Among the topics discussed during the debate between the two candidates for the presidential election, Wednesday, April 20, that of the environment opposed Marine Le Pen and Emmanuel Macron for about twenty minutes.
Article written by
Posted
Reading time : 1 min.
On the theme of the environment, we retain from the debate between Marine Le Pen and Emmanuel Macron on Wednesday April 20, first of all postures: Emmanuel Macron which describes Marine Le Pen as “climatosceptic” and she who treats him in return “climato-hypocrite”.
On especially retains a debate which very quickly narrowed around the energy issue of nuclear power and wind power. The two candidates defended the strengthening of the nuclear sector but fought over the issue of investments in the sector, Marine Le Pen accusing Emmanuel Macron of having let slip an industrial know-how, which the presidential candidate defended. .
He there were also long minutes of exchange on the place of the wind turbines. They are called “ecological and economic nonsense” by Marine Le Pen who wants to dismantle them, starting with those that are at the end of their life, while Emmanuel Macron is betting on the industrial development of the sector and in particular on offshore wind power. For Emmanuel Macron, there is no exit strategy from fossil fuels that goes through all-nuclear.
For the environmental proposals, there are totally opposite visions. Marine Le Pen assures that it is the free trade model that is responsible for greenhouse gas emissions, she is banking on localism to limit pollution and wants a slower transition than the one currently imposed on the FFrench, castigating punitive ecology. Opposite, Emmanuel Macron wants to go faster in terms of transition. Beyond aid to change cars or insulate your home, beyond investments in renewables, he wants a Prime Minister responsible for ecological planning.
Neither of the two has specified a timetable for the exit from fossil fuels or measures on the use of pesticides, the protection of biodiversity, the safeguarding of forests or the oceans which are nevertheless carbon sinks. Obviously the format did not allow everything to be addressed, mBut Gilles Bouleau recalled it in the preamble. The latest IPCC report gives us only three years to act, limit global warming to 1.5°C and thus guarantee us a livable future. Suffice to say that on this issue of the environment, the substance of yesterday’s debate didn’t seem up to the challenge.