"Despite the context, the Swiss objective of carbon neutrality by 2050 remains."

In recent months, Swiss political news has been particularly intense on energy and climate issues. Between the opening of a consultation on an indirect counter-proposal to the popular initiative "stop au blackout", the positive progress with the EU towards an agreement on electricity and the budget cuts envisaged by the Federal Council, a source of pressure on research in Switzerland, the issues are numerous. We discuss them with Benoît Revaz, Director of the Federal Office of Energy (OFEN).

With the "stop au blackout" initiative and now the Federal Council's counter-proposal, nuclear energy is trying to make a comeback through the back door. How do you perceive this development?

At OFEN, our role is not to take sides, but we naturally follow the development of this file closely. In response to the popular initiative, the Federal Council firstly judged it inappropriate to revise competences and responsibilities due to lack of time and added value. It also recalled that, in the short and medium term, the country's priority remains the implementation of the decisions taken in the revision of the Energy Act and the Electricity Act: namely the development of renewable energies.

For the country's future energy, however, the Federal Council considers it necessary to leave a door open to different technologies, including nuclear, in view of the significant advances in recent years in this field. That is where we stand today.

At the end of 2024, you published a comprehensive report on the nuclear sector. What does it say?

This document provides valuable insight into nuclear energy in Switzerland and the rest of the world. Written by nuclear experts from the Paul Scherrer Institute (PSI), ETH Zurich and EPFL, it offers a detailed overview of the latest technological advances – notably fourth generation, generation 3+ and small modular reactors (SMRs).

It also provides a comprehensive state of the sector, covering the entire production chain as well as the economic and political dimensions related to this energy source. The report shows that many aspects are evolving within this industry.

Does Switzerland therefore have the means and expertise necessary to relaunch its nuclear sector?

We tend to forget it, given our ambition to phase it out in the medium or long term, but Switzerland remains a country that operates this energy, and our plants still contribute substantially to the country's security of supply. While the development of renewable energies remains a priority, the Federal Council is aware that, in the case of too slow a transition, it could be led to reconsider certain existing technological solutions. Its desire is therefore no longer to exclude nuclear from that equation.

This caution is defensible in view of the development of renewable energies. The reality is that only the photovoltaic market has really taken off; all the other renewables remain potential, with a pace of development still too slow. That is why Parliament is currently working to accelerate procedures, in order to realize the ambitions and existing opportunities in wind, hydro and large photovoltaic projects. Returning to the counter-proposal, it represents only an additional option to be analyzed for Switzerland's energy future.

If the development of renewable energies remains a priority, the Federal Council is aware that, in the case of too slow a transition, it could be led to reconsider certain existing technological solutions. Its desire is therefore no longer to exclude nuclear from that equation.

Among the new nuclear technologies, which would be best suited to Switzerland?

If we talk about pressurized water reactors (Pressurized Reactors - PR), the budget and schedule problems encountered at Olkiluoto or Flamanville illustrate a real loss of competence in the management and development of large nuclear projects in Europe over the past decades. Now, the so-called generation 3+ goes far beyond EPRs alone: several other models are being deployed. Only time will tell whether these projects are viable in terms of management, meeting deadlines and cost control.

As for small modular reactors (SMRs), often presented as a future solution, there are currently around seventy concepts at varying stages of technological advancement. While a clear acceleration in their development is observed, these projects will still require time before reaching a commercial phase. 

Similarly to what happened in the space sector, it is not excluded that we will see new entrants, the emergence of new technologies, new approaches, or even new fuels. These developments could change the energy landscape, provided they are validated and properly regulated.

Switzerland continues to support European research projects on nuclear fusion… Can we still realistically believe in this technology?

Since this research is carried out within an international coalition, the file falls under the competence of the State Secretariat and not OFEN. What I can tell you, however, is that this work retains all its value.

Of course Switzerland cannot include fusion in its short- or medium-term energy planning, due to the lack of maturity of this technology. That said, it does not diminish its interest. 

Continuing research on nuclear fusion is all the more justified because the expected advances will go beyond the sole spectrum of nuclear energy. Many discoveries could emerge, notably in terms of new applications or innovative materials.

Since the end of last year, another topic has made the headlines: the electricity agreement between the EU and Switzerland. Is this agreement as decisive for the future energy of our country as energy suppliers claim?

The situation is quite simple to understand. Switzerland occupies a central position in Europe, at the heart of the largest and most complex electricity transmission network in the world. But while we are physically part of it, we do not share the same market rules. Today, therefore, there is a gap between the physical reality and the regulatory and market access reality. This divergence alone underlines the importance of such an agreement.

That said, while this agreement can allow certain adaptations in terms of sources of energy production, let's avoid shortcuts that for example suggest Switzerland would no longer need wind power. Indeed, an agreement with the EU would in no way exempt us from the need to strengthen our domestic production, improve our energy efficiency and optimize our flexibility as well as its use on national territory.

Wouldn't this agreement represent an opportunity to invest in and concentrate our resources on the energy sources best suited to a country like Switzerland?

Given Switzerland's energy portfolio and approach, the combination of hydropower with wind and photovoltaics – our main sources of electricity – continues to make sense. It could even be optimized more efficiently and cost-effectively, both economically and energetically, through finer management taking into account weather phenomena and the availability of solar and wind energy at the European scale. This optimization is work that has been underway for several decades and there will be no going back.

Our participation in the European grid will allow Switzerland to take part in creating the infrastructures of the future, those that will cover the second half of the 21st century.

Today at OFEN, we observe that the majority of the debate on electricity focuses on how it is produced. Yet this aspect is only one link in the value chain. To guarantee a truly resilient system, it is essential to consider all the components of this chain: security, supply, network resilience, production capacities, transmission infrastructures, cross-border exchanges, as well as storage and demand flexibility.

Our participation in the European grid will allow Switzerland to take part in creating the infrastructures of the future, those that will cover the second half of the 21st century. Conversely, a self-sufficient approach, sometimes mentioned, would make no sense, neither technically nor economically.

Given the incessant opposition to wind power, is this energy source really a serious option for Switzerland's energy future? And should the possibilities to block their construction be reviewed or relaxed?

Wind turbines produce nearly two-thirds of their electricity during the winter season, which makes them an ideal complement to photovoltaic energy and hydropower, whose maximum production is in summer. For this reason, it remains a very serious option for the future. 

During the summer session of 2023, Parliament adopted the federal law to accelerate authorization procedures for wind turbines. Thanks to the "Windexpress" law, against which no referendum was launched, certain uncontested wind farms can be built more quickly. However, the competences of the municipalities and cantons concerned must be maintained in the authorization process.

Accelerated procedures must only be used if the municipalities have already approved the installation as part of the land use plan. This measure targets wind projects of national interest, until an additional capacity of 600 megawatts is installed.

While wind turbines face serial opposition, solar energy is booming in Switzerland. What do you think of the strategy adopted around alpine solar parks?

Photovoltaics is indeed the only renewable source currently whose annual installed power levels allow us to consider reaching our targets. Last year, Switzerland recorded an additional capacity of 1.9 GW, with nearly 190 new installations commissioned each day. Per capita, our country probably surpasses most other European nations. Today, total production exceeds 6 TWh, or about 10% of national electricity consumption.

However, the market remains mainly focused on small installations, hence the idea of going in search of the sun of the Alps. Early experiences show, unsurprisingly, that the financial stakes were underestimated. Technically, the finding is similar: the reality on the ground reveals an installation more complex than initial plans suggested.

Fundamentally, I believe that the lion's share for the future of photovoltaic production will rely mainly on optimizing existing infrastructures, rather than on developing alpine solar parks.

The current problem in the hydrogen sector lies in expectations towards the Confederation. They are totally disproportionate.

Let's talk a little about hydrogen. In 2024, OFEN's report on this resource suggests it represents a key element of Switzerland's energy transition. Yet the market remains completely stagnant… Is it wise to invest in an energy source with such an uncertain future?

The conclusion is clear: Switzerland will need decarbonized molecules in the future. The question is about their origin: will they be produced locally or imported? In our report, we clearly state that, in a first phase, production will take place in Switzerland to feed a still limited and modest market. Provided this market finally takes off, we will then have to import. This two-stage deployment seems to us the most realistic approach to manage financial risks.

The current problem in the hydrogen sector lies in expectations towards the Confederation. They are totally disproportionate. Some believe that the government should not only plan all ongoing projects but also finance them. This market vision is absolutely not sustainable.

It is apparently often forgotten, but we live in a country where energy supply is based on the principle of subsidiarity. This means that the Confederation sets the framework conditions. The sector's actors then deploy their activities, thereby ensuring supply, provision, storage, import, export, but also investing and taking the necessary financial risks.

High financial risks, given the uncertainties surrounding hydrogen's future?

You indeed touch on the second major difficulty of this sector: its future potential. There is currently no clear element on its future needs. If we were to rely on the results of our market surveys to assess their hydrogen needs for 2030, 2035, 2040 and 2050, we would already have put down our pencils.

We still have very little visibility on industrial decarbonization strategies and on the real future needs for hydrogen. I am not saying that all these projects have no value and should not be carried out. On the contrary, they allow us to gain the experience necessary to reach our carbon neutrality target by 2050. But it is up to private actors to prove their competitiveness and to make themselves indispensable in this market.

In this period of budget tightening, there is growing concern within academic circles and start-up clusters. Are OFEN's support programs threatened?

The project put out for consultation by the Federal Council in January foresees, for OFEN, a linear reduction of budgets allocated to research and development, the removal of the 20 million envelope intended for pilot and demonstration projects, as well as a reduction of 20 million in the Switzerland Energy program budget.

These cuts will have concrete repercussions: they force us in particular to suspend the launch of new pilot and demonstration projects, since it would be unproductive to start new projects that would have to be stopped in a few months for lack of funding.

It is not the injection of public funds that made Switzerland successful. Our prosperity is based above all on initiative, ingenuity and entrepreneurial spirit.

Isn't it a glaring lack of vision to reduce budgets for research and support for young companies?

I do not think the question is about a lack of vision, but rather a simple question of budgetary constraints. Faced with these constraints, decisions have been made, and our role is to apply them.

For Swiss innovation and the support of Switzerland's rich cleantech ecosystem, it is important to note that not all support mechanisms and financial means available have disappeared in Switzerland. 

While the removal of the 20 million francs used in pilot and demonstration programs will necessarily impact certain sectors or projects, this is not what worries me most these days. My concern is precisely this new dependence on public subsidies. Yet it is not the injection of public funds that made Switzerland successful. Our prosperity rests above all on initiative, ingenuity and entrepreneurial spirit.

I do not pretend that the period ahead will be easy. But it also represents an opportunity to rethink our business models and encourage new entrepreneurial approaches.

Donald Trump and his crusade against green energies, the desire to water down the Green Deal in Europe, the withdrawal of banks from the Net Zero Alliance… How do we navigate such a rising wave of opposition to the commitments made in Paris in 2015?

I am not destabilized by the current debates and questioning. Despite the context, the goal of carbon neutrality by 2050 is clearly established and has been validated by Swiss citizens. The industrial sector is also committed to this path by evaluating solutions to decarbonize its processes or by putting in place compensatory measures.

Since the invasion of Ukraine, we have been aware of the cost of our dependence on carbon-based energy sources and the supply chains that result from it. Decarbonization is therefore not only a climate necessity; it also has an economic and geostrategic dimension. In view of the main oil and gas producing countries, we are facing significant forces.

Take the example of the fossil industry: it will do everything to continue extracting and selling oil as long as possible. Conversely, countries like the Netherlands or Sweden, despite even more complex decarbonization challenges than ours due to the structure of their industrial fabric, manage to set ambitious targets and give themselves the means to achieve them, notably by relying on nuclear.

This article has been automatically translated using AI. If you notice any errors, please don't hesitate to contact us.