Fantasy dreams of new nuclear power

Chronicle The government continues to ignore all factual arguments against investing in new nuclear power. A dream becomes a nightmare.

Dreams are important. The seemingly impossible can become even more possible to look beautiful and important.

But in business? The failure of the large, well-known American bitcoin company PTX suggests that it operated as a new type of pyramid scheme.

And dreams in politics? Eventually, all political plans turn into hard realities and concrete budget requirements that even the dreamer must adjust to.

At the moment, fanciful dreams of new nuclear power abound in the debate. But the facts continue to conflict.

Who wants nuclear reactors that have to be shut down regularly?

While the government parties to the Tidö agreement are demanding an “unconditional and urgent investigation” into the reopening of Ringhalls 1 and 2, which were closed a few years ago. But that is highly unlikely, as nuclear reactors have already been largely decommissioned. Shame, the new government is ignorant enough to base its decisions on assumptions.

Another part of the nightmare is that Ringhalls 1 and 2 were closed for political reasons, although everyone knew this was because the furnaces were not profitable.

Despite this, the Tidö agreement states that “new rules should be introduced to prevent politicians from arbitrarily closing down nuclear power plants” and that “new governance” should be introduced for Vattenfall.

So what is the Christerson government? Should politicians take a stab at individual Vattenfall decisions or stick to the time-honored principle that government agencies and institutions should be independent?

Nuclear dreamers usually say wind is unreliable because it doesn’t always blow, while nuclear is a weather-dependent energy source.

But when 32 of France’s 56 reactors are forced to shut down and lakes and waterways can no longer cool all of France’s nuclear power plants due to a warmer climate, how climate independent are you really? Reactors in Belgium and Switzerland also had to be suspended for climate reasons.

In general, the loss of production of nuclear power will increase the aging of nuclear reactors.

Now this autumn, Swedish nuclear power plants are forced to shut down for repairs, with announcements abound about Ringels 4 for four months and Oskarshamn 3 for nine days. One that will certainly raise the cost of electricity.

Nuclear Dreams on the editorial page of Expressen read news about shutdowns in Ringhals and Oskarshamn, as nuclear power is crucial for a secure electricity supply. But who wants reactors that have to be shut down regularly?

Åsa Carlsson, CEO of Parsebak, wanted to cheer up nuclear dreams by saying on the agenda that they plan to build some new reactors. Nuclear Energy Secretary Eppa Bush certainly thought this was good news.

And then a week passed, before BARBEC’s German partner, Unibur, publicly announced that no new nuclear power plants would be built.

In a world of nuclear dreams, billion-dollar investments can be openly planned without decisions being made by corporate boards.

How will the nuclear dreamers deal with the fact that the type of energy they want turns out to be four times more expensive than they said it would be, breaking all time? A number of shaky nuclear power plants in Finland (Olkiluto), France (Flamanville) and the UK (Hinckley Point) must be dangerous.

The solution is to harness and resist energy, which is significantly cheaper and much faster to provide electricity.

Therefore, the Tidö agreement means that the government should no longer subsidize grid connections for offshore wind power. In this agreement, the reason for this severe economic blow to wind power is the principle that all forms of energy must bear their own costs.

But if you simultaneously subsidize nuclear expansion with a 400 billion loan guarantee? Maybe you should go with a lie.

Liberal MP Louise Eklund does this. In a recent special broadcast on Agenda’s energy issues, he explained that Denmark’s offshore wind power is so profitable that it does not require government support for the costs of electricity grid connections.

But that is not true. This only applies to a few Danish projects. Instead, most have government-subsidized power grids. And such subsidies apply to wind farms in several European countries — France, Finland, Germany, Great Britain, Ireland, the Netherlands and Poland — according to a report by the Energy Agency.

Nuclear dreamers believe new reactors are the soon-to-be solution. But the experiences of constructions in Finland, France and Great Britain suggest that there will be considerable delays. Small nuclear power plants, of the SMR type, are mostly on the drawing board. Wind power, on the other hand, is ready for use after a few years.

The conflict between nuclear power and offshore wind created by nuclear dreams is slowing the transition to a green economy.

There are a lot of half-truths and lies in the argument of nuclear dreamers.

The closer we get to reality, the more we expect it to be a dream.