• Fisk400
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    76
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    This is also the government that cancelled 17 planned wind parks for no reason and then has the audacity to lecture other countries about energy security. I am pro nuclear power but Ebba Bush is so psychotically pro nuclear that it borders on kink territory.

    • Iceblade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      More wind capacity wouldn’t solve these issues. They arise specifically when it is cold, dark and windless across Europe, due to a lack of dispatchable electricity production in Germany. Germany instead imports electricity from its neighbors, and Sweden (due to EU regulations) has to export. This in turn drives prices through the roof for Swedish consumers, despite a de facto electricity surplus.

      • GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        Well, surplus renewable energy - which more wind capacity would bring - probably doesn’t hurt the economics of storage solutions, which ultimately would solve these issues.

    • Tobberone@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Well, to be frank, Sweden is Europes second largest, or largest depending on the state of things in France, electricity exporter in Europe. Sweden do not necessarily need more large scale electricity production. Specially not given the drive towards micro production that is now ongoing.

      The only reason to build large scale is to accommodate AI or some other extremely energy dependant technology. They can happily build and run their own electricity network and not include the ordinary consumers, nor the taxpayers.

      This time, it seems, they found the golden nugget despite being blind.

      • lud@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Building energy production to export even more electricity is surely very profitable and also good for the environment.

        I remember the winter 1 or 2 years ago when we exported a fuck ton electricity and apparently our clean electricity displaced enough foreign dirty electricity to reduce the carbon footprint by as much as Sweden annually carbon footprint from cars.

        https://www.svt.se/nyheter/ekonomi/svensk-elexport-minskar-utslappen-motsvarande-hela-biltrafiken

        • Tobberone@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          No denying that there are positives, but geopolitically we can’t have Berlin on it’s knees just because Kremlin had a Chinese cargo ship drag it’s anchor half way across the Baltic sea. That’s a no go for an independent Europe.

          • lud@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            Yeah, but we should still build more renewable energy production and obviously more resilient and redundant energy infrastructure.

      • sith@lemmy.zipOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        That’s very true. The rational thing is to invest in nuclear on the European continent. The Swedish pricing issue can be solved through politics.

    • sith@lemmy.zipOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yes, that sucks. And they for sure are religious when it comes to nuclear. There are more cautious and strategic ways than throwing hundreds of billions on private contractors on a dysfunctional market. The government should own and run all nuclear production.