Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Swedish minister eyes energy crisis steps, blames German nuclear phase-out

euractiv.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 129 posts

Re: Swedish minister eyes energy crisis steps, blames German nuclear phase-out

#61

Post by tcfhgj »

Xelbair wrote: post #34
wkat4242 wrote: post #2

Easy to blame someone else. None of this is new, she's had more than enough time to compensate and Sweden is in the EU energy market by choice.

yeah, extremely so. Especially if the country shut downs their nuclear power plants in middle of energy crisis, while there are laws in place that mandate energy exchange between different EU and EU adjacent countries(Norway). Did they have time to handle it? No, adjusting your grid to be resilient to such bad actors takes more time.

Who shut down nuclear within of an energy crisis?

Re: Swedish minister eyes energy crisis steps, blames German nuclear phase-out

#62

Post by [deleted] »

lawn wrote: post #60
wkat4242 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more obvious answer would have been to invest in national infrastructure to connect the hydro in the north to the consumers in the south rather than nuclear. Either way, she's responsible. The Germans are not. Their actions are an external factor she should have compensated for.

As others have commented on, it's not enough to just lay new cables and the lack of nuclear energy (or hydro or coal...) in the south is why the energy from the north can't reach the south.

[deleted]

Re: Swedish minister eyes energy crisis steps, blames German nuclear phase-out

#63

Post by Ekaros »

jsnell wrote: post #25
Ekaros wrote: post #3

How hard it is to build North South transfer capacity? I mean intra-Sweden capacity. My understanding is that Finland can buy power from the north and then move it to south effectively... And we don't even produce that power...

Would building that North-South transfer capacity even help? It seems like the basic mental model here is that it would equalize prices between Northern Sweden and Germany, not between Northern and Southern Sweden. And Germany is quite a bit bigger than Northern Sweden. So what should then happen during these German shortfalls is to move the German prices (and Southern Swedish prices) down by an imperceptible amount,…

As long as north-south capacity is reasonable compared to south-Germany. So it would increase prices somewhat in north, but as long as not all new capacity can be moved to Germany it wouldn't fully match prices.

Re: Swedish minister eyes energy crisis steps, blames German nuclear phase-out

#64

Post by tcfhgj »

lawn wrote: post #60
wkat4242 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more obvious answer would have been to invest in national infrastructure to connect the hydro in the north to the consumers in the south rather than nuclear. Either way, she's responsible. The Germans are not. Their actions are an external factor she should have compensated for.

As others have commented on, it's not enough to just lay new cables and the lack of nuclear energy (or hydro or coal...) in the south is why the energy from the north can't reach the south.

A link would be helpful

Re: Swedish minister eyes energy crisis steps, blames German nuclear phase-out

#65

Post by pelorat »

tcfhgj wrote: post #58
dsign wrote: post #54

In Sweden, I've been in contact with several companies and associations which are raising small solar farms and selling stocks on them (so, there is a primary market for stocks on renewables). Investment is affordable and transparent and it feels "grass-roots democratic". The problem with solar farms is that this time of the year, they don't produce power. The only green alternative that would produce power is nuclea…

What about wind power which is strong in winter? What about energy storage systems, e.g. using green gas? There seem to be more green options than nuclear power.

I think that's a problem everywhere in Europe. We build wind and we build solar, but we don't build storage systems to go with them.

Re: Swedish minister eyes energy crisis steps, blames German nuclear phase-out

#66

Post by sigh_again »

ivan_gammel wrote: post #26
alecco wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the Swedish government is taking blame for local shutdowns. The previous day her boss (PM) said so. The 4th paragraph reads: "“I realise that nobody is happy when I say that ‘if we hadn't shut down half of nuclear power, we wouldn't have these problems’. But it's true and it needs to be said.”, Kristersson said, referring to the previous Social Democrat-Greens coalition closing several nuclear reactors between 20…

[flagged]

The Greens had partnered with the SPD from 1998 to 2005 (and then again recently since 2021 but that's no related to the subject). They directly contributed to creating the Energiewende program. Merkel & friends implemented it, but saying the greens just "indicated preference" is utter bullshit. It's also the greens today trying to exclude any nuclear project from benefiting from grants at the European level.

The Greens do not get to have their cake and eat it when they are, in fact, directly one of the sources of the current german problem. Those 232g CO2/kWH as I write (and over 700 last week) is exactly what they asked for when they pushed for a full renewable energy grid backed by hopes and dreams.

Re: Swedish minister eyes energy crisis steps, blames German nuclear phase-out

#67

Post by sigh_again »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #19
708145_ wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is still true what she says. Having an interconnected electricity system is problematic when countries like Germany misbehave by having a horrible energy politics. That said, it would had been better in Sweden if they hadn't phased out nuclear too! There is a electricity shortage in south of Sweden where industries are denied establishing new initiatives.

Actually this is a good thing. There's demand for energy so prices go up. This in turn makes investments in energy generation in Sweden more lucrative since they apparently have a lot of energy revenue coming in from abroad to finance more such projects. There are a lot of renewable energy projects in and around Sweden and the wider region. And of course they are actually manufacturing and exporting a lot of wind tur…

This type of "hurr more money good" thinking is exactly the reason why there's a massive energy crisis across Europe, where individuals and enterprises end up paying gigantic electricity bills. People are _dying_ from this situation. Energy is not a random market like any others where number goes up means everything is good. _Lives_ depend on it.

Re: Swedish minister eyes energy crisis steps, blames German nuclear phase-out

#68

Post by tcfhgj »

Faelian2 wrote: post #57
tcfhgj wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As you can see in France, you don't make money with nuclear power. Nuclear power is basically taking a loan (national security and trash which has to be stored at least thousands of years) with a huge risk (nuclear disaster like Chernobyl or worse).

France is literally making billions by exporting in electricity. https://oec.world/en/profile/bilateral-product/electricity/r... It's France 9th biggest export.

Yet, EDF is deep in debt (and I am not even sure they pay all of the cost of nuclear power themselves) and probably would not exist anymore if it was on its own.

Now imagine infinite uranium and everyone using nuclear power. Where would they export now?

Re: Swedish minister eyes energy crisis steps, blames German nuclear phase-out

#69

Post by hurril »

pelorat wrote: post #59
hurril wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which privatisations are the cause of this energy conundrum?

When infrastructure is privatized, they become for-profit enterprises. Things like energy and clean water should not be for-profit.

Here, let me help you: things should not have problems. There. Solved it :)

Re: Swedish minister eyes energy crisis steps, blames German nuclear phase-out

#70

Post by occz »

pelorat wrote: post #51

A big problem with the "green energy transition" is that we're more than happy to build large wind-parks and promote solar (well, not in Sweden so much, it's dark in the winter), but we build little to no storage for it where surplus energy can be stored.

Storage technology is catching up quickly in terms of economics. It's long been uneconomical to run, but similarly to wind and sola, the prices are plummeting and quickly making the alternatives obsolete.

Remember how solar and wind were considered too expensive for a long time, and all of a sudden they were the cheapest thing available with their construction booming? We're on the verge of that happening with storage as well.

Post reply on HN