Three researchers at NTNU write enthusiastically about nuclear power in the column “The Norwegian wind power adventure needs nuclear power” on news Ytring. Calling Norwegian wind power development a “fairy tale” is probably something many people disagree with, but we can leave that at that. For the three researchers, an important debate is taking place, and they are right that nuclear power can – and probably will – change the Norwegian energy debate. Therefore, the researchers contribute important knowledge, but they clearly do not see the natural consequence of their own arguments. The researchers are in favor of nuclear power, because it is stable and can act as base load in our power system. That means it ticks and runs steadily, all the time. That is correct. Furthermore, they argue that nuclear power thus frees up more of the hydropower to act as a balancing force for the wind power. This is technically correct, but completely behind the mark as an argument for building nuclear power. Nuclear power can probably become relevant, also in Norway, but then simply to provide more energy with low CO₂ emissions. And – not least – precisely to avoid us destroying more valuable nature with new wind power plants. It is precisely this that is the problem, but which the three researchers do not seem to have grasped. The question is how to produce more energy with low CO₂ emissions, without destroying more nature than absolutely necessary. Most people today are aware that the nature crisis is considered as serious as the climate crisis. And hardly any development destroys nature as violently as wind power. Precisely for this reason, more and more people are realizing that nuclear power may become absolutely necessary to achieve the goals of reduced climate emissions with minimal natural damage. The researchers themselves point to how extremely expensive wind power development actually is. This is because it must have balancing power, for which it has so far avoided paying anything. They write: “In this sense, it makes the wind power adventure extremely expensive, because there are enormous costs on top of the construction costs. This can in turn lead to increased electricity prices and network rent for consumers.” The researchers are absolutely right about this. An example is the wind power development at Fosen in Trøndelag, where two of the six wind power plants have otherwise been judged by the Supreme Court to have been built illegally. That development contributed to the need to expand the power grid for NOK 5.5 billion. Of this, the Fosen development did not have to pay a penny, while you and I and everyone else had to pay the bill for the internet rent. The Norwegian authorities are also now increasing their attention to nuclear power. In the revised national budget this spring, Minister of Knowledge Ola Borten Moe allocated 25 million for research into this form of energy. Hopefully, much of that grant will be used for research into so-called 4th generation nuclear power. There are new nuclear power plants which in practice will operate with far higher efficiency, an accident risk of almost zero and reduced waste problems. In just a few years, it is likely that nuclear power will appear far more “edible” for everyone. FOLLOW THE DEBATE:
ttn-69
Nuclear power makes wind power redundant – Statement
