The march toward a nuclear-free Sweden has started – Aftonbladet

Vattenfall’s decision is historic.

The march toward a nuclear-free Sweden has begun.

In the not too distant time, it becomes unprofitable.

Barsebäcks two reactors shut down in 1999 and 2005 had nothing to do with the environment, climate and economics to do. The reason was purely political.

Unable longer to explain to the neighbor Denmark why Sweden had placed a potential meltdown just a few kilometers from Copenhagen.

Historic decision

Therefore, Vattenfall’s decision to close two reactors at Ringhals for three to five years instead of ten years’ history. For the first time decommissioned nuclear power in Sweden because it is not profitable.

– It is regrettable to close properly functioning production but sometimes it is inevitable, says Torbjörn Wahlberg, director of Vattenfall.

No longer profitable

There are two main reasons that electricity from Ringhals 1 and 2 become, or may already be, unprofitable. The first is that electricity prices plummeted in recent years, mainly due to the decline in oil prices.

The second reason is that the aggregates are becoming åldersstigna. When Torbjörn Wahlberg says they are properly functioning, it is a truth with modifications. The truth is that none of them are in production right now.

Ringhals 1 is off since mid-April for the annual audit, review. According to plans, production resumed in early June.

Ringhals 2 is also shut down, but since long. After extensive repair of a bottom plate reactor should be restarted in November.

March against nuclear-free

A third reason is that politicians tighten the thumbscrews on nuclear power. On August 1, raised the tax on the thermal effect of nuclear reactors. Admittedly, with just 250 million per year, but the margin is the money even for the energy giants in the nuclear market.

What we are witnessing is thus the start of the march towards a nuclear-free Sweden.

Already Alliance Government agreed that new nuclear power would not receive any government subsidies, which the Center slyly thought would close the door to new nuclear power.

They were more than right. It also led to what is known as premature liquidation of the old nuclear power.

Joined billion loss

To the present government, the Green Party and economic partner, the Left would have a different view is excluded.

Waterfalls is a partner in even the Ringhals 3 and 4 and Forsmark 1, 2 and 3. The company states that they will be in operation 2040th

But what speaks for it? Right now nothing more than they cost less to keep going than Ringhals 1 and 2.

The remaining reactors, nuclear power plant in Oskarshamn, owned by Eon and Fortum. It’s been 2.5 billion in losses over the past two years and it would be very surprising if not they will soon reach the same conclusion as Waterfall.

Will challenge

In the short term does Vattenfall’s decision nothing for Sweden’s energy supply. Nine out of a total of 451 terawatt-hours produced in the oldest parts of Ringhals and currently export Sweden electricity.

But in the long term must shortfall from nuclear power replaced by electricity which is not too expensive. It’s a challenge and it must be kicking off almost immediately. 2040 is only 25 years away.

Vattenfall owns 70.4 percent of Ringhals and the decision must be confirmed by the other shareholder, the energy giant Eon.