5 ms·

The "northern parts" of Sweden are, by report, already massively oversupplied with hydro power. Starting nukes with the hope of power in ten or fifteen years w

by ncmncm 4y ago

The "northern parts" of Sweden are, by report, already massively oversupplied with hydro power. Starting nukes with the hope of power in ten or fifteen years will not help keep anybody warm in the meantime. Transmission lines ought to be quite a lot quicker to complete.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
T-A 4y ago
Fun fact: plans were announced a few days ago to build out transmission lines from the north to central Sweden. Cost is projected to be 14 billion SEK, time to completion (in 2036) 14 years: https://www.nyteknik.se/energi/svenska-kraftnat-miljardinvesterar-ska-oka-eloverforingen-7038975 https://www.nyteknik.se/energi/svenska-kraftnat-miljardinves...
klabb3 4y ago
Nuclear is indeed slow, and we wouldn't be in this shitty situation if politicians and journalists would have informed themselves instead of selling dreams and fairy dust. It's not exactly like the rational voices didn't exist. And whaddaya know, look, now reality knocking on the door. What a surprise. Yes, the north is oversupplied, because they have most of the hydro. Remember though that hydro is a form of storage, so even if the transmission capacity was higher, it'd deplete faster. I don't have the numbers off the top of my head, but I highly doubt that transmission alone can solve the issue long term, even less so the short term ones. Again, dispatchable and/or baseload energy is a MUST. And the people who yesterday sold solar dreams are today selling energy storage dreams. It's the same great story, but it doesn't exist. Nuclear exists, and it's carbon neutral. It's better to start now, then to not start at all or resorting to oil/gas. There is one good short-medium term effect of the government change, for nuclear. Maintaining and/or restoring the existing reactors could be done much faster than building new ones. Not all reactors in Sweden are operational today.

by ncmncm 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

T-A 4y ago

Fun fact: plans were announced a few days ago to build out transmission lines from the north to central Sweden. Cost is projected to be 14 billion SEK, time to completion (in 2036) 14 years: https://www.nyteknik.se/energi/svenska-kraftnat-miljardinvesterar-ska-oka-eloverforingen-7038975 https://www.nyteknik.se/energi/svenska-kraftnat-miljardinves...

klabb3 4y ago

Nuclear is indeed slow, and we wouldn't be in this shitty situation if politicians and journalists would have informed themselves instead of selling dreams and fairy dust. It's not exactly like the rational voices didn't exist. And whaddaya know, look, now reality knocking on the door. What a surprise. Yes, the north is oversupplied, because they have most of the hydro. Remember though that hydro is a form of storage, so even if the transmission capacity was higher, it'd deplete faster. I don't have the numbers off the top of my head, but I highly doubt that transmission alone can solve the issue long term, even less so the short term ones. Again, dispatchable and/or baseload energy is a MUST. And the people who yesterday sold solar dreams are today selling energy storage dreams. It's the same great story, but it doesn't exist. Nuclear exists, and it's carbon neutral. It's better to start now, then to not start at all or resorting to oil/gas. There is one good short-medium term effect of the government change, for nuclear. Maintaining and/or restoring the existing reactors could be done much faster than building new ones. Not all reactors in Sweden are operational today.