The energy crisis cannot be solved without nuclear power

Kronkel: Minister of Oil and Energy Terry Leanne Asland (AP) No Nuclear Energy shows a complete lack of will to solve the energy crisis we face.

discussion

This is the topic of discussion. Post was written by an outside contributor, quality assurance by Aftenbladet’s discussion section. Opinions and analyzes are the property of the author.

Imagine we got nuclear power that costs 30 øre per kilowatt-hour. It has completely failed by investing wind energy at sea and on land. And the same with solar energy. These projects are no longer profitable and not realized with such a competitor.

This shows the government’s position on energy policy. It may seem that they are not interested in solving it as long as there is a surplus of additional income to the treasury with electricity prices of 5-6 NOK per kWh. This year alone almost extra income for the state. 70 billion due to high electricity prices. People and 20 thousand companies were devoured with 44 billion in aid. The remaining companies, Storre can live with bankruptcy.

Within 10-15 years

company Norsk Kjernekraft AS was founded in July this year It aims to be able to build small-scale nuclear power plants within 10-15 years. “I started this company after several years of analysis, is it realistic that we will be able to implement this in ten to fifteen years. Then if there is something Norway needs and something there will be political will for it”, Head Johnny Heisthammer told VG.

We received European prices whether we liked it or not. The cables to Europe will never be broken. The prices we have now are severe because of the war in Europe, but European electricity prices have always been much higher than Norwegian prices.

Great Britain bets on Seven more nuclear power plantsin addition to the fifteen they currently have, to become more self-sufficient in power in the future.

I built Finland Olkilotto 3which is increasing Finland’s energy production by 14 percent, and has plans to build an additional nuclear reactor in the north of the country.

Sweden has had nuclear power for many years.

France is betting heavily on nuclear energy in the futureBelgium is renewing the life of its nuclear power plants.

Aasland should be able to look ahead. We will need massive amounts of electricity in 10-15 years. Nor can wind and hydropower cover that.

“Nuclear power has a number of challenging aspects related to costs and safety not least when it comes to waste storage. Our assessment is that nuclear power is not a current issue in Norway,” Energy Secretary Terry Leanne Asland writes In an email to VG.

But what about the future, Asland? Can he see 10-15 years into the future and see that these challenges are unresolved?

salt water and norwegian thorium

brine reactors with thorium As a fuel emitting minimal waste challenges, and Norway has thorium deposits Which can supply Norway for 3000 years. There is great interest in this type of reactor, and work is underway to develop a commercial salt melt reactor in a number of countries, including China, Japan, the United States, Canada, Russia, Great Britain and Denmark.

A new salt smelting reactor is also included Fourth General– the program. The fact that Norway should not be involved in this race towards a carbon dioxide-free energy source that does not destroy land or waterways, does not destroy marine areas and kills bird life, is a poorly understood position on the part of the government.

Norway needs people with a vision for the future and a vision who can see outside the box. Preferred Aasland Norwegian rivers rage And nature before it opens the door wide for new thinking. Fortunately, we received a direct refusal from NVE regarding this matter Wind power in Bremangerlandet.

in spite of, According to CiceroNow, more people are positive about wind energy than before, so this doesn’t mean people want windmills under their living room door or country house wall. Wind energy is destroying norwegian nature and still inconsistent with it United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. With the prices we now have for electricity, the hope of lower prices is clearly making Norwegians and women reconsider other options. But they were also not informed of the nuclear power potential at 30 øre per kWh.

leans into the future

I would venture to say that our Energy Minister, Terje Lien Aasland, is not qualified enough to make such a decision when the future is knocking on the door with the growing need for electric power. We’ll be producing hydrogen and ammonia, which requires massive amounts of energy (which is basically a lose-lose project as the overall efficiency of electrical energy to what you get from hydrogen and ammonia is very small). They are carriers of energy, unlike electrical energy, which must be used when they are produced.

Opponents of wind energy say a resounding yes to nuclear power. Without nuclear power, we cannot halve carbon dioxide emissions until 2030 without making drastic interventions in nature. I would argue that he is stepping back into the future and closing our eyes to the possibilities that exist.

Aasland must reconsider his view of nuclear power and accept such a far-sighted commitment from some dreamers who have the opportunity and will to implement.