From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
By Paul Homewood
From the Brussels Signal ;
Two Swedish economists have issued a warning that the country’s wind-power industry is on the brink of a wave of bankruptcies.
Christian Sandström and Christian Steinbeck analysed wind-power companies’ annual reports in Sweden and their work revealed “significant financial problems”, they told Swedish media outlet Kvartal on February 28.
“The total loss for the years 2017–2022 amounted to 13.5 billion Swedish krona [€1.2 billion], which meant a loss margin of 39 per cent,” they said about the sector.
Such heavy losses seem to be the rule rather than the exception for wind-power companies in Sweden, according to the annual reports.
The Swedish Government has been pushing its national energy policies in a “green” direction, promoting wind power and decommissioning nuclear power plants. But the cost appears to be much more painful than previously thought, the economists stressed.
Sandström and Steinbeck have been pointing towards profitability problems in the wind sector for some time “despite suppliers benefiting from Government support through electricity certificates and being exempt from covering the entire expenses associated with grid adaptation for wind energy or the depreciation of properties near installations”.
Since the economists’ initial findings, Markbygden Ett, Sweden’s largest wind-farm installation with 179 turbines, is already facing bankruptcy, stacking up hundreds of millions of krona in debt.
The firm is not alone – many other alternative-power companies in Sweden are in trouble.
Sandström and Steinbeck pointed out that the sector as a whole has not made a profit in any year since 2017.
Company losses have ranged from 19 per cent to 90 per cent of turnover between 2017 and 2022, they said.
“The losses are simply because the industry cannot produce electricity at a cost below the market price, despite extensive subsidies,” the economists noted.
“That would put any other industry out of business, [although] the rate of investment has been very high.”
Both newer and older plants in the heavily subsidised industry shed cash, while economies of scale are also a limitation. The biggest farms make the biggest losses and only moderate-sized wind farms, with between 20 and 30 turbines, are turning any profits and those are at best described as “modest”.
Costs have failed to come down despite growing experience among those operating in the sector and the researchers did not observe any correlation between time elapsed and increased electricity production from existing turbines.
“Just as sailors on sailing ships once had to pray to higher powers for wind to get somewhere, wind farms can only wait for the right amount of wind,” they added.
On top of that, just 20 per cent of wind turbines in Sweden are Swedish owned. The rest are operated by foreign enterprises. Some 13 per cent of the reviewed turbines are Chinese.
Sandström and Steinbeck said the Chinese investors made their calculations based on “wind mapping” carried out by the Swedish Energy Agency and they have doubts about the accuracy of the data.
Also hammering profits is the fact that large parts of the Swedish wind-power industry cannot transfer or save power over-generation, meaning electricity needs to be consumed instantly or not at all – making it effectively unsustainable.
A few wind farms in the South of the country have gained financial momentum in recent years but all the others are stacking up more losses.
The academics noted that the change in the Swedish energy mix – decommissioning nuclear plants in favour of wind power – was politically driven and that no robust, financial independent industry has subsequently emerged.
A peculiar paradox also haunts the sector, the economists stressed. Low levels of wind leads to high electricity prices yet it also hinders electricity delivery.
On the flip side, when the wind is more powerful, oversupply drives down prices when there is ample electricity for sale.
“It is difficult to see a way out of this dilemma,” Sandström and Steinbeck concluded.
Three things stand out here.
One is that Sweden does not appear to have our system of constraint payments:
Second is the fact that low winds mean high market prices, and vice versa. Obviously wind farms make their money when the wind blows, so low prices at those times drastically impact earnings.
In the UK, the CfD subsidy protects wind farms from these fluctuations, whilst ROC subsidies are generous enough to offset low market prices.
And thirdly, the article rightly notes that wind farms don’t have to pay for grid adaption and other wider system costs.
Such a shame!
A fell wind blows that blows to ruin-ables
It is difficult to see a way out of this dilemma,”
There is no way out – unless…
They get real
The way out is for wind farms to install back-up generation to guarantee turbine nameplate production and utilize fossil fuels to produce low cost energy during low wind induced peak prices
A way out may be stop wind wind and solar farms, completely ! 😀
And subsidies, without that gift from gouvernements, paied by consumers, the horror dream is over,
Solar, in Sweden??
Sure! Haven’t you heard of the Swedish Bikini Team?
Or just rely totally on the fossil fueled generation plants and scrap that wind boondoggle altogether.
Simples.
Well, there is that😋
No, rip out the wind crap and use real renewable energy sources, gas, oil, coal, hydro and nuclear. Problems solved, proceed to prosecution and punishment of all those who perpetuated these crimes.
Bryan, either that or quit subsidizing the failed wind and solar experiment and start horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracking to accomplish the transition from natural gas to small scale modular nuclear.
Even larger scale 1100MW generation units would be better than costly, inefficient, part time “Wind and Solar + Battery” ruinables
Just one of the many lessons being learned about ‘renewable’ energy. Unintended consequence? Not for the people that reaped the subsidies. Smart people without blinders predicted it though. We are destined to see forests of kaput windmills blighting our oceans.
For a long time, I have thought that the ‘law of unintended consequences’ was wrongly named. It should be the law of predictable consequences.
In a distant future, when they find the cement foundations of these structures and have no idea what they were used for, objects from a primitive cult will be their best bet.
Something that puzzles me, and one of you guys might be able to lift the veil.
When demand is low, c 25GW, they brag that wind typically accounts for about 40% demand. At the same time, gas, is turned right down, and we import more on the interconnects, paying a hefty premium, when gas would probably be cheaper.
Any explanation?
The people get the government the voters elect, good and hard.
Especially those no longer alive and mail voters.
Non-data-driven policy done to keep the “renewables” investors’ pockets lined with the taxpayers’ (and reliable power customer rate surcharges) money.
Janice – you need to complete the circle. Some of the taxpayers’ money is used for political donations to keep the taxpayers’ money flowing.
This is not taxpayers money. It has all been printed to ‘stimulate’ the economy. There you have your inflation killing the taxpayers savings (purchasing power). That’s why all centrally controlled economic systems fail.
That’s why all centrally controlled economic systems at the end will fail. You can’t print yourself into wealth there is no free lunch.
I still feel guilty about schadenfreude.
Why guilty ? 😀
No reason at all, it’s the result if wet dreams are confronted with reality 😀
So if you’re an advocate of wind power at this scale, what’s your solution to the problem?
If, if, I was a “advocate of wind power” I would suggest an interconnection between the Swedish grid and that of Norway and Denmark, maybe even direct to Germany and they need storage – dam off fiords or mountain valleys (Norway, next door, gets a major amount of its power from hydroelectric dams).
But back to reality – while I like wind turbines as I’m a big engineering nerd – the Swedes have to spark up its closed reactors and build more of them and CCGT and super-critical coal plants.
Basically get rid of the ideological fanaticism and run the grid prudently.
Easy. Make all contracts for energy to be supplied when it is required. IOW, make all energy suppliers responsible for their own backup.
It’s called a ‘level playing field’ – all suppliers play to the same rules. If it can be done then wind operators can do it.
A level playing field would result in no new windmills being built.
Yes, we need a level playing field!
Oh I’m sure “their” solution will be their “standard” solution. Send more money.
The whole concept was bankrupt from Day 1. Modern civilization requires 24/7 electricity, not electricity generated at the whim of the weather and/or time of day.
Wind and solar should be confined to remote, off grid use. Industrial scale wind and solar are idiotic.
More good news.
All one has to do to solve this mess is get the government out of the energy business. Fire up all fossil fuel and nuclear generators, build new fossil fuel and nuclear generators, remove all wind and solar from the grid and properly maintain the grid.
Most problems in the world would be solved if Governments stopped interfering.
BUT… BUT… BUT… WIND POWER IS SO CHEAP and RELIABLE!
They will have to do an ‘Orwell’.
“The cost of wind energy will be REDUCED from $0.3/kWh, to $0.5.kWh to cover our costs”.
Heads, I win. Tails, you lose.
We haven’t herd from Nick Stokes yet – is he ill?
No, he’s active on another post.
GREAT!
Had they done a demonstration project, just perhaps they would have figured out wind power is rubbish with no return on investment.
Imagine that! Who would’a thunk it?!?!?!?🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
UK wind farms make a lot of money through subsidies, but many are foreign owned too. Follow the money.
https://davidturver.substack.com/p/offshore-wind-follow-the-money
They’re mandate and subsidy and tax credit trough feeders, not energy producers.
This is another reminder that until large-capacity storage batteries are developed, renewables won’t be able to cut it. Yet we see governments subsidizing wind and solar as though they did. Then the eco-dreamers are left wondering why renewables continue to provide such a small percentage of the global primary energy supply.
Edward, battery storage for more than four hours of maximum output from a wind or solar farm is forever too expensive, more than 5x times too expensive for a mere 48 hours. there isn’t a magic technology that will ever change that, never. Details, example, and calculations available on request.
Let’s remove the unnecessary verbiage.
This is another reminder that renewables won’t be able to cut it.
Great artwork, the best artist rendition of a future offshore windfarm ever. Nice job. It accurately depicts future wind. Too expensive to scrap. Let them fall into the sea, by the thousands, as the monopiles succumb to corrosion fatigue and pitting as the zinc galvanic anodes deplete. Just lovely.
New artificial reefs ! 🙂
I’m not a fan of photorealistic images being used without a watermark or caption stating that it is artificial. Leaving them unlabeled leaves open the possibility of this website being accused of misinformation. And the accusation would be the truth. Please fix this.
Maybe Greta Thunberg, can peddle a bicycle to make them rotate faster.
Yes, and when she gets tired, put the next eco-loon on the bicycle. They can get their rest when they’re in the queue waiting for their next turn.
It’s for the planet./sarc
You can’t beat natural gas.
There once was a big head called Bowen
Who thought if the wind it was blowin’
Would get all the lights really goin’
But the Swedes showed it just left you owin’
And his brain’s just a small protozoan.
A business model which means you can only produce your product when everyone else does.
And because you can only produce for a small portion of the year, you need multiples of what the grid wants.
You drive the price to zero because everyone is producing.
Seems like the perfect way to go broke.
the take from this that no alternative (there’s no such thing as renewable energy) has ever been, nor will it ever be, profitable. They can’t even pay for themselves. Without massive subsidies it’s a complete failure.
Again, let’s reduce this to eliminate redundant words – “It’s a complete failure.”
“…the change in the Swedish energy mix – decommissioning nuclear plants in favour of wind power – was politically driven and that no robust, financial independent industry has subsequently emerged.”
Is anyone surprised at this outcome, other than the politicians responsible?
Reality Strikes!
Reality will continue to strike.
The best laid plans of mice and Net Zero advocates sometimes go awry.
The losses are simply because the industry cannot produce electricity at a cost below the market price
But I was told that wind is free!
But the cost of collecting it and using it to generate electricity is, to use typical British understatement, gigantic.
The losses are simply because it takes more fossil fuel energy to make and operate “renewables” like wind and solar than they can produce in their lifetimes.
Even when ignoring that much of what they DO “produce” is produced when it is not needed.
Can we assume from this that the owners will simply walk away leaving the government to fund site clean ups at the end of their useful (?) life. I sure that will simply increase confidence in these con men .