A-Infos (en) France, UCL AL #373 - Trade Unionism - Decarbonization: The Electricity Market Impasse and the Renewable Energy Crisis (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

Decarbonizing the economy requires significant government planning. In 
the energy sector, government reversals are frequent, and contradictions 
with capitalism abound, much to the dismay of small and medium-sized 
business owners in the renewable energy sector. Workers, caught between 
a rock and a hard place, are beginning to mobilize. --- The publication 
of the third Multiannual Energy Program (PPE3) was intended to provide a 
roadmap for France's energy transition over the coming decades. Instead, 
it reveals a persistent inability to move beyond a management approach 
based on competition, short-term budgetary trade-offs, and market 
instability. Behind government announcements, targets are slowing down 
and remain dependent on support caps, calls for tenders, and reversible 
political decisions.

The consequences are very real in the sector. Whether in design offices, 
among developers[1], in construction or maintenance companies, 
restructurings, hiring freezes, and layoffs are multiplying. The entire 
sector is hanging by a thread, dependent on the volume of authorized 
projects and the signals sent by the government. When orders slow down, 
employees become the adjustment variable in a system incapable of 
ensuring stable industrial continuity.

A private sector living off public money
Thus, many workers in the sector, for fear of losing their jobs, are 
locking themselves into an immediate defense of their company or the 
sector... even if it means forming alliances with employers' 
organizations. But "defending the sector" no longer addresses the 
underlying problem. Renewables will remain structurally fragile as long 
as they operate in a competitive market where each player depends on 
immediate profitability and where volumes can slow down overnight.

Contrary to the prevailing narrative, particularly that promoted by 
business leaders and their lobbyists, renewable energy has never 
developed thanks to the market. Solar power, and even more so wind 
power, already largely depend on public planning. Feed-in tariffs, calls 
for tenders, government-set targets, energy programming, grid connection 
regulations, network investments, etc.-the entire sector relies on 
collective guidelines! What we call a "market" today is actually 
fragmented planning organized around and for competition between private 
actors.

Companies then compete for limited volumes of projects, investments 
depend on anticipated financial returns, and the entire renewable energy 
sector operates through cycles of boom and bust. Companies in this 
sector are particularly vulnerable to this instability. They are often 
smaller, newer, and more easily sacrificed than the large, established 
energy groups. The right and far right are already exploiting this 
fragility to attack renewables, presenting their difficulties as proof 
of their inefficiency. However, the current problems do not stem from 
the technologies themselves but from the economic framework. Future 
electricity needs will massively require solar and wind power[2]. The 
problem is not the necessity of renewables but rather the market-driven 
organization of their development.

The market-based competition in electricity subjects a common good to 
the imperatives of capital, making users pay the price of a private rent 
that only socialization can abolish.

Credits: Quang Nguyen Vinh
The contradictions are glaringly obvious with the proliferation of 
negative prices on the SPOT electricity market (the short-term market). 
During periods of high renewable energy production and low demand, 
prices sometimes fall to zero or even become negative. This situation 
perfectly illustrates the limitations of a system where the value of 
electricity depends on market mechanisms disconnected from social needs 
and the real costs of production.

In a truly planned system, these variations would be anticipated through 
coordinated investments. In a market system, they become an additional 
source of economic instability that weakens producers and slows down 
investment. These technologies are thus penalized precisely because they 
produce abundant and inexpensive electricity.

The PPE3 (Third Multiannual Energy Program) illustrates this ongoing 
compromise between competing industrial interests, budgetary 
constraints, and electoral calculations. The trajectories of the energy 
transition remain unclear and reversible. Renewables are becoming 
political bargaining chips, particularly in the face of attacks from a 
right wing increasingly hostile to onshore wind power.

In this context, continuing to pit technologies against each other or 
defending each energy sector separately is a dead end. The problem is 
not choosing between nuclear, hydroelectric, solar, or wind power as if 
they were competing markets or politically independent technologies. The 
problem lies in the overall organization of the energy system and the 
investments necessary for the ecological transition.

The socialization of energy is becoming central.
On February 10, 2026, a few days before the publication of the PPE3, a 
historic first mobilization of renewable energy workers took place in 
Paris and Montpellier. It demonstrates a growing awareness but also its 
limitations. Many are calling for "more renewables" without challenging 
the market framework. Following this mobilization, the momentum quickly 
weakened. Among the causes are the very low level of union organization 
and the composition of the workforce. Indeed, employees are dispersed 
across young and fragmented companies and benefit from 
higher-than-average salary and comfort levels. Yet, without strong 
collective organization and without challenging the electricity market 
itself, renewables will remain condemned to suffer the same recurring 
crises, and ultimately, the energy transition will also suffer.

On the union side, the National Federation of Mines and Energy (CGT) 
advocates for "the eventual nationalization of the entire energy 
sector." The SUD Énergie union echoes this sentiment, but in a more 
proactive manner. This demand was reiterated in a recent collective 
work[3]. This direction is essential. But further reflection on the 
financing mechanisms for the transition is necessary. The necessary 
investments in renewables, grids, storage, and electrification depend 
primarily on debt issued on financial markets and the profitability 
requirements of private capital. Breaking free from this logic is so 
contrary to the dominant ideology that it will require a profound 
societal shift. Capitalism is incompatible with a planet that is 
habitable for our social class. A revolutionary perspective is essential.

Tom (UCL Montpellier)

Submit

[1]A company that develops a project from the initial exploration phase 
to the commissioning of the power plant.

[2]As noted by the French Electricity Transmission Network (RTE), the 
French Agency for Ecological Transition (ADEME), the Intergovernmental 
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and the International Energy Agency (IEA).

[3]ATTAC, Energy is Our Future, Let's Socialize It!, Les liens qui 
libèrent, 2025, 80 pages, EUR8.

https://www.unioncommunistelibertaire.org/?Decarbonation-L-impasse-du-marche-de-l-electricite-et-la-crise-des
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe https://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en