On March 13, 2025, more than 160 senators from both the right and the center sent out a resounding call of concern against the multi-year energy program (PPE 3), introduced by Prime Minister François Bayrou. This open letter, addressed directly to Bayrou, expressed their discontent, severely criticizing the proposed program as unrealistic and potentially detrimental to the French economy.
The PPE 3, which aims to set the framework for France's energy strategy from 2025 to 2035, includes ambitious objectives such as slashing the share of fossil fuels from 58% down to 42% by 2030 and to 30% by 2035. At the same time, the share of electricity is purportedly set to increase from 27% to 34% by 2030 and eventually to 39% by 2035. The program also plans to boost renewable energy usage, excluding electricity, from 15% to 30% by 2035.
Senators are not just challenging the goals of PPE 3; they are vocally opposing the approach the government is taking to enact these changes. "Sur un sujet aussi majeur pour l’avenir de notre pays, il nous semblerait totalement inconcevable que la représentation nationale soit ignorée," stated centrist senator Vincent Delahaye. This highlights their contention with Bayrou's decision to adopt the PPE 3 by decree, effectively circumventing necessary parliamentary debate—a move senators view as undemocratic and concerning.
Beyond process, the letter expresses deep skepticism toward the ambitious targets laid out by the PPE 3. Senators argue these projections are unrealistic and fail to reflect the real costs associated with such dramatic shifts. One of the larger criticisms is the notion of moving away from nuclear energy, which has historically been the cornerstone of France's lower-carbon energy production. Instead, there is increased focus on solar power, which, according to critics, is inherently unstable due to its dependence on weather conditions. Delahaye lamented, "Je ne comprends pas que l’on puisse faire des propositions sans réelle étude d’impact," emphasizing the necessity for thorough impact studies before such pivotal changes are recommended.
The High Council for Climate and the High Commission for Atomic Energy have also chimed in, echoing the senators' concerns surrounding the impact of PPE 3 on energy prices for households and businesses alike. Their shared reservations indicate broader apprehensions about how energy stability may be compromised as well.
Further, the senators are troubled by the implications of this new energy policy on energy costs. They fear the proposed strategy could lead to soaring prices for consumers, preventing access to affordable energy and undermining economic stability.
Looking at the stakes involved, it becomes clear why this letter has caught the public's attention. Should these criticisms move the needle? Only time will tell if PM Bayrou will reconsider his strategies. The senators remain vigilant, eager to see how this volatile situation will evolve.
With the adoption date for the PPE 3 fast approaching, it seems the questions surrounding its practicality and impact will only intensify. The call for more clear strategies is loud, and the resistance from lawmakers sheds light on the need for comprehensive debate over such consequential matters.
While the government might see the PPE 3 as a stepping stone toward achieving carbon neutrality by 2050, for the many senators who are pushing back, it signifies more than just legislative maneuvering. It’s about maintaining the integrity of the democratic process and ensuring sustainability is not traded off for hastily set goals. Prime Minister Bayrou appears to be facing his own political crossroads, and the decisions made on the PPE 3 may shape the future of France's energy policy for years to come.