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.
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.
The thing with wind power is that it doesn’t blow all the time but it always blows somewhere so a large spread of small wind farms gets more stable as it grows. Also, nuclear power is also unreliable because they regularly gets shut down for maintenance or safety reasons.
Also, nuclear power is also unreliable because they regularly gets shut down for maintenance or safety reasons.
This sounds like one of those bizarrely bad anti-nuclear talking points.
Everything needs maintenance. That’s how literally everything works. But nuclear is by leagues and bounds more stable, predictable, and reliable compared to every other power source. Cold, hot, light, dark, windy, calm, rain, snow, desert, it doesn’t matter. Nuclear just works.
Last year Sweden had some really high power prices and part of the problem was that multiple reactors where shut down for extended periods of time.
Its not an attack on nuclear, it’s a defense of wind. No system is perfect and you can’t say that wind is unreliable and then ignore that we had reactors be shut down for multiple months.
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.
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.
The thing with wind power is that it doesn’t blow all the time but it always blows somewhere so a large spread of small wind farms gets more stable as it grows. Also, nuclear power is also unreliable because they regularly gets shut down for maintenance or safety reasons.
Which in turn would require enormous amounts of excess generation capacity and transmission lines.
Beyond a certain point it’s simply more efficient to install dispatchable electricity generation.
Oh and as for your last statement it is simply incorrect. Nuclear power plants are the single most reliable electricity producer. https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/nuclear-power-most-reliable-energy-source-and-its-not-even-close
This sounds like one of those bizarrely bad anti-nuclear talking points.
Everything needs maintenance. That’s how literally everything works. But nuclear is by leagues and bounds more stable, predictable, and reliable compared to every other power source. Cold, hot, light, dark, windy, calm, rain, snow, desert, it doesn’t matter. Nuclear just works.
Last year Sweden had some really high power prices and part of the problem was that multiple reactors where shut down for extended periods of time.
Its not an attack on nuclear, it’s a defense of wind. No system is perfect and you can’t say that wind is unreliable and then ignore that we had reactors be shut down for multiple months.