From Watts Up With That?
Sweden recently stirred the global climate conversation by overturning its green energy targets and shifting its focus back to nuclear power.
Finance Minister Elisabeth Svantesson cited the need for a more “stable energy system,” pointing out the inherent instability in wind and solar energy sources.
Changing the target to “100% fossil-free” electricity, from “100% renewable” is key to the government’s plan to meet an expected doubling of electricity demand to around 300 TwH by 2040 and reach net zero emissions by 2045.
This decision provides a compelling argument against the generally perceived necessity of acting on climate change through green energy transition, bringing a much-needed reality check to the discourse around renewable energy. Despite the urgency propelled by the World Economic Forum (WEF), the United Nations, the World Health Organization (WHO), the Paris Climate Agreement, the World Bank, and the Biden administration, Sweden is demonstrating that stability and efficiency must come before ideology.
Unstable and inefficient technologies, particularly wind and solar power, have been endorsed and implemented with the noble goal of achieving 100% renewable energy. However, as Svantesson succinctly stated,
“This creates the conditions for nuclear power. We need more electricity production, we need clean electricity and we need a stable energy system”https://www.netzerowatch.com/sweden-cancels-renewable-energy-targets-britain-should-follow/
Nuclear power, as she emphasized, creates these conditions.
The environmental campaign group, Net Zero Watch, echoed this sentiment, stating that the Swedish decision is
“an important step in the right direction, implicitly acknowledging the low quality of unstable wind and solar, and is part of a general collapse of confidence in the renewable energy agenda pioneered in the Nordic countries and in Germany.”
https://www.netzerowatch.com/sweden-cancels-renewable-energy-targets-britain-should-follow/
Indeed, in the rush to fulfill a green agenda, the inefficiency and lack of stability in renewable energy sources have often been overlooked.
It is critical to note that Sweden’s shift to nuclear power is not a regression, but a progression towards a “100% fossil-free” energy future. Nuclear power, along with hydro and biomass, is seen as an essential element of the energy mix, allowing Sweden to avoid reliance on fossil fuels.
Svantesson’s warning to other Western nations, currently doggedly adhering to the renewable energy agenda, is clear. Substantial industrial economies require a stable and secure energy source to remain competitive – and nuclear is key.
Moreover, the goal of significantly reducing carbon dioxide emissions is called into question. Experts argue that the potential harms of this gas are uncertain and often exaggerated, while the potential benefits are overlooked.
Proposals by Sweden to allow countries to prolong subsidies for standby coal power plants have also been met concern in the EU, while Stockholm also wanted Brussels to water-down a landmark law to restore deteriorating natural habitats.
Dr. John Constable, Net Zero Watch’s Energy Director, added an interesting perspective to the discussion.
“Living close to Russia focuses the mind, and the Swedish people not only wish to join NATO but also to ground their economy in an energy source, nuclear, that is physically sound and secure, unlike renewables which are neither. For the time being the UK government continues to live in a fantasy of their own making, but we are coming to the end of the green dream.”
https://www.netzerowatch.com/sweden-cancels-renewable-energy-targets-britain-should-follow/
The narrative that meeting the green agenda goals is the only way forward is slowly being challenged. As other countries continue to strive towards the green dream, they may need to pay closer attention to Sweden’s new policy direction. Sweden’s decision demonstrates the importance of pragmatic, clear-eyed assessments of renewable energy sources and their limitations. It underlines that the path to afuture is not necessarily a one-size-fits-all solution, but a strategic blend of various energy sources, tailored to each country’s unique circumstances and needs.
Share this:
Discover more from Climate- Science.press
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
You must be logged in to post a comment.