstand, von Simone Boehringer, 23/05/2008, www.sueddeutsche.de/wirtschaft/191/442930/text (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Suivi-Eolien.com & TheWindPower.net: Wind turbines and windfarms databases (Accessed on October 20, 2009). Tagesschau.de: Streit über Ausstieg aus der Atomenergie, Röttgen peilt 2030 an - das Umweltbundesamt 2020, 20/02/2010, www.tagesschau.de/inland/atomkraft142.html (Accessed on February 20, 2010). TF1.LCI.fr a: Bientôt un 3e réacteur EPR en France ?, 06/02/2009, http://lci.tf1.fr/science /environnement/2009-02/bientot-un-3e-reacteur-nucleaire-en-france-4896755.html (Accessed on August 20, 2009). TF1.LCI.fr b: Sarkozy en militant écolo, Energies, 09/06/09, http://tf1.lci.fr/infos/sciences /environnement/0,,4437403,00-sarkozy-en-militant-ecolo-.html (Accessed on July 8, 2009). TheWindPower.net & Suivi-Eolien.com: Wind turbines and windfarms databases (Accessed on October 20, 2009). UN Population Division: World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision, Population Database, http://esa.un.org/unpp/ (Accessed on August 20, 2009). UNFCCC.int: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Kyoto Protocol – Status of Ratification, 14/01/2009, http://unfccc.int/files/kyoto_protocol/status_of_ratification /application/pdf/kp_ratification_20090826corr.pdf (Accessed on February 20, 2010). UsineNouvelle.com a: « Il n'y a pas de stratégie nationale de recherche en matière d'énergie », 06/03/2009, www.usinenouvelle.com/article/-il-n-y-a-pas-de-strategie-nationale-de-rechercheen-matiere-d-energie.160108 (Accessed on September 20, 2009). UsineNouvelle.com b: Seconde chance pour les concurrents d'EdF, par Guillaume Maincent, 08/10/2009, www.usinenouvelle.com/article/seconde-chance-pour-les-concurrents-d-edf.N118749 (Accessed on October 20, 2009).

151

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010 VDE.com: Verband der Elektrotechnik Elektronik Informationstechnik. Windenergie, 17/11/2007, www.vde.com/de/fg/ETG/Arbeitsgebiete/V1/Aktuelles/Oeffentlich/Seiten/Wind energie.aspx (Accessed on November 5, 2009). VentDeColere.org: Fédération Nationale, Non à l'Eolien Industriel, www.ventdecolere.org (Accessed on October 20, 2009). Veolia.com: Veolia Environnement is a world leader in environmental services, www.veolia.com (Accessed on October 20, 2009). Vergnet.fr: Vergnet Groupe, L'industriel francais de l'éolien, www.vergnet.fr; Vergnet La Gamme: www.vergnet.com/index.php, AND www.vergnet.com/images/phototheque/fidji01.jpg (Accessed on October 20, 2009). Vie-publique.fr: Projet de loi portant engagement national pour l’environnement – Où en eston ? / De quoi s'agit-il ?, Panorama des lois, www.vie-publique.fr/actualite/panorama/textediscussion/projet-loi-portant-engagement-national-pour-environnement.html (Accessed on December 19, 2009). WindSonne.de: Webseite des Berufschulzentrum Elbinsel Wilhelmsburg, gefördert durch die Deutsche Bundesstiftung Umwelt DBU, Demonstrationsanlagen zur Vermittlung regenerativer Umwelttechnik, www.windsonne.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id =67&Itemid=97 (Accessed on November 5, 2009). WindIt.fr & IosisGroup.fr: a project of Elioth, department of the Iosis Group, www.windit.fr, www.iosisgroup.fr (Accessed on October 20, 2009). Wissenschaft-Frankreich.de: Wissenschaft Frankreich #159 – 18/03/2009, Informationsblatt über die wissenschaftliche Aktualität in Frankreich, Abteilung für Wissenschaft und Technologie in Berlin, Französische Botschaft in Deutschland, 19/03/2009, www.wissenschaftfrankreich.de/publikationen/wissenschaft_frankreich/nummer/files/159.htm (Accessed on September 20, 2009). Zeit.de a: Angst vor dem Ölpreis, von Philip Faigle, 21/11/2007, www.zeit.de/online/2007 /45/oelpreise (Accessed on August 20, 2009). Zeit.de b: Hybridkraftwerk, Gegen Stress im Stromnetz, 31/07/2009, www.zeit.de/online /2009/17/hybridkraftwerk (Accessed on November 5, 2009).

152

Wind Energy in France - Diploma Thesis - Fabia Schäufele - Institute of Sociology, TU Berlin - 2010

Appendix
table 3: French wind farm database, March 2009 (combination of several sources: Suivi-Eolien.com, TheWindPower.net, SER/FEE liste parcs 2009, Eolinfo.com, + information from the websites of several wind generator manufacturers and park developers; graphic rendered by author)
A
wind park

B
park section

C
region

D
departm ent

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

. Nogent-le-Roi (à 70 km à l'ouest de Paris) Portel des Corbières - Plan des Aladers (Château de Lastours?) . Site de particulier - Schweyen . . Malo (les Bains) . Dunkerque Corbières-Maritimes - Port-La-Nouvelle (1) 1de3 Corbières-Maritimes - Port-La-Nouvelle (2) 2de3 Toufflers . Bondues . Le Souffleur (1de2) Désirade 1 Le Souffleur (2de2) Désirade 2 . Dunkerque (Windpark) Petite Place . Wormhout . . Sallèles-Limousis Aire de Baie de Somme . Petit Canal (1de3) 1de3 Miquelon . Morne Constant . Le Moule . Mont Négandi . Rurutu . Ile des Pins . Widehem . Donzère . Plateau de la Montagne Désirade 3 Goulien . Plouarzel 1de2 Corbières-Maritimes - Sigean 3de3 Cap Corse - Pietraggine Rogliano 1de2 A Cap Corse - Toricella Ersa Souleilla-Corbières Bondues II ? Portel des Corbières - Plan du Pal Ile de Lifou Roquetaillade Souleilla-Corbières Tuchan II Portel des Corbières - Plan du Pal Prony (1de3) Petit Canal (2de3) Avignonet - Lauragais Fontanelles Merdélou Port-Saint-Louis-du-Rhône Port-Saint-Louis-du-Rhône Port-Saint-Louis-du-Rhône Côte de l’Epinette Le Portel Fitou I Dineault Plouyé Tuchan Saran Petit François (Petit Canal) Fonds Caraïbes (St François) Prony (2de3) Chépy Guitrancourt (Issou) Plougras Névian Névian Punta Aja

Centre Languedoc-Roussillon Lorraine Nord-Pas-de-Calais Nord-Pas-de-Calais Languedoc-Roussillon Languedoc-Roussillon Nord-Pas-de-Calais Nord-Pas-de-Calais DOM - Guadeloupe DOM - Guadeloupe Nord-Pas-de-Calais DOM - Guadeloupe Nord-Pas-de-Calais Languedoc-Roussillon Picardie DOM - Guadeloupe TOM - Polynesie fr/St Pierre et Miquelon DOM - Guadeloupe DOM - Guadeloupe TOM - Nouvelle Caledonie TOM - Polynesie fr / Iles Australes TOM - Nouvelle Caledonie Nord-Pas-de-Calais Rhône-Alpes DOM - Guadeloupe Bretagne Bretagne Languedoc-Roussillon Corse D

28 11 57 59 59 11 11 59 59 971 971 59 971 59 11 80 971 975 971 971 988 987 988 62 26 971 29 29 11 2B

32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64

B C 2de2 Corse 1de2 Languedoc-Roussillon . Nord-Pas-de-Calais 1de2 = Lastours? Languedoc-Roussillon . TOM - Nouvelle Caledonie . Languedoc-Roussillon 2de2 - extension Languedoc-Roussillon 2de2 Languedoc-Roussillon 2de2 = Lastours? Languedoc-Roussillon 1de3 TOM - Nouvelle Caledonie 2de3 DOM - Guadeloupe 1de2 Midi-Pyrénées . Midi-Pyrénées . Midi-Pyrénées 3de3 Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur 1de3 Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur 2de3 Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur . Champagne-Ardenne . Nord-Pas-de-Calais 1de2 Languedoc-Roussillon . Bretagne . Bretagne 1de2 Languedoc-Roussillon Centre . . DOM - Guadeloupe . DOM - Guadeloupe 2de3 TOM - Nouvelle Caledonie . Picardie . Ile-de-France . Bretagne 1de3 Languedoc-Roussillon 2de3 Languedoc-Roussillon . Corse

2B 11 59 11 988 11 11 11 11 988 971 31 12 12 13 13 13 51 62 11 29 29 11 45 971 971 988 80 78 22 11 11 2B

153

65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97

A Bouin - La Côte de Jade Rivesaltes Rivesaltes Escales 1 (Conilhac?) Sainte-Marie-de-Redon Freyssenet - Serre-des- Fourches Bouin - Les Polders du Dain Opoul-Perillos (Salses) Mardyck Mardyck Mardyck Morne Carriere Petit Canal (3de3) Beuzec-Cap-Sizun Nibas Névian Dirinon Oupia Saint-Simon - La clé des champs Coat-Piquet (Magoar) Riols (= La Roque ?) Plateau Ardéchois Cotentin (Sortosville-en-Beaumont) Montjoyer et Rochefort Montjoyer et Rochefort Kerherhal extension - Plouguin Téterchen Fitou I - extension Langoëlan Haute-Lys - Fauquembergues Haute-Lys - Fauquembergues Haute-Lys - Fauquembergues Haute-Lys - Fauquembergues

B
1de2 2de2 1de2 . . . 2de2 . 1de3 3de3 2de3 . 3de3 . 1de2 3de3 . . . . . . . 2de2 1de2 2de2 . 2de2 . 3de4 1de4 2de4 4de4

C Pays de la Loire Languedoc-Roussillon Languedoc-Roussillon Languedoc-Roussillon Bretagne Rhône-Alpes Pays de la Loire Languedoc-Roussillon Nord-Pas-de-Calais Nord-Pas-de-Calais Nord-Pas-de-Calais DOM - Martinique DOM - Guadeloupe Bretagne Picardie Languedoc-Roussillon Bretagne Languedoc-Roussillon Picardie Bretagne Languedoc-Roussillon Rhône-Alpes Basse-Normandie Rhône-Alpes Rhône-Alpes Bretagne Lorraine Languedoc-Roussillon Bretagne Nord-Pas-de-Calais Nord-Pas-de-Calais Nord-Pas-de-Calais Nord-Pas-de-Calais

D
85 66 66 11 35 7 85 66 59 59 59 972 971 29 80 11 29 34 2 22 34 7 50 26 26 29 57 11 56 62 2 62 62

98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130

A Saint-Crépin Saint Thégonnec (in Pleyber-Christ) Ploumoguer Montfranc Saintes (Terre de Bas) Kafeate (2de2) Kafeate (1de2) Ally - Mercoeur La Montagne ardéchoise - Cham Longe La Montagne ardéchoise - Cham Longe Ally - Mercoeur (Moulins de Verseilles?) Ally - Mercoeur (Moulins de Monteil?) Ally - Mercoeur (Moulins de Bessadous?) Plourin Aumelas - Quatre Bornes Aumelas - Conques Clitourps Guerlédan Sainte-Rose Ploudalmezeau (Plourin) Janville - Voie Blériot Est Bougainville Chaudeyrac Gavray Le Haut des Ailes - Haut des Grues Le Haut des Ailes - La Tournelle Le Haut des Ailes - Le Haut des Masures Janville - Bois Clergeons Bouillancourt-en-Séry Le Quarnon - Mont Faverget Kergrist Kergrist Kergrist

B
. . . . . 2de2 1de2 4de4 2de2 1de2 1de4 2de4 3de4 . 2de2 1de2 . . . . 1de3 . . . 3de4 2de4 1de4 2de3 . . 1de5 2de5 3de5

C Poitou-Charentes Bretagne Bretagne Midi-Pyrénées DOM - Guadeloupe TOM - Nouvelle Caledonie TOM - Nouvelle Caledonie Auvergne Rhône-Alpes Rhône-Alpes Auvergne Auvergne Auvergne Bretagne Languedoc-Roussillon Languedoc-Roussillon Basse-Normandie Bretagne DOM - Réunion Bretagne Centre Picardie Languedoc-Roussillon Basse-Normandie Lorraine Lorraine Lorraine Centre Picardie Champagne-Ardenne Bretagne Bretagne Bretagne

D
17 29 29 12 971 988 988 43 7 7 43 43 43 29 34 34 50 22 974 29 28 80 58 50 54 54 54 28 80 51 56 56 56

131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163

A Valhuon - Tranche : First Valhuon - Tranche : Innovent Les Malandaux Plouguin 2 Kerherhal Peyrelevade Champfleury Haut-de-Vausse - Reffroy Le Boutonnier (Reffroy) Saint-Clément Louville la Chenard Louville la Chenard Louville la Chenard Gueltas Noyal Pontivy Site de particulier 2 (Dordogne) Auvers-Méautis Nibas - Saucourt Epense-Argonne Epense-Argonne Côtes de Champagne Carré Sénart (Lieusaint) Méligny le Grand Prony (3de3) Sainte Suzanne - La Perrière (3de3) Sainte Suzanne - La Perrière (2de3) Sainte Suzanne - La Perrière (1de3) Aupiac Iffendic Saint-Agrève la Citadelle Dio et Valquières Chapelle Vallon - Chapelle d’Eole La Nisandière (Brem sur Mer) L’Espinassière

B
2de2 1de2 . . 1de2 . . . . . 1de3 2de3 3de3 . . . 2de2 2de2 1de2 . . . 3de3 3de3 2de3 1de3 . . . . 2de2 . .

C Nord-Pas-de-Calais Nord-Pas-de-Calais Champagne-Ardenne Bretagne Bretagne Limousin Champagne-Ardenne Lorraine Lorraine Rhône-Alpes Centre Centre Centre Bretagne Aquitaine Basse-Normandie Picardie Champagne-Ardenne Champagne-Ardenne Champagne-Ardenne Ile-de-France Lorraine TOM - Nouvelle Caledonie DOM - Réunion DOM - Réunion DOM - Réunion Midi-Pyrénées Bretagne Rhône-Alpes Languedoc-Roussillon Champagne-Ardenne Pays de la Loire Pays de la Loire

D
62 62 51 29 29 19 10 55 55 7 28 28 28 56 24 50 80 51 51 51 77 55 988 974 974 974 12 35 7 34 10 85 85

164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196

A Port autonome de Marseille (Fos-sur-Mer) Beaucaire Momerstroff Vauvilliers Lou Paou PV5 Fécamp Escales 2 Saint-Martin-des-Besaces Lou Paou Longue Epine Freyssenet Assigny Maisnières - Tilloy-Floriville Bois Bigot Bois de l’Arche Les Trois Muids (Treminiers) Le Cornouiller (Thieux, Noyers-Saint-Martin) Roinville Chemin de Tuleras Haut-de-Bane Haut Languedoc - Valbonne Haut Cabardès - Cabrespine Haut Cabardès - Pradelles Haut Languedoc - Mourel Roussas - Claves Roussas - Gravières Haut Languedoc - Amaysse Cuxac-Cabardès Quatre-Communes (Faux-Vésigneul) Les Monts Bergerons Cormainville (Guillonville) Cormainville (Guillonville) Cormainville (Guillonville)

B
. . . . 2de2 . . . 1de2 . . . 1de2 . . . . . . . 2de3 2de2 1de2 1de3 1de2 2de2 3de3 . . 1de2 1de5 2de5 3de5

C Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur Languedoc-Roussillon Lorraine Picardie Languedoc-Roussillon Haute-Normandie Languedoc-Roussillon Basse-Normandie Languedoc-Roussillon Picardie Rhône-Alpes Haute-Normandie Picardie Centre Centre Centre Picardie Centre Centre Lorraine Languedoc-Roussillon Languedoc-Roussillon Languedoc-Roussillon Languedoc-Roussillon Rhône-Alpes Rhône-Alpes Languedoc-Roussillon Languedoc-Roussillon Champagne-Ardenne Picardie Centre Centre Centre

D
13 30 57 80 48 76 11 14 48 80 7 76 80 28 28 28 60 28 28 55 34 11 11 34 26 26 34 11 51 80 28 28 28

197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229

A Cormainville (Guillonville) Cormainville (Guillonville) Héstomesnil Les Mardeaux Viertiville Le Carreau (Treminiers) Le Moulin Démoli (Lihus) La Branche Morte Mont Huet Bois Louis Kergrist Kergrist La Butte des Fraus (Ménéac, Mohon) Janville - Voie Blériot Ouest Lascombe Chicheboville (Conteville) Les Pénages Quatre-Chemins (Saint Jean Coupéville) Beauregard Fitou II Silfiac - Bodervedan Pluzunet Trébry Lanfains Le Haut Corlay Fonds de Fresnes Séglien Trescoët (Séglien Ar Tri Milin) Chapelle Vallon - Val d’Eole Centernach (Saint-Arnac) Gommerville Beausemblant Bonneval La Champ du Pin (St Front )

B 4de5 5de5 . . . . . . . . 4de5 5de5 . 3de3 - PELEIA I . . PELEIA II . . 1de2 . . . . . . . 1de2 . . 1de2 . .

C Centre Centre Picardie Centre Centre Centre Picardie Picardie Nord-Pas-de-Calais Centre Bretagne Bretagne Bretagne Centre Midi-Pyrénées Basse-Normandie Centre Champagne-Ardenne Lorraine Languedoc-Roussillon Bretagne Bretagne Bretagne Bretagne Bretagne Picardie Bretagne Champagne-Ardenne Languedoc-Roussillon Centre Rhône-Alpes Centre Auvergne

D
28 28 60 41 41 28 60 60 62 45 56 56 56 28 12 14 41 51 55 11 56 22 22 22 22 80 56 10 66 28 26 28 43

230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262

A La Champ du Pin (St. Front, Montusclat, Champclause) Pont-de-Salars - Ségur + Jos Kemenez / Quéménès (Le Conquet) Ménil la Horgne Mont Mau (Mont Dore) Grand Maison Trois Sources Plouarzel - extension Campagnes et Tambours Campagnes et Tambours Longs Champs (Longchamps) Kerigaret + Pennengoat Patrimonio Les Barthes Luc-sur-Orbieu Pleyber-Christ (Coat Conval) Portes - Soudan Freigné Portes - Erbray Beaufou Maisnières - Frettemeule St Flour (Col Fageole + Rageade) Omissy 2 Butte Saint-Liphard Sainbois Les Chandelles (Breteuil, Paillart) Brachy Cast Murat sur Vebre Derval et Lusanger Derval et Lusanger Mont de Bézard - La Grande Côte Mont de Bézard - Le Haut du moulin

B

. . . . . . . 2de2 1de2 2de2 . . . 1de2 . . 2de2 . 1de2 . 2de2 . . . . . . 1de2 . 1de2 2de2 1de3 3de3

C Auvergne Midi-Pyrénées Bretagne Lorraine TOM - Nouvelle Caledonie DOM - Guadeloupe Lorraine Bretagne Nord-Pas-de-Calais Nord-Pas-de-Calais Picardie Bretagne Corse Auvergne Languedoc-Roussillon Bretagne Pays de la Loire Pays de la Loire Pays de la Loire Pays de la Loire Picardie Auvergne Picardie Centre Centre Picardie Haute-Normandie Bretagne Midi-Pyrénées Pays de la Loire Pays de la Loire Champagne-Ardenne Champagne-Ardenne

D

43 12 29 55 988 971 55 29 62 62 80 29 2B 43 11 29 44 49 44 85 80 15 2 28 45 60 76 29 81 44 44 10 10

263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295

A Mont de Bézard - Les Renardières Saint-Léger Saint-Léger Bornes de Cerqueux Saint-Servais Coren Boulay-Moselle - Buchfeld Laneuville-au-Rupt Rampont (Nixéville-Blercourt, Les Souhesmes-Rampont) La Nourais Courcelles sur Aire Saulzet Grand Fougeray Guéhenno Bignan Cast - Chateaulin Champ-Besnard Hauts de Melleray Lanrivoaré (I ?) Le Champ Vert Plestan Pont-Melvez II - Keranfouler Pont-Melvez 1 - Le Gollot Ségur - Viarouge Saint-Barnabé Patay (Vallee des Gommiers) Plouvien Fruges (Tranche 2008) Fruges (Tranche 2007) Site de particulier - Avignonet Saint-Aubin-sur-Aire Fond de Plaine (Luc-sur-Orbieu) Boulay-Moselle - Les moulins de Boulay

B 2de3 2de2 1de2 . . . 2de3 . 1de2 . . . . . . 2de2 PELEIA IV PELEIA III . . . 2de2 1de2 . . . . 2de2 1de2 . 1de2 . 3de3

C Champagne-Ardenne Nord-Pas-de-Calais Nord-Pas-de-Calais Centre Bretagne Auvergne Lorraine Lorraine Lorraine Bretagne Lorraine Auvergne Bretagne Bretagne Bretagne Bretagne Centre Centre Bretagne Picardie Bretagne Bretagne Bretagne Midi-Pyrénées Bretagne Centre Bretagne Nord-Pas-de-Calais Nord-Pas-de-Calais Midi-Pyrénées Lorraine Languedoc-Roussillon Lorraine

D
10 62 62 45 22 15 57 55 55 35 55 3 35 56 56 29 28 28 29 60 22 22 22 12 22 45 29 62 62 31 55 11 57

296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328

A La Renardière Mulinière (Vairé) Les Métairies (Maitairies) Princay (Benet) Harpen Hauts Traits Harpen Petits Caux Kerlan Bois Lislet La Mahaudière Quatre-Vents (Vanault-le-Châtel) Bambesch Bernay-Saint-Martin Voie Sacrée Sud Voie Sacrée Nord Léhaucourt Castelnau - Pegayrols Les Sablons Moulin de Froidure (Cocquerel) Barre - Cap Redounde Barre - Puech Cambert Les Champs Blancs - Benet Beausemblant - extension Cambernon Les Pérails (Marquein) Piolenc Plélan-le-Petit Conteville Gâtinais, Sceaux-du-Gâtinais Fierville-Bray Les Quatre Vents Corlay Janaillat - Saint-Dizier-Leyrenne Pont-de-Salars - Flavin (= Les Potences ?)

B
. . . . . . . . . . . . 2de2 1de2 . . . . 2de2 1de2 . 2de2 . . . . . . . . . . .

C Champagne-Ardenne Pays de la Loire Pays de la Loire Pays de la Loire Haute-Normandie Haute-Normandie Bretagne Picardie DOM - Guadeloupe Champagne-Ardenne Lorraine Poitou-Charentes Lorraine Lorraine Picardie Midi-Pyrénées Basse-Normandie Picardie Midi-Pyrénées Midi-Pyrénées Pays de la Loire Rhône-Alpes Basse-Normandie Languedoc-Roussillon Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur Bretagne Basse-Normandie Centre Basse-Normandie Champagne-Ardenne Bretagne Limousin Midi-Pyrénées

D
51 85 85 85 76 76 22 2 971 51 57 17 55 55 2 12 14 80 81 81 85 26 50 11 84 22 14 42 14 10 22 23 12

329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361

A Scaër - Leuhan Hombleux Sainte-Honorine-la-Chardonne La Belle Epine (Pléchâtel) Argentan Hermin Valhuon II Garcelles-Secqueville Hénansal Saint Jacques de Nehou Beurey-Bauguay Grosbois Saint-Anthot Le Truc de l'Homme (La Fage-Montivernoux) Sallen Villemur La Grallière (Saint-Amand-sur-Sèvre) Jaladeaux Combusins Xambes Roudouallec Donzère - extension La Montagne Ardéchoise - extension (St-Étienne-de-Lugdarès) Hargicourt Avignonet - Lauragais - extension Boulay-Moselle - Welling Plélan le Grand Petit Terroir Cruas Villesèque des Corbières Castanet - La Tourelle Les Barthes Veulettes-sur-Mer Castanet - Le Haut

B
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2de2 1de3 . . . 1de2 2de2 2de2 . 1de2

C Bretagne Picardie Basse-Normandie Bretagne Basse-Normandie Nord-Pas-de-Calais Nord-Pas-de-Calais Basse-Normandie Bretagne Basse-Normandie Bourgogne Bourgogne Languedoc-Roussillon Basse-Normandie Poitou-Charentes Poitou-Charentes Poitou-Charentes Poitou-Charentes Poitou-Charentes Bretagne Rhône-Alpes Rhône-Alpes Picardie Midi-Pyrénées Lorraine Bretagne Picardie Rhône-Alpes Languedoc-Roussillon Languedoc-Roussillon Auvergne Haute-Normandie Languedoc-Roussillon

D
29 80 61 35 61 62 62 14 22 50 21 21 11 14 16 79 16 16 16 56 26 7 80 31 57 35 80 7 11 34 43 76 34

362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394

A Fraïsse sur Agoût Chemin d’Ablis Levézou - Salles-Curan Bourbriac Pays de Bray - Clos Bataille Pays de Bray - Les Vatines Pays de Bray - Varimpré Leign Ar Gasprenn (Collorec) Les Eparmonts Plaines du Porcien (Château Porcien) La Gaillarde Gueures La Marette (Saint-André-Farivillers) Chemin Blanc - Francastel Demi-Lieue (Crèvecœur-le-Grand) Oresmaux Les Trois Fermes La Brière Le Colombier (Saint-Germain-de-Longue-Chaume) Le Soulié Lomont Est Marsanne Lomont Ouest Carrière Martin La Grelière (Mauléon) Longuyon Saint Hilaire-La-Croix Ardes-sur-Couze Les Monts Bergerons 2 Falaise II / Pays de Falaise Bonneuil-les-Eaux Le Haut des Ailes II (=Le Haut de Blâmont?) Lislet

B . . . . 1de3 2de3 3de3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1de2 . 2de2 . . . . . 2de2 . . 4de4 - extension 1de2 ?

C Languedoc-Roussillon Centre Midi-Pyrénées Bretagne Haute-Normandie Haute-Normandie Haute-Normandie Bretagne Champagne-Ardenne Champagne-Ardenne Haute-Normandie Haute-Normandie Picardie Picardie Picardie Picardie Centre Centre Poitou-Charentes Languedoc-Roussillon Franche-Comté Rhône-Alpes Franche-Comté Picardie Poitou-Charentes Lorraine Auvergne Auvergne Picardie Basse-Normandie Picardie Lorraine Picardie

D
34 28 12 22 76 76 76 29 52 8 76 76 60 60 60 80 45 45 79 34 25 26 25 2 79 54 63 63 80 14 60 57 2

395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427

A Lehaucourt-Gricourt Lislet Saint-Sauveur-de-Ginestoux Les Prés Hauts Bel Air La Haie au Vent - Stenay Fitou II - extension Amélécourt Trayes Erize Saint Dizier + Gery Saint-Aubin II Hamel Au Brun (Guilberville) Talizat-Rézentières Hescamps Coajou-Baslan (Plouisy) Villesèque-Portel Vaux-lès-Mouzon Lestrade-et-Thouels Sole du Moulin Vieux - Ablaincourt-Pressoir Le Mont de Ponche Anoux Saint Saumont Vaudeville-le-Haut Le Haut des Épinettes (Perles) Le Vieux Moulin (Hautevesnes) Vouthon-Haut Montcornet Cernon - Centrale éolienne de Cernon Cernon - Eole cernon Cernon - Les vents de Cernon Prouville Montloué Fresnes-en-Saulnois Plomodiern

B
. 2de2 ? . . . . 2de2 . . . 2de2 . 1de2 . . 2de2 . . 2de2 . . . . . . . 1de3 2de3 3de3 . . . .

C Picardie Picardie Languedoc-Roussillon Nord-Pas-de-Calais Pays de la Loire Lorraine Languedoc-Roussillon Lorraine Poitou-Charentes Lorraine Lorraine Basse-Normandie Auvergne Picardie Bretagne Languedoc-Roussillon Champagne-Ardenne Midi-Pyrénées Picardie Nord-Pas-de-Calais Lorraine Lorraine Picardie Picardie Lorraine Picardie Champagne-Ardenne Champagne-Ardenne Champagne-Ardenne Picardie Picardie Lorraine Bretagne

D
2 2 11 62 85 55 11 57 79 55 55 50 15 80 22 11 8 12 80 62 54 55 2 2 55 2 51 51 51 80 2 57 29

428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460

A Site de particulier 3 Chantereine (Chanteraine) Nançois (le grand) Is-en-Bassigny Nalliers Péré Mouzeuil St Martin, Le Langon Mouzeuil St Martin, Le Langon Pont-de-Salars - Canet-de-Salars (Carelets) Mounes - Parc du Pays Belmontais Clamanges-Villeseneux Niedervisse Rochereau Mas de Leuze (Mas Laurent) Ambon (=Gambon?) Muzillac Saint-Jean-Lachalm (1de2) Puech Cornet Saint-Jean-Lachalm (2de2) Forières II (Criel-sur-Mer) Guern Greneville-en-Beauce Hauteville Parc du Lauragais (Saint-Felix - La Lande) Parc du Lauragais (Montégut - Le Bois) Trémeheuc Seraumont - La Saurupt La Salle et Rocharvez Lanrivain Réguiny - Crédin Beausoleil (Taupont, Saint-Malo-des-Trois-Fontaines) Saint-Cirgues-en-Montagne Plaine Auboise (Nozay,Premierfait,Grandes Chapelles/Banlées) Chouy - Billy-sur-Ourcq

B
. . . . . . 1de2 2de2 . . . . . . . . 1de2 . 2de2 2de2 ? . . . 2de2 1de2 . . . . . . . .

C Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur Lorraine Lorraine Champagne-Ardenne Pays de la Loire Poitou-Charentes Pays de la Loire Pays de la Loire Midi-Pyrénées Midi-Pyrénées Champagne-Ardenne Lorraine Poitou-Charentes Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur Bretagne Bretagne Auvergne Midi-Pyrénées Auvergne Haute-Normandie Bretagne Centre Picardie Midi-Pyrénées Midi-Pyrénées Bretagne Lorraine Bretagne Bretagne Bretagne Rhône-Alpes Champagne-Ardenne Picardie

D
84 55 55 52 85 17 85 85 12 12 51 57 86 13 56 56 43 81 43 76 56 45 2 31 31 35 88 22 56 56 7 10 2

461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493

A B Monts d'Arcis (Allibaudières, Dosnon, Le Chêne) . Lavallée - Levoncourt . . Saint-Georges-de-Noisné . Aussac-Vadalle . Saint-Coulitz . Pleugriffet - Crédin . Gâprée - Trémont Agenville . . Boisbergues . Moyencourt-lès-Poix . Fiefs Audrieu . Frénouville . Croixrault . . Massiac Chaussée César Nord Civray 2de2 Chaussée César Sud Civray 1de2 Sainte-Thorette - Les Coudrays 2de2 Sainte-Thorette - Les Mistandines 1de2 . Dehlingen . Les Croquettes Quincy La Benâte . Binas- Ouzouer-le Marché . . Sachin Haucourt-Moulaine . Plateau de Ronchois (Lannoy-Cuillère) . Le Grand Camp (Barmainville, Oinville-Saint-Liphard, Rouvray-Saint-Denis) . Chasse-Marée (Fressenneville, Aigneville, Embreville) . Plateau de Ronchois (Conteville, Criquiers, Ronchois) . . Arfons - Sor Viviers-sur-Chiers - Revémont 2de2 Viviers-sur-Chiers - Braumont 1de2 Oisseau .

C Champagne-Ardenne Lorraine Poitou-Charentes Poitou-Charentes Bretagne Bretagne Basse-Normandie Picardie Picardie Picardie Nord-Pas-de-Calais Basse-Normandie Basse-Normandie Picardie Auvergne Centre Centre Centre Centre Alsace Centre Poitou-Charentes Centre Nord-Pas-de-Calais Lorraine Picardie Centre Picardie Haute-Normandie Midi-Pyrénées Lorraine Lorraine Pays de la Loire

D
10 55 79 16 29 56 61 80 80 80 62 14 14 80 15 18 18 18 18 67 18 17 41 62 54 60 28 80 76 81 54 54 53

494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526

A Plogastel-Saint-Germain La Lande du Vieux Pavé (Calanhel, Lohuec) Grand-Bois (Lacombe, Cuxac-Cabardès, Caudebronde) Sambrès (Roquefere,Labastide-Esparbairenque,Mas Cabardès) Pays de Saint-Seine Bollène Lanrivoaré (II ?) Locmélar La Limouzinière Saint-Hilaire de Chaleons Mont Cauvel (Notre-Dame-de-Bondeville) Frossay Echalot Miroir (Domart-en-Ponthieu, Saint Léger-lès-Domart) La Picoterie (Charly-sur-Marne) Chemin des Haguenets Bretelle, Étalante, Poiseul-la-Grange Soveria Le Mont d’Aunay (Fiennes) Sauveterre Lévigny Tigné Hauteurs de Falbe Le Horps - Lassay Saint Pierre Bénouville Saint Pierre Le Viger - La Gaillarde Les Ternois Côte d'Albatre (Veulettes-sur-Mer) Lamontélarié Vix Les Joyeuses - Saint-Georges-sur-Arnon Les Barbes d'Or (Saint-Georges-sur-Arnon, Migny) Les Tilleuls - Saint-Georges-sur-Arnon

B
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2de2 ? 2de2 ? 1de2 ?

C Bretagne Bretagne Languedoc-Roussillon Languedoc-Roussillon Bourgogne Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur Bretagne Bretagne Pays de la Loire Pays de la Loire Haute-Normandie Pays de la Loire Bourgogne Picardie Picardie Picardie Bourgogne Corse Nord-Pas-de-Calais Midi-Pyrénées Champagne-Ardenne Pays de la Loire Lorraine Pays de la Loire Haute-Normandie Haute-Normandie Nord-Pas-de-Calais Haute-Normandie Midi-Pyrénées Pays de la Loire Centre Centre Centre

D
29 22 11 11 21 84 29 29 44 44 76 44 21 80 2 60 21 2B 62 82 10 49 57 53 76 76 62 76 81 85 36 36 36

527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559

A Les Vignes (Saint-Georges-sur-Arnon) Autremencourt Plein Champ - Chanteraine-Ménaucourt Orme - Champagne Leffincourt Nurlu Mauron Talizat-Rézentières Mont de l'Arbre Saint Cyr en Pail (Les Près Barons) Raucourt-et-Flaba Solerie - Moulin Vieux Pertain, Potte Beaurevoir Le Truel - Ayssènes Fouy Saint-Georges-des-Gardes Les Crêtes Breteuil - Esquennoy Campbon Antoigné Plateau de Langres Chemay - L'lie d'Olonne Forières 1 (Criel-sur-Mer) Rampont 2 - Osches Saint-Alban (Cinq chemins ?) Éolienne du Singladou Le Margnès Fontanille II (St-Jean-de-Pourcharesse, St-Pierre-St-Jean) Fontanille 1 (Sablières) Trelans Murato Ventiseri Beuvraignes Laucourt Champs des Sœurettes (Gamaches, Beauchamps)

B
1de2 . . . . . . 2de2 . . . 1de2 . . . . . . . . . 1de2 2de2 . . 2de2 1de2 . . . . . . ?

?

? ?

C Centre Picardie Lorraine Champagne-Ardenne Champagne-Ardenne Picardie Bretagne Auvergne Champagne-Ardenne Pays de la Loire Champagne-Ardenne Picardie Picardie Midi-Pyrénées Pays de la Loire Pays de la Loire Picardie Pays de la Loire Pays de la Loire Champagne-Ardenne Pays de la Loire Haute-Normandie Lorraine Bretagne Midi-Pyrénées Rhône-Alpes Rhône-Alpes Languedoc-Roussillon Corse Corse Picardie Picardie Picardie

D
36 2 55 51 8 80 56 15 51 53 8 80 2 12 49 49 60 44 49 52 85 76 55 22 81 7 7 11 2B 2B 80 80 80

560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592

A Crennes-sur-Fraubée Rully La Haie (Traversaine) Laprugne, Ferrières-sur-Sichon, Saint-Clément Saint-Riquier Familly Portes de la Côte-d'Or Manneville-ès-Plains Rouessé-Vassé Cap Redounde Châteauneuf - Val-Saint-Donat Villars-Neuvy La Vallée du Moulin (Guigneville, Charmont-en-Beauce) Sainte Sève Sery les Mézières Sery les Mézières Sery les Mézières Villers le Sec Sonneville Fontaine-Chalendray Saint Mard Trois Évêques (Albine,Cassagnoles,Lespinassière,St Amans-Soult ?) Thicourt Houtteville Mesnil-au-Val Puceul La Vallière (Pannece, Riaillé O.WKN) Artigues - Ollières Baronville - Destry Rezentières-Vieillespesse Blain Omissy Vauvilliers II (Lihons, Herleville)

B
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1de3 2de3 3de3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C Pays de la Loire Basse-Normandie Pays de la Loire Auvergne Picardie Basse-Normandie Bourgogne Haute-Normandie Pays de la Loire Midi-Pyrénées Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur Centre Centre Bretagne Picardie Picardie Picardie Picardie Poitou-Charentes Poitou-Charentes Poitou-Charentes Midi-Pyrénées Lorraine Basse-Normandie Basse-Normandie Pays de la Loire Pays de la Loire Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur Lorraine Auvergne Pays de la Loire Picardie Picardie

D
53 14 53 3 80 14 21 76 72 81 4 28 42 29 2 2 2 2 16 17 17 81 57 50 50 44 44 83 57 15 44 2 80

593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625

A Roman Blandey Marsanne - La Teissonnière Orvilliers-Saint-Julien Mont de Bezard - extension Plougonven Saint-Germain-de-Marencennes Moréac Heugnes - Villegouin Germainville Prudemanche (Dampierre-sur-Avre, Prudemanche) Ménétréols-sous-Vatan Pellafol Avant-les-Marcilly (Avant-lès-Marcilly, Charmoy, Trancault ) Achiet-le-Grand Ablainzevelle Gomiécourt Mouriez-Tortefontaine Roye Langonnet Longueville-sur-Aube Kergrist-Moëlou Germinon - Vélye Baudignécourt Delouze-Rosières Les Landes du Tertre (La Prénessaye, Saint-Barnabé) Saint-Michel-Chef Chauvé Marigny-le-Châtel Corroy (Corroy, Euvy, Fère-Champenoise) Saint - Pierre-de-Maillé La Motte-de-Galaure Plourin-lès-Morlaix La Désirade IV

B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Désirade IV

C Haute-Normandie Rhône-Alpes Champagne-Ardenne Champagne-Ardenne Bretagne Poitou-Charentes Bretagne Centre Centre Centre Centre Rhône-Alpes Champagne-Ardenne Nord-Pas-de-Calais Nord-Pas-de-Calais Nord-Pas-de-Calais Nord-Pas-de-Calais Picardie Bretagne Champagne-Ardenne Bretagne Champagne-Ardenne Lorraine Lorraine Bretagne Pays de la Loire Pays de la Loire Champagne-Ardenne Champagne-Ardenne Poitou-Charentes Rhône-Alpes Bretagne DOM - Guadeloupe

D
27 26 10 10 29 17 56 36 28 28 36 38 10 62 62 62 62 80 56 10 22 51 55 55 22 44 44 10 51 86 26 29 971

626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651

A La Montagne Ardéchoise II (Saint-Étienne de Lugdarès) Bonneval (Neuvy-en-Dunois) Rambures La Motte (Linghem, Rely) Mont-de-Gerson (Arniwurt, Barby, Sorbo) Saint-Servant - Lizio Ambrugeat (Ambrugeat, Péret-Bel-Air, Davignac) Téterchen - extension Pièces de Vignes Liniez Cermelles, Luçay-le-Libre Vatan Le Vieux Moulin (Charmont-en-Beauce) Beauséjour Site de particulier 1 Ambleny Le Moulin à Cheval (Montdidier) Lusignan Montigné (Celles-sur-Belle, Saint-Roman-lès-Melle) Les Alleuds (Les Alleuds, Goumay-Loizé) Lusseray (Lusseray, Paisay-le-Tort) Saulces- Champenoises Noyales (Perles) Thory (Chirmont, Louvrechy, Sourdon, Thory) Quesnoy-sur-Airaines

B
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C Rhône-Alpes Centre Picardie Nord-Pas-de-Calais Champagne-Ardenne Bretagne Limousin Lorraine Centre Centre Centre Centre Pays de la Loire Picardie Picardie Picardie Poitou-Charentes Poitou-Charentes Poitou-Charentes Poitou-Charentes Champagne-Ardenne Picardie Picardie Picardie

D
7 28 80 62 8 56 19 57 36 36 36 42 44 60 2 80 86 79 79 79 8 2 80 80

E
.

F
startup year

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

. . 2002? . . . . . 1995 1992 1998 . . 1999 . . 1998 1997 2000 . . . . 2001 . . . . . .

1958 1983 1989 1991 1991 1991 1993 1993 1993 1995 1996 1996 1997 1997 1998 1998 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000

G H I J capacity number (park) in of WPS model . MW WPSs 1 ? 650 100 10 Vergnet (?) 1 ? 400 1 ? 300 1 Windmaster (?) 300 200 1 Vestas V25/200 2000 4 Vestas V39/500 300 2 Siemens B23/150 80 1 Lagerwey LW80-18 300 12 Vergnet GEV 10/15 15? 240 4 Vergnet GEV 15/60 9 ? 2700 1500 25 Vergnet GEV 15/60 400 1 Turbowinds T400-34 10 Windmaster WM43/750 7500 250 1 Nordex N29/250 2400 40 Vergnet GEV 15/60 600 10 Vergnet GEV 15/60 1380 23 Vergnet GEV 15/60 15 1 Vergnet GEV 10/15 4500 20 Vestas V27/225 80 2 Vergnet GEV 15/40 180 3 Vergnet GEV 15/60 4500 6 Jeumont J48/750 3000 5 Nordex N43/600 2100 35 Vergnet GEV 15/60 6000 8 Neg Micon NM48/750 3300 5 Gamesa G47/660 6600 10 Vestas V47/660 (Gamsea?) 4200 7 Nordex N43/600

K L rotor capacity diameter (WPS) in kW in m 650 ? 10 ? 400 ? 300 ? 25 300 200 25 500 39 150 23 80 18 25 10 60 15 300 ? 60 15 400 34 43 750 250 29 60 15 60 15 60 15 15 10 225 27 40 15 60 15 750 48 600 43 60 15 750 48 660 47 660 47 600 43

M hub height in m 58 ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

N
stall / pitch

. . . . . . . . . . . . inertial regulation . PITCH STALL inertial regulation . inertial regulation . PITCH inertial regulation . . STALL inertial regulation STALL PITCH+ . STALL

E 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64
. . . . . . . . . 2003 2001 . . . 2003 2003 2003 . . . . . . . 2002 . . . . . . . .

F 2000 2000 2000 2000 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003

G 7800 7800 750 1800 540 5280 13000 3000 1540 2200 3300 8000 7800 7800 850 10200 10200 1500 3000 9100 1200 3000 6000 20 2200 4400 4620 4000 60 6000 5950 9350 6000

H
13 6 1 3 9 8 10 5 7 10 15 10 6 6 1 12 12 1 4 7 4 4 10 1 10 20 21 2 1 8 7 11 10

I Nordex N43/600 Bonus Energy B62/1300 Lagerwey LW750-52 Nordex N43/600 Vergnet GEV 15/60 Gamesa G47/660 Bonus Energy B62/1300 Nordex N43/600 Vergnet GEV 26/220 Vergnet GEV 26/220 Vergnet GEV 26/220 Nordex N50/800 Nordex N60/1300 Nordex N60/1300 Vestas V52/850 Vestas V52/850 Vestas V52/850 Repower MD77 Lagerwey LW750-52 Nordex N60/1300 Windmaster WM28/300 Neg Micon NM48/750 Nordex N43/600 Vergnet GEV 10/20 Vergnet GEV 26/220 Vergnet GEV 26/220 Vergnet GEV 26/220 Enercon E70 Vergnet GEV 15/60 Jeumont J48/750 Gamesa G52/850 Gamesa G52/850 Enercon E40

J

K
600 1300 750 600 60 660 1300 600 220 220 220 800 1300 1300 850 850 850 1500 750 1300 300 750 600 20 220 220 220 2000 60 750 850 850 600

L
43 62 52 43 15 47 62 43 26 26 26 50 60 60 52 52 52 77 52 60 28 48 43 10 26 26 26 70 15 48 52 52 40 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

M

N STALL STALL . STALL . PITCH+ STALL STALL . STALL STALL STALL STALL STALL PITCH PITCH PITCH PITCH+ . STALL . STALL STALL . STALL STALL STALL PITCH+ inertial regulation STALL+ PITCH+ PITCH+ .

E 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97
. . . . 2005 . . . . . . 2005 2003 . . . . . . ? . . . . . . 2005 . . . . . .

F
2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004

G 12000 2400 5200 7500 1250 600 7500 10500 3000 4000 5000 1100 1540 1500 12000 2550 1700 8100 11000 5600 3600 6800 7500 7500 9750 10000 9000 1300 1800 7500 9000 9000 12000

H
5 4 4 10 1 1 3 6 1 2 2 4 7 1 6 3 2 9 4 7 4 8 5 10 13 5 6 1 2 5 6 6 8

I Nordex N80/2400 Nordex N43/600 Nordex N60/1300 Jeumont J48/750 Dewind D6 Enercon E40 Nordex N80/2500 Vestas V66/1750 GE 3000 Vestas V80/2000 Nordex N80/2500 Vergnet GEV MP 275 Vergnet GEV 26/220 Neg Micon NM64 (Vestas?) Enercon E66 Gamesa G52/850 Vestas V52/850 Neg Micon (?) Neg Micon ? (Vestas?) ? Neg Micon (?) Vestas V52/850 GE 1.5s Jeumont J48/750 Jeumont J48/750 Enercon (?) Repower MD77 Nordex N60/1300 Neg Micon (?) GE 1.5s GE 1.5s GE 1.5s GE 1.5s

J

K
2400 600 1300 750 1250 600 2500 1750 3000 2000 2500 275 220 1500 2000 850 850 900 2750 800 900 850 1500 750 750 2000 1500 1300 900 1500 1500 1500 1500

L
80 43 60 48 64 40 80 66 104 80 80 32 26 64 66 52 52 ? 92 ? ? ? 52 70,5 48 48 70 77 60 ? 70,5 70,5 70,5 70,5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

M
PITCH+ STALL STALL STALL+ . . PITCH+ PITCH+ . PITCH PITCH+ PITCH STALL STALL PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH STALL . . STALL PITCH PITCH+ STALL+ STALL+ STALL+ . STALL STALL PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+

N

E 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130
. . . . 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

F
2004 2004 2004 2005 ? 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005

G 9000 1500 5250
1925 5500 6050 7500 9000 9000 10500 10500 10500 3400 10000 12000 3300 4250 6325 9100 11500 12000 1700 2000 10000 10000 12000 11500 9000 4000 850 3600 7200

H
6 5 7 1 7 20 22 5 6 6 7 7 7 4 5 6 5 5 23 7 5 6 2 1 5 5 6 5 6 2 1 2 4

I Repower MD77 Windmaster WM28/300 Neg Micon NM48/750 ? Vergnet GEV MP 275 Vergnet GEV MP 275 Vergnet GEV MP 275 GE 1.5sl GE 1.5s GE 1.5s GE 1.5sl GE 1.5sl GE 1.5sl Gamesa G52/850 Repower MM70 Repower MM70 Vestas V47/660 Vestas V52/850 Vergnet GEV MP 275 Siemens B62/1300 Nordex N90/2300 Enercon E66 Gamesa G58/850 Repower MM70 Repower MM82 Repower MM82 Repower MM82 Nordex N90/2300 Acciona (?) Repower MM82 Vestas V52/850 Vestas V80/1800 Vestas V80/1800

J

K
1500 300 750 ? ? 275 275 275 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 850 2000 2000 660 850 275 1300 2300 2000 850 2000 2000 2000 2000 2300 1500 ? 2000 850 1800 1800

L
77 . 28 . 48 . . 32 . 32 . 32 . 77 . 70,5 . 70,5 . 77 . 77 . 77 . 52 . 70 . 70 . 47 . 52 . 32 . 62 . 90 . 66 . 58 . 70 . 82 . 82 . 82 . 90 . . 82 . 52 . 80 . 80 .

M
PITCH+ . STALL . PITCH PITCH PITCH PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH . PITCH STALL . PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ . . PITCH+ . . .

N

E 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163
. . . . . . 2007 . . . 2006 2006 2006 . . . . . . . . . 2007 2008 2007 2005 . . 2007 . . . .

F
2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006

G 2000 2000 4000 8000 4000 9000 12000 12000 12000 1200 12000 12000 12000 9000 1,5 8000 12000 4250 11900 19550 132 8000 5500 3025 3300 3850 500 2000 13800 11690 12000 4250 18000

H
1 1 2 4 2 6 6 6 6 2 6 6 6 6 1 4 6 5 14 23 1 4 20 11 12 14 2 1 6 7 6 5 9

I J Enercon E70 Enercon E70 Repower MM82 Enercon E66 Enercon (?) GE 1.5s Repower MM82 Repower MM82 Repower MM82 Enercon E40 Vestas V80/2000 Vestas V80/2000 Vestas V80/2000 Repower MD77 African Wind Power AWP 3.6 900? ? Enercon E70 Gamesa G58/850 Gamesa G58/850 Gamesa G58/850 ? 132? Repower MM82 Vergnet GEV MP 275 Vergnet GEV MP 275 Vergnet GEV MP 275 Vergnet GEV MP 275 Vergnet (?) Repower MM82 Enercon E70/2300 Ecotecnia 74 Repower MM82 Gamesa G58/850 Gamesa G80/2000

K
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 1500 2000 2000 2000 600 2000 2000 2000 1500 1,5 2000 ? 2000 850 850 850 ? 2000 275 275 275 275 250 ? 2000 2300 1670 2000 850 2000

L
70 70 82 66 70 70,5 82 82 82 40 80 80 80 77 3,6 70 58 58 58 82 32 32 32 32 82 71 74 82 58 80 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

M
PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ . PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ . PITCH PITCH PITCH PITCH+ . . PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ . 66 PITCH+ PITCH PITCH PITCH PITCH . PITCH+ PITCH+ . PITCH+ . .

N

?

E 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196
. 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

F
2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006

G 10000 11500 11500 12000 2000 4500 5950 6000 12000 10000 10000 12000 12000 9200 11500 11500 11500 8000 12000 12000 7800 10400 10400 10400 10500 10500 11700 12000 12000 12000 12000 12000 12000

H
4 5 5 6 1 5 7 2 6 5 5 6 6 4 5 5 5 4 6 6 6 8 8 8 6 6 9 6 6 6 6 6 6

I Nordex N80/2500 Nordex N90/2300 Nordex N90/2300 Vestas V80/2000 Enercon (?) Neg Micon (?) ? Vestas V90/3000 Enercon (?) Repower MM82 Vestas (?) Enercon E66 Enercon E70 Nordex N90/2300 Nordex N90/2300 Nordex N90/2300 Nordex N90/2300 Enercon E66 Enercon E66 Repower MM82 Siemens Bonus SWT-1.3-62 Bonus Energy B62/1300 Siemens Bonus SWT-1.3-62 Siemens Bonus SWT-1.3-62 Vestas V66/1750 Vestas V66/1750 Siemens Bonus SWT-1.3-62 Vestas V80/2000 Repower MM82 Repower MM82 Vestas V80/2000 Vestas V80/2000 Vestas V80/2000

J

K
2500 2300 2300 2000 2000 900 850 3000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2300 2300 2300 2300 2000 2000 2000 1300 1300 1300 1300 1750 1750 1300 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000

L
80 90 90 80 ? ? ? 90 ? 82 ? 66 70 90 90 90 90 66 66 82 62 62 62 62 66 66 62 80 82 82 80 80 80 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

M
PITCH+ . . . . STALL . . . PITCH+ PITCH PITCH+ . . . . . PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ . STALL . . PITCH+ PITCH+ . 122 . PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH PITCH PITCH

N

E 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2007 2007 . . . . 2005 . . . . . 2005 . . . ?

F
2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2007

G 12000 12000 11500 11500 11500 9200 11500 11500 9000 11500 850 5400 12000 11500 1700 12000 11500 9000 12000 10400 3200 6000 9000 7500 9000 10000 9000 12000 1670 275 12000 12000 12000

H
6 6 5 5 5 4 5 5 6 5 1 3 6 5 2 8 5 6 6 8 4 3 6 5 6 5 6 6 1 1 6 6 8

I Vestas V80/2000 Vestas V80/2000 Nordex N90/2300 Nordex N90/2300 Nordex N90/2300 Nordex N90/2300 Nordex N90/2300 Nordex N90/2300 GE 1.5s Nordex N90/2300 Vestas V52/850 Vestas V80/1800 Vestas (?) Nordex N90/2300 Gamesa G52/850 GE 1.5sl Nordex N90/2300 Repower MD77 Repower MM82 Nordex N60/1300 Enercon E48 Vestas V80/2000 Neg Micon NM64/1500 Neg Micon NM64 (Vestas?) Neg Micon NM64/1500 Repower MM82 Repower MD77 Repower MM82 Ecotecnia 74 Vergnet GEV MP 275 Vestas V90/2000 Vestas V80/2000 ?

J

K
2000 2000 2300 2300 2300 2300 2300 2300 1500 2300 850 1800 2000 ? 2300 850 1500 2300 1500 2000 1300 800 2000 1500 1500 1500 2000 1500 2000 1670 275 2000 2000 1500 ?

L
80 80 90 90 90 90 90 90 70,5 90 52 80 90 52 77 90 77 82 60 48 80 64 64 64 82 77 82 74 32 90 80 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

M
PITCH PITCH . . . . . . PITCH+ . . . . . PITCH+ PITCH+ . PITCH+ PITCH+ STALL . PITCH . . STALL PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ . . . . .

N

5x2000

E 230 ? . 231 . 232 . 233 . 234 2006 235 236 Oktober (Juni) 237 . 238 . 239 . 240 . 241 . 242 . 243 2009 244Dezember 245 2008 246 . 247 . 248 . 249 2008 250 . 251 März ? 252 . 253 . 254 . 255 2006 256 . 257 . 258 . 259 . 260 . 261 . 262 .

F

2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007

G 12000 24000 2500 10500 4125 2475 36000 3400 8350 8350 8350 12000 11500 12000 12000 8100 6900 9200 11500 12000 12000 15000 10000 10000 11500 11500 12000 10000 11700 8000 8000 12000 12000

H

8 12 1 7 15 9 18 4 5 5 5 8 5 6 6 9 3 4 5 6 6 5 5 4 5 5 5 4 9 4 4 6 6

I J ? Vestas V80/2000 Proven WT2500 Repower MD77 Vergnet GEV MP 275 Vergnet GEV MP 275 Vestas V90/2000 Gamesa (?) Ecotecnia 80 1.6 Ecotecnia 80 1.6 Ecotecnia 80 1.6 Acciona AW-77/1500 Nordex N90/2300 Enercon E70 Repower MM70 8x2000 Enercon (?) Enercon E70/2300 Enercon E70/2300 Enercon E70/2300 Enercon E70/E4 Enercon E70 Vestas V90/3000 Gamsea (?) Nordex N90/2500 Nordex N90/2300 Nordex N90/2300 Nordex N80/2400 Nordex N80/2500 Siemens Bonus SWT-1.3-62 Repower MM82 Repower MM82 Repower MM82 Repower MM82

K

L

M

N

1500 2000 2500 1500 275 275 2000 850 1670 1670 1670 1500 2300 2000 2000 900 2300 2300 2300 2000 2000 3000 2000 2500 2300 2300 2400 2500 1300 2000 2000 2000 2000

?

3,5 ?

?

?

?

. 80 . . 77 32 . 32 . 90 . . 80 . 80 . 80 . 77 . 90 . 70 . 70 . . 71 . 71 . 71 . 71 . 70 . 90 . . 90 . 90 . 90 . 80 . 80 . 62 . 82 . 82 . 82 82

. . . 57 . PITCH PITCH . . . . . . . PITCH+ PITCH+ . PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ . . . . . . . PITCH+ . PITCH+ PITCH+ 80 PITCH+ 80 PITCH+

E 263 . 264 . 265 . 266 . 267 . 268 Januar ? 269 . 270 . 271 2008 272 . 273 . 274 . 275 . 276 . 277 2008 278 . 279 . 280 . 281 . 282 2008 283 Januar 284 . 285 . 286 . 287 . 288 . 289 . 290 2008 291 Juni 292 ? 293 . 294 . 295 .

F

G 2007 12000 2007 3400 2007 6000 2007 11500 2007 5600 2007 15000 2007 10000 2007 10000 2007 12000 2007 10000 2007 11500 2007 1200 2007 2400 2007 3600 2007 4000 2007 10000 2007 10000 2007 10000 2007 3900 2007 10000 2007 13800 2007 9100 2007 10400 2007 12000 2007 12000 2007 12000 2007 10400 2007 28000 2007 112000 2007 ? 2007 9200 2007 4000 2007 10000

H
6 4 3 5 7 5 4 5 6 5 5 1 2 3 2 4 4 4 3 5 6 7 8 6 6 6 8 14 56 1 4 2 4

I Repower MM82 Gamesa G58/850 Gamsea (?) Nordex N90/2300 Enercon (?) Vestas V90/3000 Nordex N90/2500 Repower MM92 Gamesa G90/2000 Gamesa G80/2000 Nordex N90/2300 Winwind WWD-1-64 Winwind WWD-1-64 Winwind WWD-1-64 Enercon ? / WinWind ? Nordex N80/2500 Nordex N90/2500 Nordex N90/2500 Nordex N60/1300 Repower MM82 Nordex N90/2300 Siemens Bonus SWT-1.3-62 Siemens (?) Vestas V90/2000 Vestas V90/2000 Vestas V80/2000 Siemens Bonus SWT-1.3-62 Enercon E70 Enercon E70 ? ...éolienne à pales souples Nordex N90/2300 Repower MM70 Nordex N90/2500

J

K
2000 850 2000 ? 2300 800 ? 3000 2500 2000 2000 2000 2300 1200 1200 1200 2000 2500 2500 2500 1300 2000 2300 1300 1300 ? 2000 2000 2000 1300 2000 2000 ? 2300 2000 2500

L
82 58 . . 90 . . 90 . 90 . 92 . 90 80 . 90 . 64 . 64 . 64 . 71 . 80 . 90 . 90 . 60 . 82 . 90 62 . . 90 . 90 . 80 . 62 . 70 . 70 . 90 . 70 . 90 .

M
80 PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ . . . . PITCH+ 78 . . . . . . . PITCH+ . . STALL PITCH+ 80 . . . . . PITCH . PITCH+ PITCH+ 32 . . PITCH+ .

N

2300

296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328

E 2009?
März Januar . . . . . . . . Juli Juli . Januar . . . . . 2005 2009 . . . . . 2009 . . . .

F
2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008

G 12000 4000 11500 11500 10000 10000 6300 5000 3025 8500 12000 12000 22000 32000 10000 29900 10000 12000 3900 11700 12000 4000 9200 20 5400 12000 4000 8000 28000 35000 4250 7650 20000

H
6 5 5 5 4 4 7 2 11 10 6 8 11 16 4 13 5 6 3 9 6 2 4 2 3 6 2 4 14 14 5 9 10

I Repower MM82 Enercon E48 Nordex N90/2300 Nordex N90/2300 Nordex N90/2500 Nordex N90/2500 Enercon (?) Nordex N90/2500 Vergnet GEV MP 275 Gamesa G58/850 Gamesa G80/2000 Repower MD77 Gamesa G90/2000 Gamesa G90/2000 Nordex N90/2500 Enercon E70/2300 Repower MM82 Repower MM82 Ecotecnia 62 (Repower?) Ecotecnia 62 Vestas V80/2000 Vestas V80/2000 Enercon (?) Aircon 10S ? Enercon (?) Enercon E70/E4 Vestas (?) Repower (?) ? Gamesa (?) Gamsea (?) Gamsea (?)

J

K
2000 800 2300 2300 2500 2500 900 2500 275 850 2000 1500 2000 2000 2500 2300 2000 2000 1300 1300 2000 2000 2300 10 1800 2000 2000 2000 2000 2500 850 850 2000

L
82 48 90 90 90 90 ? 90 32 58 80 77 90 90 90 71 82 82 62 62 80 80 . . . . . .

M
65 . . . . 65 PITCH+ . . . . . . . PITCH PITCH+ . PITCH+ . . . PITCH+ PITCH+ . . . PITCH . . . . . . . . . . . .

N

2500 2500

900?

78 78

1x2000

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

. . . . . . . . . 7,4 . . . . . . . . . .

E 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2009 . . .

F
2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008

G 7500 18000 2400 4800 7200 11500 23000 16000 10000 10000 12000 12000 11690 8000 2300 8000 9200 11500 11500 5600 7500 4600 16000 4600 10000 12000 4250 6000 50600 2000 4000 8000 10000

H
5 9 2 4 6 5 10 8 5 5 6 6 7 4 1 4 4 5 5 7 3 2 8 2 4 6 5 2 22 1 2 4 5

I ? ? Winwind (?) Winwind WWD-1-64 Winwind (?) Siemens (?) Siemens (?) Enercon (?) Vestas (?) Enercon (?) ? ? Ecotecnia (?) Enercon (?) Nordex N90/2300 Repower (?) Nordex N90/2300 Nordex N90/2300 Nordex N90/2300 Enercon E53 Nordex (?) Enercon (?) Enercon E82 Enercon E70 Nordex N90/2500 Enercon E82 Gamesa G52/850 Vestas V90/3000 Enercon E70/2300 Enercon E70 Enercon E70 Repower (?) Enercon E70

J

K
1500 2000 1200 1200 1200 2300 2300 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 1670 2000 2300 2000 2300 2300 2300 800 2500 2300 2000 2300 2500 2000 850 3000 2300 2000 2000 2000 2000 ? ? ?

L
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

M
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PITCH+ PITCH+ . . PITCH+ . PITCH+ PITCH+ PITCH+ . PITCH+

N

64 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 90 ? 90 90 90 53 ? ? 82 70 90 82 52 90 71 71 70 ? 71

7x2000 2000

2300

2300

E 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394
. . . . . . . 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2007 . . .

F
2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008

G 23000 52000 87000 10000 10000 12500 12500 8000 12000 23000 12500 7500 11500 12000 12000 12000 10000 12000 10000 6000 10000 12000 20000 30000 8000 25300 1200 20800 10000 10000 12500 12000 12000 ?

H
10 26 29 5 4 5 5 4 8 10 5 3 5 6 6 6 5 6 5 3 5 6 10 15 4 11 1 26 5 5 5 6

I Enercon (?) Repower MM92 Vestas V90/3000 Vestas ? / Gamsea ? Nordex N90/2500 Nordex N90/2500 Nordex N90/2500 Enercon E70 Repower MD77 Enercon E82 Nordex (?) Nordex (?) Enercon (?) Enercon (?) Enercon (?) Enercon E66 Vestas V80/2000 Vestas (?) Repower (?) ? Vestas V90/2000 Vestas V80/2000 Vestas V90/2000 ? Repower MM92 Siemens (?) Winwind WWD-1-64 Enercon E48 Repower MM82 Repower MM82 Nordex (?) Repower MM82 Gamsea (?)

J

K
2300 2000 3000 2000 2500 2500 2500 2000 1500 2300 2500 2500 2300 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2300 1200 800 2000 2000 2500 2000 ? ?

L
92 90 90 ? 90 90 90 70 77 82 ? ? 70 ? ? 66 80 ? ? ? 90 80 90 ? ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

M
. PITCH+ . . . . . . . . . . PITCH+ . . PITCH+ PITCH . . . . PITCH 80 . . PITCH+ . . 56 . PITCH+ PITCH+ . PITCH+ .

N

2000

? ?

. 92 . . 64 . 48 82 . 82 . . 92 . .

E 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427
. . . 2007 . 2007 2006 . . 2006 2007 . . . . . . . . . . 2009? . . 2009? . . . . . . . .

F
2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008

G 22000 1980 6680 12000 8000 10000 1300 11500 10000 11500 11500 8000 12000 6000 6900 4600 6900 11500 10000 8000 10000 11000 12000 12000 12000 24000 7500 10000 10000 12000 8000 11500 12000

H
11 3 4 6 4 5 1 5 5 5 5 4 6 5 3 2 3 5 5 4 5 4 6 6 5 12 3 4 4 6 4 5 5

I Vestas (?) Gamsea (?) Ecotecnia (?) Repower MM82 Gamesa G90/2000 Gamesa G90/2000 Nordex N60/1300 Nordex (?) Gamsea (?) Nordex ? / Gamsea ? Nordex N90/2300 Gamesa G87/2000 Gamesa G87/2000 Winwind WWD-1-64 Enercon (?) Enercon E70/2300 Enercon E70/2300 Enercon E70/2300 Repower MM82 Repower MM82 Repower (?) Repower (?) Repower (?) Repower (?) Repower (?) Vestas (?) Nordex N90/2500 Nordex N90/2500 Nordex N90/2500 Vestas (?) Enercon (?) Nordex N90/2500 Nordex N80/2400

J

K
2000 660 1670 2000 2000 2000 1300 2300 2000 2300 2300 2000 2000 1200 2300 2300 2300 2300 2000 2000 2000 2750 2000 2000 2400 2000 2500 2500 2500 2000 2000 2300 2400 ? ? ?

L
. . . . . . . . . . . .

M
. . . . . . STALL . . . . . . . . . . PITCH+ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

N

82 90 90 60 90 ? ?

?

11x2000

? ? ? ? ? ?

? ?

90 87 87 64 . . 71 . 70 . 70 . 82 82 . . . . . . . 90 90 90 . . 90 . 80 .

67

80

80 80 80

E 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460
? . . . 2009 . . . 2007 . . . . . . . . 2007 . . . . . 2009 2009 . . . . . . . .

F
2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009

G
10 2300 4600 12000 4800 8000 5600 8100 12000 90000 10020 12000 6680 7200 10020 10020 6000 11500 12000 4000 8000 1000 22000 8350 10020 12000 10000 8000 8000 10000 18000 41400 18000

H
1 1 2 6 6 4 7 10 6 30 6 6 4 9 6 6 3 5 6 2 4 1 11 5 6 6 5 10 4 5 9 18 9

I ? ... France Eolienne 10kW ? ? Vestas V90/2000 Enercon E53 Enercon E66 Enercon E48 Enercon E48 Vestas (?) ? Ecotecnia (?) Gamesa G80/2000 Ecotecnia 80 1.6 Enercon E48 Ecotecnia (?) Ecotecnia (?) Enercon (?) Enercon E70/2300 Enercon (?) AAER Vestas (?) Vergnet GEV HP Vestas (?) Ecotecnia (?) Ecotecnia (?) Vestas V90/2000 Repower (?) Enercon (?) Enercon (?) Enercon (?) ? Siemens Bonus SWT-2.3-93 ?

J
2300 2000

K
10 2000 2300 2000 800 2000 800 800 2000 3000 1670 2000 1670 800 1670 1670 2000 2300 2000 2000 2000 1000 2000 1670 1670 2000 2000 800 2000 2000 2000 2300 2000 ? ? ?

L
. . . 90 53 66 53 53

M
PITCH . . 80 . . PITCH+ . . . . . . . 50 . . . . PITCH+ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

N

. . . . ? . 70-80 . ? . 80 . 80 . 48 ? . ? . ? . 71 . ? . ? . ? . 62 . ? . ? . ? . 90 . ? . ? . ? . ? . ? . 82? . ? .

E 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

F
2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009

G 35000 8000 9350 8000 8000 22000 2400 2400 2400 6900 8000 13800 13800 13800 27000 10000 10000 10000 10000 11500 12000 12000 10000 9200 2300 8000 20000 20000 22000 22000 9200 13800 6000

H
14 4 11 4 4 11 2 2 2 3 4 6 6 6 9 4 4 4 4 5 5 6 5 4 1 4 10 8 11 11 4 6 3 ? Gamsea (?) Gamsea (?) Gamsea (?) Enercon (?) Gamsea (?) Winwind (?) Winwind (?) Winwind (?) Enercon (?) Winwind (?) Enercon (?) Enercon (?) Enercon E82 Winwind (?) Nordex (?) Nordex (?) Nordex (?) Nordex (?) Nordex (?) Nordex (?) Enercon (?) Enercon (?) Enercon (?) Siemens ? Enercon (?) Enercon (?) Nordex (?) Enercon (?) AAER Siemens (?) Siemens (?) Vestas (?)

I

J

K
2500 2000 850 2000 2000 2000 1200 1200 1200 2300 2000 2300 2300 2300 3000 2500 2500 2500 2500 2300 2400 2000 2000 2300 2300 2000 2000 2500 2000 2000 2300 2300 2000 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

L
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

M
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

N

2300 4x2300 3x2300

.

E 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526
. . 2008 2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2008 . . . . . . 2008 . . 2007 . . . .

F
2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009

G 9200 9350 12000 59800 50000 6900 2550 5950 6000 6000 8000 8000 16000 16000 22000 28000 30000 1700 11500 12000 10000 12000 13800 13800 12500 12500 22000 105000 10000 10000 10000 12000 12000

H
4 11 6 26 25 3 3 7 3 3 4 4 16 8 11 14 30 2 5 6 5 6 6 6 5 5 11 21 5 5 4 5 5

I Enercon (?) Gamesa G58/850 ? ? Vestas (?) Nordex (?) Gamesa G52/850 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Gamsea (?) Repower MM92 ? Enercon (?) Enercon E70/2300 ? Repower MM92 Repower (?) Enercon (?) Enercon E70/E4 Nordex (?) Nordex (?) Enercon (?) Multibrid Enercon (?) Repower (?) Nordex (?) Nordex (?) Nordex (?)

J
11800?

K
2300 850 2000 2300 2000 2300 850 850 2000 2000 2000 2000 1000 2000 2000 2000 1000 850 2300 2000 2000 2000 2300 2300 2500 2500 2000 5000 2000 2000 2500 2400 2400 ?

L
. 58 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? . . . . 52 . . . . . . . . . 92 . . . 71 . . 92 . . 71 . . . . . . . . . .

M
. 60 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 . . . . . . . . . . . . .

N

9x2300

E 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559
. . . . . . 2008 2008 . . . . . 2008 . 2008 . . . . . . 2008 . . . . . . . . . .

F
2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009

G 12000 27500 12000 24000 32000 4000 10000 6000 34000 10000 12000 12000 10000 12000 10000 10000 12000 12000 8000 12000 8000 8000 26000 10000 2300 8000 10000 12000 18400 18400 10000 10000 14000

H
5 11 6 12 16 4 5 3 17 5 6 6 5 8 4 4 5 5 4 6 10 4 13 5 1 4 5 8 8 8 4 4 7

I Nordex (?) Nordex (?) Gamesa G90/2000 Gamsea (?) Gamsea (?) ? Gamesa G90/2000 Gamesa G87/2000 ? Enercon E82 Vestas V90/2000 Repower MM82 Gamsea (?) Acciona AW-77/1500 Nordex (?) Nordex N90/2500 Nordex (?) Nordex (?) Enercon (?) Repower (?) Enercon (?) Enercon (?) Gamsea (?) Vestas (?) Enercon (?) Repower (?) Repower (?) GE (?) Enercon (?) Enercon (?) GE (?) GE (?) Enercon (?)

J

K
2400 2500 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 1500 2500 2500 2400 2400 2000 2000 800 2000 2000 2000 2300 2000 2000 1500 2300 2300 2500 2500 2000 ? ? ? ? ?

L
. . 90 . . . . 90 . 87 . 82 . 90 82 . 77 . . 90 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

M
. . . . . . . 67 . . . 105 . 80 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

N

8x2000

?

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

E 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592
. . . . . . 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2007 . . 2008

F
2009 2009 2009 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

G 10000 12000 12000 16000 22000 10000 54000 10500 7500 12000 12000 24000 30000
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

H
5 6 6 8 11 5 27 6 3 6 5 8 10 9 3 4 8 ? 6 9 8 ? 4

150000 8000 12000 ? 18000 ? 800 8000 63000 12000 ? 8000 10000 12000

1 4 21 6 6 4 5 6

I Vestas (?) Vestas (?) Vestas V90/2000 Enercon (?) Enercon (?) Enercon (?) ? ? Nordex (?) Repower (?) ? Vestas V90/3000 Ecotecnia (?) ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Gamsea (?) Gamsea (?)

J

K
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 1750 2500 2000 2400 3000 3000 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

L
. . 90 . . . . . . . . . 90 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

M
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

N

3x2000

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 60x2500 ? 2000 ? ? 800 2000 3000 2000 ? 2000 2000 2000

E 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625
. 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

F

G 12500 4000 12000 24000 9000 7500 16000 16000 24000 28000 34000 3000 16000 8000 10000 10000 10500 34000 12000 10000 28000 90000 12000 24000 10000 10000 12000 24000 45000 24000 4000 10000 1375

H
5 2 6 24 6 5 8 8 12 14 17 2 8 4 5 5 6 17 6 5 14 30 6 12 10 5 6 8 18 10 2 5 5 Nordex (?) Vestas (?) ? Repower (?) ? Repower (?) Gamsea (?) Gamsea (?) Gamsea (?) Gamsea (?) Gamsea (?) ? Gamsea (?) Vestas (?) Vestas (?) Vestas (?) Vestas (?) ? Enercon (?) ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Vestas (?) Vestas (?) Enercon (?) Vergnet (?)

I

J

K
2500 2000 2000 1000 1500 1500 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 1500 2000 2000 2000 2000 1750 2000 2000 2000 2000 3000 2000 2000 1000 2000 2000 3000 2500 2400 2000 2000 275 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

L
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

M
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

N

E 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

F

G 39000 16000 12000 8000 20000 12000 10500 3000 15000 18000 18000 18000 10000 1 6900 ? 8000 6000 10000 12000 12000 16000 12000 ? 24000 36000

H
26 8 6 4 8 6 7 2 5 6 6 6 5 1 4 3 4 6 5 8 12 12

I GE (?) ? Enercon (?) Enercon (?) ? ? ? Repower (?) Ecotecnia (?) Ecotecnia (?) Ecotecnia (?) Ecotecnia (?) ? ? ... Eolienne FD 3.2-1000 ? ? Gamsea (?) ? ? ? ? ? ? Vestas (?)

J

K
1500 2000 2000 2000 2500 2000 1500 1500 3000 3000 3000 3000 2000 1 ? 2000 2000 2500 2000 2400 2000 ? 2000 3000 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

L
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

M

N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PITCH+ = PITCH & adaptable speed STALL+ = STALL & adaptable speed

O
park developer

P
park operator

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Institut Aérotechnique de Saint-Cyr L'Ecole ? Vergnet ? ? ? Espace Éolien Développement Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent ? Innovent Aerowatt Aerowatt ? Aerowatt ? Poweo Poweo Vergnet/SIIF (EDF-EN) Aerowatt Aerowatt telball ? ? ? Poweo Poweo Aerowatt Poweo Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent SIIF (EDF-EN)

? ? Particulier ? ? Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Les 3 Suisses Natural Teck/Innovent Aerowatt/Vergnet Aerowatt/Vergnet Eoliennes Nord-Pas-de-Calais Aerowatt / SNC Marie- Galante Dhollandia (belgisches Logistik-Unternehmen) EDF-EN / EDEV/EDF/Cegelec ? Poweo / Conseil général de la Somme Aerowatt Aerowatt / SNC Eole Miquelon Aerowatt / SNC Eole Morne Constant Commune du Moule EEC (Eau et Electricité de Nouvelle-Calédonie) Electricité de Tahiti Enercal (fournisseur d'électricité en Nouvelle-Calédonie) SFE Française d’Eoliennes Sinerg-EOC / Poweo Aerowatt / SNC Eole Plateau de La Montagne Centrale éolienne du Goulien (SA) / Cegelec Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent EDF-EN

32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64

O P SIIF (EDF-EN) EDF-EN Eole-Res Eole-Res / CEP Souleilla ? Innovent JMB Energie JMB Energie / Centrale éolienne de Lastours/Énergies du Midi ? Aerowatt Aerowatt Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Eole-Res Eole-Res / CEP Souleilla Solldev Valeco Eole Vergnet Vergnet Aerowatt Aerowatt Vergnet/SIIF (EDF-EN) Aerowatt Poweo Boralex Valorem Enertrag Valorem Enertrag Mistral Energie GIE Mistral Energie Mistral Energie GIE Mistral Energie Mistral Energie GIE Mistral Energie Particulier/Private owner Hervé Huet Poweo Innovent Poweo Moulins à vent de Fitou Nerzh An Avel Nerzh An Avel Poweo Sinerg-EOC France / Cegelec / Adelis ? Solldev Valeco Eole ? Vergnet ? Aerowatt Aerowatt Aerowatt Aerowatt Aerowatt Aerowatt Innovent Boralex Communauté d'agglomération Mantes en Yvelines Communauté d'agglomération Mantes en Yvelines Poweo Compagnie Armoricaine D’Energie Verte CADEV (SAS) Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Corséol (SA) Corséol (SA)

65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97

O SIIF (EDF-EN) Hydelec Hydelec Poweo DBS-Wind System Particulier/Private owner SIIF (EDF-EN) Eole-Res Poweo Poweo Poweo Aerowatt Vergnet/SIIF (EDF-EN) Avel Braz ("kleines Unternehmen") Innovent Compagnie du Vent EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN / Poweo SIIF Energies EDF-EN Eole-Res Eole-Res Poweo Poweo VSB Energies Nouvelles ? ABO-Wind Poweo / Perfect Wind Nass & Wind Poweo Poweo Poweo Poweo

P EDF-EN/Sydec Hydelec Hydelec JSPM / Jeumont/Amec Spic/Espace Éolien Développement ? Lecoq SA/DBS Wind System M. Ladreyt / SARL PTPLM REVe ? / EDF-EN/Sydec STMicroelectronics Total Total Total Aerowatt Aerowatt Avel Braz ("kleines Unternehmen") Boralex Compagnie du Vent / Moulin de Services EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN ? EDF-EN / SNC parc éolien St Simon, Riols Eole-Res Eole-Res Escofi Escofi Juwi Macquarie Bank/ABO Wind Moulins à vent de Fitou / Iberdrola Natenco Séchilienne-Sidec Séchilienne-Sidec Séchilienne-Sidec Séchilienne-Sidec

98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130

O SFE Française d’Eoliennes ? Poweo ? Aerowatt Aerowatt Aerowatt Sofiva Sofiva Sofiva Sofiva Sofiva Sofiva Compagnie du Vent ? ? EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN / Vergnet Breiz-Avel (?) / Ecovent ? Nordex Enertrag Eole 48 Particulier/Private owner Erelia Erelia Erelia Nordex Française d'Éoliennes Particulier/Private owner P&T Technologie P&T Technologie P&T Technologie

P
SFE Française d’Eoliennes SPEE de St Sève/DBS VS Energie (SNC) / Cegelec ? Aerowatt Aerowatt / Vergnet Aerowatt / Vergnet Boralex Boralex Boralex Boralex Boralex Boralex Compagnie du Vent EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN Elsam Enersis/Nordex Enertrag Eole 48 Eolfi / Patrick Neel / S3E Erelia Erelia Erelia Eurowatt Française d'Éoliennes Hervé Huet Iberdrola Iberdrola Iberdrola

131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163

O Innovent/Verhaegue Industrie Innovent/Verhaegue Industrie JMB Energie VSB Energies Nouvelles Juwi Poweo Poweo Maïa Sonnier Maïa Sonnier Ostwind Volkswind Volkswind Volkswind Neo ? Ventis Eurowatt SFE Française d’Eoliennes SFE Française d’Eoliennes SFE Française d’Eoliennes ? Energie 21 Aerowatt Aerowatt / Vergnet Aerowatt / Vergnet Aerowatt / Vergnet Aupiac Diversification (SARL) Avel-If (SARL) VSB Energies Nouvelles Valorem ? Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent

P Innovent/Verhaegue Industrie Innovent/Verhaegue Industrie J.M. Bouchet / JMB Energie Juwi / Boralex Juwi / Plougin SAS ? M. Canard / Cegelec M. Chatelain Maïa Sonnier Maïa Sonnier Ostwind Poweo - Sorgenia (CIR) - SFE Française d'Éoliennes Poweo - Sorgenia (CIR) - SFE Française d'Éoliennes Poweo - Sorgenia (CIR) - SFE Française d'Éoliennes RDE (Neo?) Robert Laurent Samfi Invest Samfi/Ventis/Innovent SFE Française d’Eoliennes SFE Française d’Eoliennes SFE Française d’Eoliennes ? ABO-Wind/Energie 21 Aerowatt Aerowatt / SNC Eole La Perrière Aerowatt / SNC Eole La Perrière Aerowatt / SNC Eole La Perrière Aupiac Diversification (SARL) Avel-If (SARL) Boralex Cantos Holding (SAS) Chapelle d’Eole (SARL) Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent

164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196

O Compagnie Nationale du Rhône CNR Compagnie Nationale du Rhône CNR Eolec Eurowatt EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN Ventura Ecovent Energieteam Energieteam Nordex Nordex Nordex Nordex Enertrag Enertrag Maïa Sonnier Eole-Res Eole-Res Eole-Res Eole-Res Eole-Res Eole-Res Eole-Res Eole-Res Poweo Valorem Volkswind Volkswind Volkswind

P Compagnie Nationale du Rhône CNR Compagnie Nationale du Rhône CNR Ecojoule Ecoterra / Infinivent ? EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN / Ecovent Energieteam / Nouvergie (SAS) Energieteam / Samfi Invest Energy Power Resources / Macquarie Bank et Norde ? Energy Power Resources / Macquarie Bank et Norde ? Enersis Enersis Enertrag Enertrag Eole 79 SAS Eole-Res Eole-Res Eole-Res Eole-Res Eole-Res Eole-Res Eole-Res Eole-Res Eolfi Eolfi Eolia Eolia Eolia

O 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229
Volkswind Volkswind ? Nordex Nordex Nordex / Eole 76 Nordex Nordex Poweo Nordex P&T Technologie P&T Technologie P&T Technologie Nordex Particulier/Private owner Valorem Nordex Poweo Maïa Sonnier Perfect Wind Nass & Wind Difko Poweo Poweo Poweo Ventura Nass & Wind ? Valeco Eole Vergnet VSB Energies nouvelles Zéphyr ?

P Eolia Eolia ERG ERG / VSB Energies Nouvelles? / Theta? ERG / VSB Energies Nouvelles? / Theta? ERG / VSB Energies Nouvelles? / Theta? ERG/VSB Energies Nouvelles / Eole Service ? ERG/VSB Energies Nouvelles / Theta ? Escofi Eurowatt Iberdrola Iberdrola Iberdrola JPEE / Financière du Cèdre ? Lascovent M. Charmy / SNC Saint Laurent energie M. Châtelain ? / JPEE M. Guilllaume / SAS les 4 chemins / Poweo Maïa Sonnier Moulins à vent de Fitou / Iberdrola Natenco - GDF Ouest Energies nouvelles / Energies Eoliennes France ? Sinerg / Adelis / Ouest Energies Nouvelles ? Sinerg / Adelis/Eneria ? Sinerg / Adelis/Eneria? / Ouest Energies nouvelles? Théolia - Ventura Théolia/Ventura Val d'Eole (SARL) Valeco Eole Vergnet VSB Energies nouvelles Zéphyr / loceaux / ADEME ? ?

230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262

O ? ? Krugwind Energie 21 Aerowatt Aerowatt / Vergnet Eole-Res Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN Enel Erelis (SAS) / Wind System Energieteam Energieteam Energieteam Energieteam Energieteam Eneria Eurowatt / Infinivent Nordex Nordex Nordex Enersis/Shell Cegelec Eole-Res ABO-Wind ABO-Wind Erelia Erelia

P ? ? ? ABO-Wind/Energie 21 Aerowatt Aerowatt CEPE des Trois Sources et de St Florentin Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN Enel Erelis (SAS) Energieteam Energieteam Energieteam Energieteam Energieteam / CNR Eneria / NED Nouvelles Energies Dynamiques Enersis Enersis Enersis Enersis Enersis/Shell Eole Energies SAS Eole-Res Epuron Epuron Erelia Erelia

263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295

O Erelia Infinivent Infinivent Nordex Nass & Wind Dirkshof Boreas Forcéole / Perfect Wind ? Gamesa P&T Technologie Perfect Wind Innovent Innovent Innovent Innovent Cegelec Nordex Nordex Juwi Maïa Sonnier Nass & Wind Adeol Adeol RDE RDE (Recherche et Développement Eolien) / Nii ? RDE / Tencia ? Adeol (Ecovent?) Ostwind Ostwind ? Les Vents Meuse Sud ? Boreas / Perfect Wind

P Erelia Eurowatt Eurowatt Eurowatt GDF GHF Windpark Herzberg GmbH & Co. KG Iberdrola Iberdrola Iberdrola Iberdrola Iberdrola Innovent Innovent Innovent Innovent JMA Energies SARL JPEE / Financière du Cèdre ? JPEE / Financière du Cèdre ? Juwi Maïa Sonnier Natenco / Théolia/Ventura? Neo Neo Neo Neo Neo Neo / Le Duigou ? Ostwind/Babcock and Brown/Enersis Ostwind/Babcock and Brown/Enersis Particulier Pedersoli Poweo Poweo

296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328

O Zéphyr REE REVe REVe Valorem Valorem Adeol Eoles Futur / Eole 76 ? SEC Poweo Poweo SFE Française d’Eoliennes SFE Française d’Eoliennes SFE Française d’Eoliennes Poweo Ventura ? Ventura Valeco Eole Valeco Eole Volkswind VSB Energies nouvelles VSB Energies nouvelles ? ? ? ABO-Wind Adelis EDF-EN Espace Éolien Développement Gamesa / Innovent Gamesa Énergie France Gamesa Énergie France ?

P
Poweo REE REVe REVe RWE RWE SARL Le Duigou Scan Energy / Eurocap ? SEC Séchilienne-Sidec Séchilienne-Sidec SFE Française d’Eoliennes SFE Française d’Eoliennes SFE Française d’Eoliennes SNET Théolia - Ventura Theolia/Ventura Théolia/Ventura Valeco Eole Valeco Eole Volkswind VSB Energies nouvelles VSB Energies nouvelles ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

O 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361
GdF Infinivent Innovent Innovent Innovent Innovent Innovent Intervent Neo Ostwind International Poweo Poweo Tencia Ventura ABO-Wind ABO-Wind ABO-Wind ABO-Wind ABO-Wind ABO-Wind Adelis ? Innovent Seris Eole (SAS) Boreas ? Compagnie du Vent EDF (nicht -EN !) ? EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN

P ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ABO-Wind ABO-Wind ABO-Wind ABO-Wind ABO-Wind ABO-Wind / Juwi ? Amec Spie / Espace Éolien Développement Boralex Boralex Boralex Boreas / Iberdrola Brocéliande Energies Locales (SAS) Compagnie du Vent EDF (nicht -EN !) EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN

362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394

O EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN Eneria / Neo ? Eole 76 développement Eole 76 développement Eole 76 développement Enel Erelis (SAS) / Wind System Enel Erelis (SAS) / Wind System Energie 21 Enersis / Shell Enersis/Shell Enertrag Enertrag Enertrag Enertrag Adelis Adelis ? ? Eole-Res Eole-Res Eole-Res Eole-Res ? ? Innovent Innovent Valorem Ventura Epuron Erelia Infinivent

P EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN EDP Renovaveis EDP Renovaveis / Oget et Shulz (particulier?) EDP Renovaveis / Oget et Shulz (particulier?) EDP Renovaveis / Oget et Shulz (particulier?) Enel Erelis (SAS) Enel Erelis (SAS) Energie 21 Enersis / Shell Enersis/Shell Enertrag Enertrag Enertrag Enertrag Eole 45 (SICAP) / Eneria ? Eole 45 / Eneria ? Eole 79 Eole-Res Eole-Res Eole-Res Eole-Res Eole-Res Eolfi Eolfi Eolfi Eolfi Eolfi Eolfi / Energies Pays de Falaise ? Epuron Erelia Eurowatt

395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427

O Infinivent / Eurowatt ? Infinivent Les Éoliennes du Gévaudan ? Alternative Technologie Forcéole / Perfect Wind ? Perfect Wind Perfect Wind / Eolor/Vigneron/Nath/Schlernitzauer Windstrom Iberdrola / Perfect Wind La rose des vents lorrains Gamesa Energie France ? Innovent Gamsea Energie France ? JMB Energie Juwi Juwi Maïa Eolis Maïa Sonnier ? Maïa Sonnier Maïa Sonnier Maïa Sonnier Maïa Sonnier Eurowatt Nass & Wind Nass & Wind Nass & Wind ? Eole 76 développement Nordex DBS-Wind System

P Eurowatt Eurowatt / Enersis Forces éoliennes du Gévaudan GDF Iberdrola Iberdrola Iberdrola Iberdrola Iberdrola Iberdrola / Perfect Wind Iberdrola / Poweo/Perfect Wind ? Iberdrola / Samfi Invest ? Iberdrola, Gamesa Innovent Innovent ? JMB Energie Juwi Juwi Maïa Eolis Maïa Eolis Maïa Sonnier Maïa Sonnier Maïa Sonnier Maïa Sonnier Maïa Sonnier Maïa Sonnier / Eurowatt ? Nass & Wind/SNET/Habitants (invest. loceaux) Nass & Wind/SNET/Habitants (invest. loceaux) Nass & Wind/SNET/Habitants (invest. loceaux) Neo Neo Nordex Nordex/SBEA/DBS-Wind System

428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460

O ? ? ? Poweo REE REE ? ? Neo / RDE ? ? Espace Éolien Développement ? Poweo Tencia Adelis Valorem Valorem Valeco Eole Valeco Eole Valeco Eole Valorem Oser Vergnet Volkswind 3V Développement 3V Développement VSB Energies Nouvelles ? Adeol Adeol Adeol Enel Erelis Eolfi / Cegelec ? Espace Éolien Développement

P Particulier Pedersoli Pedersoli Poweo REE REE REVe REVe SAS Centrale éolienne Canet-de-Salars - Pont-de-Salars SAS Eoliennes de Mounes / Total et Harpen (Groupe RWE) Séchilienne-Sidec Séchilienne-Sidec Sergies SEML SNC Energie du Delta / Samfi Invest / Enercon ? SNET SNET Valeco Eole Valeco Eole Valeco Eole Valorem Ventotec et ZJN Vergnet Volkswind Voltalia Voltalia VSB Energies Nouvelles / Nouvergies ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493

O Espace Éolien Développement Gamesa Énergie France Gamesa Énergie France Gamsea Energie France ? GdF Iberdrola / VSB Énergies Nouvelles Innovent Innovent Innovent Innovent Innovent Innovent Innovent Innovent Innovent Nordex Nordex Nordex Nordex Nordex Nordex Renerco SEPE Bois d'Anchat, Intervent SEPE Sachin / Intervent SPEHM ? Theolia / Ventura Theolia / Ventura Theolia / Ventura Theolia / Ventura Valorem Vivéole ? Vivéole ? VSB Energies nouvelles

P
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526

O VSB Energies nouvelles Neo Eole-Res Eole-Res Eole-Res CNR Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent EDF-EN Espace Éolien Développement ? Eneri /Noréole / EDF-EN ? Eolfi Energie 21 Énergiequelle Au Vent Energieteam Enersis/Shell Enersis/Shell Enertrag Enertrag ? Eolfi Nordex Nordex Nordex

P ? (Spanischer Investor?) CEPE de Grandbois CEPE de Sambres, de Lafage, de la Ferrière et de Vaumercy CEPE du Pays de St Seine et des Epinoirs CNR Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent Compagnie du Vent EDF-EN EDF-EN EDF-EN ? EDF-EN ? Energie 21 Énergiequelle Au Vent Energieteam Enersis/Shell Enersis/Shell Enertrag Enertrag Eole-Res Eolfi Eurowatt Eurowatt Eurowatt

O 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559
Nordex Eole Futur Française d'Éoliennes Française d'Éoliennes Française d'Éoliennes Eole-Res VSB Energies Nouvelles Energie France ? JMB Énergie Juwi Juwi Maïa Eolis Neo Neo Nordex Nordex Nordex Windsystem Amicus Salus Poweo REVE Valorem Gamesa Neo Energia ? ? ? ? ? ? Valorem Valorem Valorem

P Eurowatt Eurowind Française d'Éoliennes Française d'Éoliennes Française d'Éoliennes Iberdrola Iberdrola Iberdrola, Gamesa JMB Énergie / Nass et Wind Technologie Juwi Juwi Maïa Eolis Neo Neo Nordex Nordex Nordex Nordex Parc éolien d'Antoigné SAS et Énergie z r Poweo REVE RWE SAS du Mulsonnier SCE Saint-Alban Valeco Eole Valeco Eole Valeco Eole Valeco Eole Valeco Eole Valeco Eole Valorem Valorem Valorem

560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592

O VSB Energies nouvelles VSB Energies Nouvelles VSB Energies nouvelles Enel Erelis / JP Énergie environnement Intervent JP Énergie Environnement Eole-Res Compagnie du Vent Windsystem ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? (Valorem?) Aerodis Énergies Renouvelables Aerodis Énergies Renouvelables Aerodis Énergies Renouvelables Astoul Astoul Eco Delta Développement Eiden ENEOL ? Énergie Éolienne France Eneria Eneria / Infinivent

P VSB Energies nouvelles VSB Energies Nouvelles VSB Energies nouvelles / DIF(?) ? ? ? CEPE des Portes de la Côte d'OR et des Hautes Côtes Compagnie du Vent Nordex ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625

O Eole 76 développement Eole-Res ? Eolec Erelia Espace Éolien Développement Française d'Éoliennes Gamesa Énergie France Gamesa Énergie France Gamesa Énergie France Gamesa Énergie France Gamesa Énergie France Hostache Earl Iberdrola / Perfect Wind Infinivent Infinivent Infinivent Infinivent Infinivent Juwi Les Ailes d'Argensol Nass et Wind Technologie Nass et Wind Technologie Natenco Natenco P&T Technologie Valorem Valorem Valorem Valorem Volkswind VSB Energies nouvelles VSB Energies nouvelles Aerowatt

P
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Aerowatt

O 626 Sofiva-Energie 627 EDF-EN 628 Energieteam 629 Enertrag 630 Aerowatt 631 Nass et Wind Technologie 632 Iberdrola / Perfect Wind 633 ABO-Wind 634 Tencia 635 Tencia 636 Tencia 637 Tencia 638 Pannece, Bonnœuvre WKN ? 639 ? 640 Pfeiffer Énergies renouvelables 641 Oser 642 Gamesa Énergie France 643 ? 644 ? 645 ? 646 ? 647 Volkswind 648 Volkswind 649 Volkswind PITCH+ = PITCH & adaptable speed 650 STALL+ = STALL & adaptable speed 651

P

Boralex EDF-EN Energieteam Enertrag Éole de Mont de Gerson Gaz de France / Theolia ? Iberdrola / Perfect Wind Macquarie Bank Neo Neo Neo Neo Pannece, Bonnœuvre WKN ? Particulier Pfeiffer Énergies renouvelables Régie communale d'électricité Sergies Sieds Sieds Sieds VensorR Volkswind Volkswind Volkswind

Q

R

comments
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

.

démantelé en 1966 premier parc experimental en France . démantelé en 2004 erste Anlage Frankreichs ? - démantelé en 2004 à la suite d’un accident erste Anlage Frankreichs ? . . (auf thewindpower.com + suivi-eolien + FEE France Energie Eolienne ) EOLE 2005 EOLE 2005 démantelé en 2004 à la suite d’un accident EOLE 2005 . démantelé en 2003 ? . EOLE 2005 EOLE 2005 EOLE 2005; SNC = Société en nom collectif (= GbR; Betreibergesellschaft?) . . . . EOLE 2005 EOLE 2005 EOLE 2005 EOLE 2005; Poweo = Espace Éolien Développement ??? EOLE 2005 EOLE 2005; Fournisseur des éoliennes: Vestas Gamsea Eolica ? EOLE 2005

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64

Q EOLE 2005 EOLE 2005 (auf der Innovent-Seite + thewindpower.com + eolinfo.com) EOLE 2005 . . . . EOLE 2005. - Aerowatt réalise 1ere centrale éolienne française couplée au réseau EDF. Construite à Lastours elle produit 10 x 10 kW. . . . . EOLE 2005 . . . . EOLE 2005 . . . . démantelé . . . . Comm Agglo = établissement public de coopération intercommunale . . . .

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97

Q "Ce parc a bénéficié d'un accueil très favorable des riverains" . . EOLE 2005; Le parc éolien du CERS . . Eigentümer des ganzen Parks: SIIF Energies France & REVe (Régie d’Eletricité de Vendée) --> nordex-online.com . . . . . . démantelé en 2004 ??? . . cédé ? (nicht auf edf-website) . Parc cédé dans le cadre de l'activité de développement-vente d'actifs structurés. Programme "Plein Vent" en construction ? Parc cédé dans le cadre de l'activité de développement-vente d'actifs structurés. Programme "Plein Vent" . . . . . "für seine Qualität und Akzeptanz in der Bevölkerung anerkannt" . . . . . .

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130

Q . . . . . . . . . . GE = GE Wind . . . dont 10 MW (des 22 MW) cédés (Centrale cédée dans le cadre de l'activité de Développement-Vente d'Actifs Structurés ) dont 10 MW (des 22 MW) cédés (Centrale cédée dans le cadre de l'activité de Développement-Vente d'Actifs Structurés ) Parc cédé dans le cadre de l'activité de développement-vente d'actifs structurés. Programme "Plein Vent" cédé ? (nicht auf edf-website) . . . . . . Regroupés au sein de la société Le Haut des Ailes, 99 souscripteurs privés, résidant autour du parc, ont acquis des actions Regroupés au sein de la société Le Haut des Ailes, 99 souscripteurs privés, résidant autour du parc, ont acquis des actions Regroupés au sein de la société Le Haut des Ailes, 99 souscripteurs privés, résidant autour du parc, ont acquis des actions . . . (auf suivi-eolien: Kergrist - Maisnières II (12000 - 6x2000) + Le Roduel (6000 - 4x1500), Enercon, PITCH+, CNR / Iberdorla) . .

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163

Q . . . . . . . . . . . . . . www.e-eolienne.info . . . . . . . . auf www.vergnet.fr - insg. Nur 7,2 MW auf www.vergnet.fr - insg. Nur 7,2 MW auf www.vergnet.fr - insg. Nur 7,2 MW . . (Link auf VSB-Seite funtioniert nicht) . . . "Il s'agit du parc qui compte le plus grand nombre de machines, et les plus hautes, de toute la région." (Sept 2006)

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196

Q CNR = Compagnie Nationale du Rhône . . . dont 12 MW cédés (Centrale cédée dans le cadre de l'activité de Développement-Vente d'Actifs Structurés ) Parc cédé dans le cadre de l'activité de développement-vente d'actifs structurés. Programme "Plein Vent" cédé ? (nicht auf edf-website) Parc cédé dans le cadre de l'activité de développement-vente d'actifs structurés. Programme "Plein Vent" dont 12 MW cédés (Centrale cédée dans le cadre de l'activité de Développement-Vente d'Actifs Structurés ) Parc cédé dans le cadre de l'activité de développement-vente d'actifs structurés. Programme "Plein Vent" Parc cédé dans le cadre de l'activité de développement-vente d'actifs structurés. Programme "Plein Vent" . . . . . (nicht auf Nordex-Seite) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 projets juridiquement indépendants ont été mis en place par 4 sociétés 5 projets juridiquement indépendants ont été mis en place par 4 sociétés 5 projets juridiquement indépendants ont été mis en place par 4 sociétés

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229

Q 5 projets juridiquement indépendants ont été mis en place par 4 sociétés 5 projets juridiquement indépendants ont été mis en place par 4 sociétés . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l'annulation des permis de construire?

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262

Q l'annulation des permis de construire? (nur auf thewindpower.com) "Kemenez, l'île autonome en énergie" . . . . . . . . . cédé ? (nicht auf edf-website) en construction ? dont 4 MW cédés (Centrale cédée dans le cadre de l'activité de Développement-Vente d'Actifs Structurés ) . . . . . . . . . . (nicht auf Nordex-Seite) . . . . . . .

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Q 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . die einzelnen Parks sind hier gelistet: http://www.ostwind.de/index.php?id=33 . . . .

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Q 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328

. . REVe = Régie électricité de Vendée . . . . . . . . . . . . . Venture = filiale de Theolia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Q 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . en . . . en en . en

construction

construction ? construction ? construction ?

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394

Q en construction ? en construction ? en construction ? . . . . . . en construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . Brissy-Hamégicourt (3 machines), Séry-les-Mézières (4 machines), Ribemont (5 machines), Villers-le-Sec (3 machines) . . . en construction . . . . .

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Q 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . en construction . . . . . . en construction . . en construction . . . . . . . .

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Q 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . permis de construire pour 8 éoliennes accordé, travaux engagés . permis de construire pour 8 éoliennes accordé, travaux engagés . . Parc expérimental de Vergnet . . . Parc Chanteloup ??? / Parc Combourg ??? . . . . .
Pour le compte de la société Eolfi, Cegelec a livré sur le site 'Plaine Auboise', les infrastructures relatives à 3 parcs (6 turbines de 2,3 MW)

.

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Q 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493

. . . en . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . en . . . . . en en .

construction

construction

construction construction

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Q 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526

. . . . . . en construction en construction en construction en construction; (nicht auf www.thewindpower.net) . en construction; (nicht auf www.thewindpower.net) . . . en construction . . . . . . . en construction . . . Offshore . . . . .

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Q 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559

. . en . . . en . . en en . . . . en . . . en . . en en . . . . . . . . .

construction

construction

construction; (nicht auf www.thewindpower.net) construction

construction

construction

construction construction

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Q 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592

en construction en construction en construction . . . . . . . . en construction . gehört vielleicht zu Saint Thégonnec (siehe exploiteurs) ??? . . . en construction . . . (Vgl. Vent de Colere) . . . . . . . . . .

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Q 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Q 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .