[tordrt]

Theres not going to be built any more interconnectors from Norway anytime soon.

Electricity became a lot more expensive in Norway after building several interconnectors to UK and mainland Europe. Importing high prices from the failed energy politics of UK and Germany which both have among the most expensive electricity in the world.

This has been a huge debate, and the general concensus seems to be that joining ACER and building inrerconnectors to mainland Europe was a big mistake.

[kragen]

Does that mean Norway is making a huge amount of money exporting electricity over those interconnections?

[yxhuvud]

Yes. But that is money the consumers don't see.

[parineum]

That seems counterintuitive to me.

Electricity prices don't go up because you have access to expensive power, it goes up because you don't have enough cheap power so you have to buy the expensive power.

It seems like Norway just wouldn't have power if they weren't connected to other sources, not that they'd have more cheap power.

[jltsiren]

Electricity prices go up when you have access to customers who are willing to pay more. If grid connections to other regions are limited, people in regions with a lot of cheap generation (such as Norway) pay low prices. But if you add grid connections without increasing generation capacity, prices start equalizing between regions, as every power company tries to sell to the highest bidder.

Norway could power itself fully with domestic hydro. But it chose not to, as the power companies make more money by importing foreign power when it's cheap and exporting hydro when it's not.

[fulafel]

> It seems like Norway just wouldn't have power if they weren't connected to other sources, not that they'd have more cheap power.

This is not the case as Norway and neighbouring Sweden have plentiful hydro. It's especially valuable as it can be regulated to complement wind/solar fluctuations, essentially replacing storage.

[sgc]

Obviously the presumably large amount of money spent to interconnect could have been spent adding local production and storage. It would be a waste of money if there was a reasonable path to local energy independence that was neglected.

[PunchyHamster]

but they have enough cheap power

they have too much cheap power, so they decided to sell it. But the fact they have a buyer that buys for more than locals, means they do not longer have to sell to locals at low price.

Tho it being state owned make it weird, you'd think state would keep lower rates for the people

[Hamuko]

It’s basic supply and demand. And by linking to other grids, you increase demand since there’s now more customers for your supply. What they have (comparatively) less is supply since the supply in those markets is shite in comparison to what Sweden and Norway have for their local demand.

[skeletal88]

Prices went up in norway because the uk had even higher prices than norway. Having these interconnections is good for producers in norway and consumers in Uk, but very bad for consumers in Norway

[KaiserPro]

> Importing high prices from the failed energy politics of UK

Remember that its a market, not the consumer price.

The spot price for UK electricity is still quite competitive in the winter, just not reliable.

The other thing to note is that peak in the UK is different to peak further up in longitude, which means that there is benefit to both countries for this.

[eru]

> Importing high prices from the failed energy politics of UK and Germany which both have among the most expensive electricity in the world.

Look at it the other way: producers of electricity previously could only sell for cheap at home, and now they can export and make more money. That's good!