Nuclear power plant advocates want to overturn the nuclear energy ban with an initiative. The discussion is of no use, says Michael Wider, President of the electricity industry association VSE. The decisive factor is the conclusion of an electricity agreement with Europe and the expansion of renewables.
“The initiative creates uncertainty and delays”: Michael Wider, President of the electricity industry association VSE and deputy head of Alpiq. (Berne, January 23, 2024)
Lea Moser Photography
You have been President of the VSE, the umbrella organization for the electricity industry, for seven years. In May you will say your farewell. What were the greatest frustrations and greatest joys during your time in office?
My greatest joy: The topic of energy is very high in society’s attention. In other words, where it belongs due to its great strategic importance. My biggest annoyance is when dogmas are advocated. For example, when nuclear, hydro and solar energy are played off against each other. The energy supply of the future will consist of many pieces of the puzzle. It is pointless to fixate on one individual.
From the perspective of some critics, the electricity industry also adheres to a dogma: that an electricity agreement with Europe is essential.
The importance of the agreement can be shown with numbers: In 2022, Switzerland consumed around 60 terawatt hours (TWh) and produced 64 TWh of electricity. During the same time, we imported 33 TWh and exported around 30 TWh – so these exports and imports each correspond to a good half of our consumption. In the future, these enormous amounts of electricity will continue to flow through Switzerland to be exchanged with other countries. The only question is: Will this happen in an orderly manner, with us as an equal partner?
What would happen without an agreement?
Our electricity system is connected to foreign countries at 41 points. An island existence is impossible. The electricity flows are jointly controlled by the European operators of the interconnected network. When Switzerland was still at the table, it was part of the planning. Today, Swissgrid, which operates the Swiss transmission network, has to react and correct the network dozens of times a day because it lacks this information. This situation would continue to worsen.
Michael Wider
The lawyer chairs the Association of Swiss Electricity Companies (VSE), whose over 400 members produce 90 percent of Switzerland’s electricity. Wider is deputy CEO and head of the Swiss division of Alpiq, the second largest Swiss electricity company.
At least so far Swissgrid has it under control. The power hasn’t gone out yet.
Yes. We manage to balance the grid, especially with Swiss hydropower. But this could be used more sensibly.
Is the risk of blackouts increasing?
What is increasing is the risk of a power shortage. In such a situation it becomes more difficult and time-consuming to stabilize our system. And the danger is growing that we will have to control consumption and production with drastic measures.
That means?
In extreme cases, a power shortage can lead to planned network shutdowns, meaning that all regions alternately have no power for a few hours.
You are also deputy head of the electricity giant Alpiq, which makes a lot of money from electricity trading. Doesn’t a contract with Europe primarily serve the interests of Alpiq and the other forty Swiss electricity companies that operate on the European wholesale market?
That’s wrong. All of the over 600 electricity companies benefit. Thanks to the connection to Europe, we can sell our excess electricity in the summer and – crucially – import electricity in the winter. If unstable situations occur at the highest voltage level, this also affects the small electricity suppliers and their customers. In addition, we all bear the costs that unstable situations cause. Without an agreement, prices for end customers would rise.
Will there be an electricity agreement without fully opening the Swiss market?
Probably not.
However, opening the market is unpopular even in parts of the electricity industry.
The EU accepts very different forms of market opening. For example, there are models in which the basic service continues to exist in one form or another and only those customers who want to switch to the free market. It’s time to look at these variants now. I am sure that there will be solutions that the entire industry can agree on.
The unions fear job cuts.
There is already a shortage of skilled workers in our industry. Opening the market would not change that. More jobs would be created because we work in an industry that is growing rapidly.
Parliament recently passed a new law almost unanimously to accelerate the expansion of renewable energies. Nevertheless, a referendum has now taken place. Does that annoy you?
I find this difficult to understand. Unfortunately, there is now a risk of another delay in the important expansion of renewable energies. Our electricity companies are still planning their projects at full speed so that they can start construction as quickly as possible. But this requires a yes from the population to the proposal for a secure electricity supply, as the electricity law will be called in the vote. There is no alternative to this law.
The law is full of compromises. Does it bring so much?
Why should compromise be a negative thing? The Electricity Act shortens procedures, promotes energy efficiency and accelerates the expansion of renewable energies. And it specifies where the construction of energy production plants should take priority over protection interests – and where not. All of this is substantial.
Are there no alternatives?
Only a few. For example, do we really want to build gas power plants instead of relying on photovoltaics and wind energy? The alternatives to the new electricity law are all worse.
The so-called “Stop Blackout” initiative will be submitted on February 16th. She proposes a different solution and wants to lift the ban on building new nuclear power plants. What does your association think about this?
We all want security of supply and climate friendliness. That is undisputed.
But?
The discussion comes at the wrong time. We haven’t even really started implementing the energy strategy yet and are now expected to throw it overboard. This creates uncertainty and delay – and that is exactly what we don’t need right now. The initiative also has weaknesses in terms of content.
Which?
For example, it is worded unclearly. Nuclear energy is not even explicitly mentioned, even though that is its main concern. It would also create uncertainty in the regulation of responsibilities for electricity supply. If you want to abolish the ban on nuclear energy, there are more direct ways, for example by changing the Nuclear Energy Act. That’s why this popular initiative is the wrong path.
Is this a rejection of the construction of new nuclear facilities?
No. It’s about setting your priorities correctly. In the short and medium term, the focus must be on expanding renewable energies.
And in the long term?
There is nothing wrong with following the progress of all technologies now, including nuclear energy. But we have to think carefully about what can be implemented today and tomorrow. And which solutions take longer. In the discussion about the blackout initiative, the different time horizons are confused. We can’t move forward like this.
People often talk about small, modular nuclear reactors, which are supposed to be cheaper and safer. When could they be used?
Nobody can say for sure. Some experts say ten years, others twenty or more. However, it is a fact that the demand for the technology is increasing and it is now being developed by large international corporations. That could speed up the schedule.
Switzerland is a nuclear-sceptical country. It decided to phase out nuclear power in 2017, and there is no sign of a change in opinion yet. Could this change as new technologies become available?
Yes, if they rule out a core meltdown and solve the waste issue better than the current generation. They must also be able to be operated economically. Then a change of opinion is conceivable.
How realistic is it that the energy transition – the exit from fossil and nuclear power production – will succeed?
I am very confident. I sense a spirit of optimism. Not just in the electricity industry, but beyond: in the municipalities, the cantons, in politics, in the economy. I’ve never felt that so strongly.
Where does it come from?
The ongoing European energy crisis has shaken us all up. Another reason is that the federal government is involving the protagonists of energy policy much more closely. Today, when it comes to important issues, all stakeholders sit together at the same table. Discussions will be open and transparent. This means we can no longer just find the lowest common denominator. But significantly more.
An article from the «NZZ on Sunday»
2024-01-28 07:30:16
#Nuclear #power #plant #electricity #industry #initiative #lift #construction #ban #wrong
