The public debate in France is highly contested and mediatized. France is one of the only countries to have issued a legal ban on the hydraulic fracturing technique, the so-called Jacob Law; and it did so very early in the debate. Generally speaking, France does not have an extractive culture. Around 75% of its produced electricity stems from nuclear power. The following describes the public debate in France, based on media articles, political developments and government reports. It clusters the main dynamics into three periods between 2011 and 2014.

Social movements and the Jacob law prohibiting fracking, 2011

The shale gas debate was strongly politicized very early on in France, due to strong local civil movements. The first public information meeting on shale gas was organized by José Bové on December 20th, 2010 in Saint-Jean-du-Bruel in the Larzac region. José Bové, a European deputy for the green party coalition EELV, and a well known French politician and militant, was a key person who leveraged his popularity in the media and helped local citizens to organize events and build citizen collectives opposing shale gas development. Very quickly citizen collectives were created in different regions, starting in the Larzac, and then spilling over into Ardèche - those areas that were included in the exploration permits that were issued in 2010. Three permits for the research of shale gas in the South (Montélimar, Villeneuve de Berg and Nant) had been granted to 1) Schuepbach Energy, then associated with GDF-Suez, 2) Total E&P France and 3) Devon Energie Montélimar SAS. These permits were granted by Jean-Louis Borloo, who was environmental minister at the time. Local politicians started to join the mobilization against shale gas, some of them complaining that they had not been previously informed and had only heard about the issuance of the permits from the media. This is possible because in France the property rights of underground resources remain with the State (i.e. in contrast to landowners’ property rights in the US) and are approved by the national environmental ministry.A political opportunity also helped to increase the movements’ strength, as regional elections were to be held in March, 2011. On January 11th José Bové launched a petition to the government to ban fracking, called “Gaz de schiste non merci”, alluding to the same slogan movements had used to fight GMOs in the country. Three months later 100,000 people had signed. The main points mentioned in the petition were that:

• government had granted permits without previously informing local stakeholders;
• environmental destruction due to fracking can be observed in the US;
• shale gas exploitation plays counter to French engagements in lowering carbon emissions;
• the petition signers thus asked government to immediately issue a moratorium on any exploration activity of shale oil and gas, and that permits be cancelled.

On February 11th, 2011 Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet, then Minister for the Environment, indeed suspended all permits and exploratory research activities on shale gas in France. Later the Prime Minister extended this moratorium by by several months. This did not reassure citizens however, who organized a first manifestation opposing shale gas in Villeneuve de Berg, on February 26th, with 10-20,000 participants. The main concerns with shale gas development remained that it may potentially contaminate drinking water and harm local tourism and agrarian activities.

One of the strongest mobilizing citizen collectives remains the collectif 07 from the Ardèche region. This citizen collective helped create other anti-fracking collectives nationally and internationally. Arguably, one of the key factors that led to the strong initial mobilization was the screening of the movie “Gasland”, and notably the fear that drinking water becomes contaminated. The well-known image of a local resident next to a fracking site setting the water from his faucet on fire quickly spread internationally [see SHIP article]. In France, virtually every information session on fracking referenced at least parts of the Gasland movie. While the movie triggered initial contestation, the loosely structured but well-connected citizen collectives could quickly leverage arguments against shale gas, based upon American experiences. They brought forward example cases from the US (which have been generally refuted by industry), where fracking caused environmental damage.During the temporary moratorium, in February, 2011, jointly with the economics ministry, the environmental ministry launched a study to inform the government on economic, technical, legal, social and environmental issues associated with potential shale gas and oil development in France. This study was conducted by the public institutes of the respective ministries: the CGIET (Conseil général de l'industrie, de l'énergie et des technologies) and CGEDD (Conseil Général de l'Environnement et du Développement Durable). The initial report was provided to government on April 21st, 2011.

Its main conclusions were the following:

• The economic potential remains unsure as long as no exploratory drilling is conducted, but estimates are around 100 million m³ for shale oil and 5000 billion m³ for shale gas, which makes France one of the most promising countries in Europe;
• The hydraulic fracturing technique can still be much improved in terms of efficiency and environmental protection;
• It should only be conducted under strict control and for scientific research purposes so as to determine the potential;
• It would be detrimental to the economy and job creation not to estimate the potential of this resource;
• A necessary mining code reform should require public consultation meetings before permits are granted;
• The regulation of techniques to extract hydrocarbons should be adapted and could include suggestions for best practices (e.g. limiting the number of additives used);
• The tax law should be adapted so as to cater to the interests of local communities;
• After 2-3 years of scientific research a rational decision on whether or not to exploit this resource in France may be taken.

In parallel, the National Assembly, specifically its Sustainability Commission, ordered an information study on shale gas and oil conducted by the deputies Francois-Michel Gonnot, and Philippe Martin (the latter was to become environmental minister in 2013). This report was published on June 8th, 2011. It seeks to provide objective information on technical, economic, environmental and legal aspects of shale gas development, as well as the international dynamics.The deputies underline that France will be impacted by the international consequences of decisions from other countries. In the end it envisaged three scenarios:

1. Exploit shale gas: if scientists judge environmental risks to be controllable this could favor economic development;
2. Exploit shale gas at a later point in time: this could provide France with a competitive edge if no alternative energy sources have emerged;
3. Do not exploit shale gas: this could favor the development of renewables, but this would also need to be accompanied by strict import constraints on fossil fuels.

On March 31st, a law proposition was filed by Christian Jacob, deputy of the UMP party, and 124 deputies from the majority signed the Jacob law proposal. At this time nearly 90,000 people had signed the anti-shale gas petition. In April, 2011 dissent was at its peak, with the National Assembly voting on this law proposal prohibiting fracking scheduled for May 11th, 2011. Industrialists also tried to weigh in on the regulatory process. Specifically the professional association of drillers wrote several open letters to the government. Their initiatives were, however, hardly mentioned in the media. And one of the very few articles regarding the letter of April 11th, 2011 was illustratively entitled: “Shale gas: the drillers want to be heard”.

Eventually the Jacob law was published in the national register on July 14th, 2011 (for a summary of the legal procedure see the senate’s website). The law focuses on the prohibition of the hydraulic fracturing technique used for unconventional shale oil and gas extraction. The law also establishes two dispositions, however, which aim to advance research and information gathering on the issue: 1. exploratory research for scientific purposes is allowed, and 2. a multiparty commission is to be created that should establish public recommendations for the forms in which research on shale gas could be conducted. A report was to be given to the government one year after the promulgation of this law. In its complementary report the CGIET and CGEDD mention that this commission would soon be created. To this day, however, the commission foreseen in the Jacob law does not exist. This is one of the things that industry and favorable politicians lament.

The three permits mentioned previously, Villeneuve de Berg, Nant and Montélimar, were not the only ones, but generated the most contestation. They were officially cancelled in October, 2011. Schuepbach Energy filed a “priority question of constitutionality” (QPC) to question the constitutionality of the Jacob law, which went to the French constitutional court (conseil constitutionnel) but was eventually rejected on October 13th, 2013.

Energy transition debates and research for alternative techniques to fracking 2012/13

After the presidential elections in Spring, 2012, the new president Francois Hollande organized a nationwide large-scale citizen deliberation effort on the French vision of its energy transition. The main objective of this national debate on the energy transition was to engage citizens and inform the government’s law project on the energy transition. This energy transition law was one of the main points of Hollande’s election manifesto that includes the decrease down to 50% of French electricity derived from nuclear energy by 2025 and the strong development of renewables. He launched an environmental conference in September, 2012 that prepared the ground for the deliberation during the following months. On this occasion 22 industry leaders wrote a joint letter to the government asking to reopen the debate on the evaluation of French shale gas potential on September 27th, 2012. They asked for a nationwide debate on shale gas that would integrate “all concerned stakeholders, citizens, NGOs, industrialists and researchers”. They highlight that France has a “duty to explore its resources” and that shale gas could be a step towards the increased economic competitivity of the country. Similarly, the economic competitivity report ordered by the new government, the so called “Gallois” report, issued on November 5th, 2012, mentioned shale gas favorably as a potential opportunity for economic development.

The OPECST (Office parlementaire d'évaluation des choix scientifiques et technologiques) was mandated with a study to search for alternative technologies to hydraulic fracturing. This mission of the parliamentary office was conducted by the deputy Christian Bataille and Senator Jean-Claude Lenoir. The OPECST report confirmed that fracking is the only viable technology to date to extract unconventional hydrocarbons. A preliminary report was published on June 5th, 2013 so that its recommendations could inform the national energy transition debate that was coming to an end. The final version was adopted by OPECST on November 26th, 2013. These reports generated much controversy and debate. The main propositions were the following:

• Explore France’s shale gas and oil resources;
• Conduct research on alternative technologies to keep improving existing solutions;
• Use shale resources to finance the energy transition;
• Reform the mining code to align shale gas development with local interests.

On June 25th, Delphine Batho, then environmental minister, officially cancelled one of the non-conventional permits originally granted to Hexagon Gas in 2010. She was discharged of her functions on July 2nd, 2013. She was dismissed on the very same day she had publicly criticized the budget cuts of the environmental ministry. She later attributed her aggressive discharge to industry lobbying by Vallourec, a French MNC who is the leading drilling tube producer internationally, and increased its activities thanks to shale gas development in the US. This accusation was widely diffused by the media and naturally found much criticism from industrialists as well as agreement from environmentalists.

As mentioned before, industry was barely participating in the public debate in the media during the initial social movement period, but towards the end of the energy transition debates in Summer 2013, industrial associations such as Ufip (Union française des industries pétrolières) and MEDEF (Mouvement des entreprises de France) were increasingly heard. The MEDEF published its propositions for the national debate on the energy transition. Their priorities for the sake of economic competitivity were the maintenance of nuclear energy and the development of shale gas. Similar arguments were put forward by Ufip.

Two extraordinary shale gas related meetings were held during the end of the national energy transition debate: the first on June 27th, 2013, giving an outlook of energy prices and the impact that shale gas has on world markets; the second one specifically on shale gas on July 3rd, with six intervening experts. The experts could barely find common ground and during the question and answers session key figures and hypothesis on which certain pro and contra arguments were based were heavily debated. When the official conclusions of the energy transition debate were published on July 18th, 2013, the industry association MEDEF did not accept these conclusions that penalized nuclear and discarded shale gas.

While these dynamics show that certain voices in favor of shale gas may grow louder, and even the economic competition Minister Arnaud Montebourg expressed himself in favor of shale gas in the media, President Hollande confirmed repeatedly that shale gas will not be exploited nor explored during his presidency. While the final OPECST report, favorable of shale gas, was published in November, 2013, Government continuously signals its opposition, for example an additional seven pending permits on shale oil have been officially cancelled.

Political developments in 2014

On January 22nd, 2014 the European Commission released its recommendation on minimum principles for the exploration and production of hydrocarbons (such as shale gas) using high-volume hydraulic fracturing. This announcement renewed favorable statements on shale gas in the press by Arnaud Montebourg. The Crimean crisis raises questions and fears of energy security at a European level. In March, US president Obama urged the EU to decrease its energy dependence and the European Parliament voted in favor of an exemption of shale gas from an environmental impact assessment. These international dynamics also infiltrate the French debate. For example, references in the French press to the European Union, Commission, and Parliament have significantly increased in 2014.

Finally, former President, Nicolas Sarkozy, announced his candidacy for the presidency of his party (first step towards French presidential elections) in September, 2014. In his first public meeting after this announcement on September 25th, he mentioned shale gas favorably; he pointed to the American example and stated that he “cannot accept that the US became energy independent thanks to shale gas and that France cannot benefit from this new energy at a time when our territory and families are plagued by unemployment, that’s unacceptable”¹. This is interesting to point out, particularly as it was under his presidency that the Jacob law was put into effect. Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet, ex-environmental minister and in office when the social movements took off, distanced herself from Nicolas Sarkozy on this point. And Ségolène Royal, who is the current environmental minister (the 4th since Hollande took office), confirmed clearly, in response to Sarkozy’s statement, the governments’ opposition to shale gas, and that there will be neither shale gas exploitation nor exploration: “All public and private means shall be focused on the development of renewable energies”². Royal later presented the law project on the energy transition that was voted upon by the National Assembly on October 14th. The main aspects of this law that was allocated €10 billion include:

• 100% of buildings will be low-consumption by 2050 by means of legal obligation of energy renovation with the help of fiscal, and other financial support (particular aid for low income households);
• reduce the part of nuclear energy in electricity production down to 50% by 2025 and further develop renewables by means of an increased dedicated investment fund;
• increase electric vehicle usage through the installment of charging stations and financial incentives;
• reduce waste by 50% including the prohibition of one-time usage plastic bags and disposable dishes.

This law project shows the French governments’ intention to push for an energy transition that does not include shale gas and strongly decreases nuclear energy usage. Questions on economic competitivity, energy security, and decreasing energy dependence specifically on Russian gas, present strong motivating factors at a European level, however. As the UK and Poland are going ahead with exploration and Germany is still discussing the regulatory constraints under which fracking may or may not be allowed in Germany, it remains to be seen whether France’s position is going to become more open to shale gas extraction or whether it continues its strong opposition. Opponents and proponents alike are already thinking ahead to the next presidential election in 2017 that may bring new impulses in one direction or the other.

1 Translated by author. Original quote: "Je ne peux pas accepter que les Etats-Unis soient devenus du point de vue de l'énergie indépendants grâce au gaz de schiste et que la France ne puisse pas profiter de cette nouvelle énergie alors que le chômage ravage tant de nos territoires et tant de nos familles, c'est inacceptable."

2 Translated by author. Original quote: "Tous nos moyens publics et privés doivent être sur les économies d'énergie et les énergies renouvelables"