Chief Executive Officer, Dottikon ES Holding
Dr. Markus Blocher | Assemblée des délégués du 18 mars 2023
About Markus Blocher
In March 2023, Markus Blocher, CEO of Dottikon Es Holding, spoke at a delegate assembly where he argued against the Swiss climate protection law, describing it as "too short-term and too expensive." He stated that achieving net-zero emissions would require at least 10 to 30 billion Swiss francs per year and estimated a realistic timeline of around 55 years, suggesting 2080 rather than 2050 as a feasible target. Blocher said that when risk and uncertainty are high, diversification across technologies is necessary, and when challenges are complex, focus should be on core tasks. Blocher also discussed energy supply and geopolitics, saying that Switzerland could face a shortfall of 30 to 50 terawatt-hours of electricity by 2050. He advocated for extending the operating life of nuclear power plants to 80 years, expanding hydropower and pumped-storage plants, and developing fossil-fuel electricity generation as a bridge during the transition. He noted that geopolitical shifts may force the relocation of CO2-intensive industry back to the West. Additionally, Blocher criticized the volume of new regulations, stating that over 100 pages of new rules per day had been produced in recent years, and called for fewer laws and more reliance on markets.
Transcript (13 segments)
M
Markus Blocher0:01
Hello. I listen to Pierre le Français mèche? I don't understand, so I speak German.
If we look at things optimistically, we will again arrive with the addition of hydraulic and solar at 61 watts, since solar energy will make 10 to 21. That corresponds to 10 times the project of a solar in the Viège valley. After that, we have the electro-... heat pumps, we will still have electric mobility. It says terawatt for population growth, which brings us to about 90 years, meaning that we are missing about 30 to 50 terawatt-hours that will be lacking. I came today by train, and it would be magnificent if we could also do that in 2050. But our neighboring countries, especially Germany, have the same problem. The second point not to forget is geopolitics. The world has changed. The two poles fighting for dominance over the world are the United States and China, each with their alliances.
So the next 10 years will be decisive from a strategic point of view to know who will prevail. The United States says we will be the first, the leading world power in 10 years. But the alternative provision of electricity comes from or depends on China. That's how it is. It comes from China. 90% of all installations come from China. Moreover, volatility means that very often we receive electricity when we don't need it, while when we really need it, there is no electricity. So we need to store. If I store electrical power, I receive less when I discharge than at the time of... So the degree of utility is between 30 and 80 degrees. For storage space, we have the best system, which are pumped storage plants. But if the risk is very high, we need to diversify. That is, we need to be able to resort to different technologies, we need to bet on different technologies and use them. And when things become very hot, we need to focus on essential tasks. I would like to remind politics what the essential tasks are: education, basic supply, security. Parts of the center-left have demolished education and training, and now they are also demolishing the energy provision and the exit. If we want to ensure our freedom and independence in an independent manner, we must truly ensure these fundamental tasks of the state.
Today we talk about energy, fuels, combustibles, and supply. And if we discuss the right technology, it is certainly not politics that is the driver, but the market. And all those in Bern, I ask you to take this message with you. In the last 15 years, on average more than 100 pages of new regulations per day have been produced. That means I have to read pages every day to know what you generate, and it smells like constitutional. It is not surprising that in the end we no longer have a clear view due to regulation. So we need fewer laws and more market.
The essential messages that follow are these: First, fossil fuels brought prosperity and population growth. Second, population growth, prosperity, growth always requires more energy. Third, the increase in CO2 levels leads to global warming. As I speak to you, this is truly scientifically established. Fourth, the net-zero goal is technically achievable. Fifth, this goal will however take at least 50 years to implement, and will cost between 10 and 30 billion francs annually at minimum. 85% of global energy consumption comes from fossil fuels. This fossil energy has allowed a lot of prosperity and population growth. This increase in prosperity has allowed practically all countries, on average, a quadrupling of prosperity, but most countries have infinitely higher prosperity than in 1950.
Great prosperity and population increase, so prosperity growth in all regions, leads to global warming. If we compare the average between 1850 and 1900, in 1970 the average temperature increased by 1 degree. The key questions are to know who is responsible for the strong and rapid increase, who must reduce their CO2 emissions, and how and where to reduce CO2 emissions. If we take CO2 emissions from fossil fuels, we see that the increase came largely from Asia. If we compare the absolute CO2 emissions of Switzerland, it is completely negligible compared to the United States and China. And if we take CO2 emissions per inhabitant, according to two different criteria, namely CO2 emissions per capita relative to CO2 produced in the country, we see that we are not better than the United States. We have an increase in efficiency by a decrease in the curve, while in China we see an increase in emissions and production. We have externalized the production industry and we think we have saved CO2 emissions, but in fact we are also co-responsible for that CO2. Ultimately, CO2 emissions depend on the one hand on prosperity, but also on the degree of tertiarization. Where heavy energy and energy-absorbing industries are located, we have the highest CO2 emissions relative to GDP.
Geopolitical changes mean that the industry with high energy use emitting a lot of CO2, we need to repatriate it if we want to maintain our prosperity. CO2 emissions are the product of birth rate, economic performance, energy efficiency, and CO2 intensity. You can reduce CO2 emissions by controlling the birth rate, or if you want to curb economic performance, and there I would be the wrong interlocutor. You can also reduce immigration, and you can also tell your voters that you want less prosperity, because less prosperity also leads to less CO2 emissions. These are political questions, and I leave them to politics. It takes a lot of political and moral science to settle these questions. But to settle energy efficiency, we are faced with technical questions. It would be good if the conferences of the cantonal energy directors and more scientific information on energy informatics, because this problem will only be reduced by those faculties. So we need to surround ourselves with people who know the music.
After my prelude, I take the liberty of giving you the main thermodynamic principles. First basic principle: conservation of energy. That is, energy is maintained. If I do work, I have reversible energy plus a part of irreversible energy, which leads to the second basic principle: spontaneous processes are irreversible. And we introduce entropy S into the system. It is the measure of disorder in the system. Heat only flows spontaneously from hot to cold. That is a principle. And when we have a heat reservoir, it always flows towards a cold reservoir. Then we can also say that the creation of order in one place produces more disorder in another place of the system. This means that entropy always increases. The creation of order and structure always generates irreversible energy. This means that if we want to maintain functional social structures with growing prosperity and population, the resulting entropy production must be accepted. The challenge is to organize entropy production sustainably, i.e., anthropogenic efficiency, and what does that mean in practice?
The following sustainability measures follow according to priorities: First, use existing structures more efficiently and for longer. Second, reuse existing structures at a high value level. Third, in case of replacement or extensions of existing structures, focus on more sustainable approaches for new structures. What does that mean in practice? First, increase the operating life of nuclear power plants to 80 years. Second, subsequent use of the current electricity and fuel distribution infrastructure. It makes no sense to create a parallel electric network for electric vehicles. Additionally, we should produce energy where the energy producers are, so that we can also use the distribution infrastructure later. Third, expansion and new construction of pumped storage plants in combination with solar.
So what will the future look like? I have alternative electricity. That is, we do not always have electricity when we need it, and we have too much when we do not need it. So we need to store electricity. Switzerland would be destined to use these hydroelectric plants to store. Then also electrolysis, and then we also need to use the surplus energy to use the surplus CO2 from the atmosphere, and from hydrogen and CO2 we can, in processes, create chemical syntheses, and we can produce the source of electricity that can be brought through distribution systems where it is needed, i.e., internal combustion engine. And if we do this correctly from a technical point of view, we will have a fuel price of 5 to 7 francs per liter. In addition, we can find raw materials that can be used in the chemical industry, for example to produce medicines. All of this requires a lot of knowledge and especially considerable modifications to set up this network that I have just described.
And a Russian scientist - I don't know if we are still allowed to say that - but showed cycles and pushes, that these new technologies generally last more than 50 years. Generally, the spacing of the peaks of the long-term wave of the economic movement is about 57 years. That is, economic growth has increased, but between the different peaks and between implementation, there is always about 57 years. The same scientist showed that the spacing of the peaks of economic and social change of basic innovations is 55 years. That means thinking to get there in 2050 is not realistic. We should rather expect 2080.
But let's talk about costs. If we take 5 to 7 francs per liter of this new fuel, and if we also take the difference of the missing energy, 30 to 50 terawatt-hours, we need about 10 to 30 billion francs, which corresponds to 2 to 4% of Switzerland's GDP, which means a price increase of 4% each year until 2050, or to put it another way, a third of the Confederation's tax revenues will be devoted to this. Conclusion for a net-zero policy: it needs a lot of money, at least 10 to 30 billion per year. Second, it needs time, about 55 years, so the more realistic time horizon is 2080, not 2050. And who will bring us this money? It is the economy that will allow us the innovation to do it. It will be the economy. And for the economy to bring you this innovation and this money, it needs energy, fuels, and electricity. Only with fuels and electricity can the economy provide innovation and money.
So I come to the conclusion that we must guarantee an operating life of at least 80 years for nuclear power plants, create fossil electricity production to alleviate the electricity shortage. In addition, we need a massive expansion of existing hydropower, we need new pumped storage plants. If we want this energy, we must submerge entire valleys. And we also need to massively develop solar, wind, and CO2 capture with Power-to-X. That is how we will obtain a synthetic fuel. So from the point of view of climate protection, we have planned a horizon that is too short. And I thank you for your energy, your attention. And also, this time is also very... this realization is very expensive.