In this thread, we can discuss electricity production, transmission, and other topics generally related to electricity markets in Finland and globally. 
Electricity sales contracts, their prices, and terms can be discussed in the thread below instead. 
Energy saving, tips, and consumption can be discussed here instead. 
I just watched a weather forecast video for the end of January from Maikkari (Pekka Pouta). The map covered all of Western Europe, and I find it very noteworthy that a colder-than-normal (“blue”) air mass seemed to cover the entire continent now (except for Spain, maybe).
In previous weeks, as I recall, the coloring for areas outside Northern Europe was still different.
I think this relates to the thread’s topic because, as I see it, the current markets will truly be put to the test in the coming weeks. It will be interesting to follow how electricity is produced and consumed, as well as how it’s paid for in different parts of the continent.
And presumably, while consumers might be crying, some players will be making BIG money from electricity this month.
It’s getting cold…
Fortum executive’s critical view of the Finnish electricity market.
I looked at the maximum capacities for wind and solar power from last year.
11.1.2023 Solar power 606 MWh/h
Wind power 5309 MWh/h
11.1.2024 Solar power 1018 MWh/h
Wind power 6715 MWh/h
One would think that this will already be reflected in prices over the course of the spring, provided no other capacity drops out of production. Solar power quickly ramps up its output after mid-February; the winds are what they are, but surely something will always be generated.
Someone else thinks the market is working as it should 
" Jukka Leskelä, CEO of Finnish Energy (Energiateollisuus ry), says that the primary conclusion from last Friday is, however, that the electricity market is working as it should.
”Demand was eventually flexible enough that there was even a small margin left in supply,” Leskelä says.
According to him, the probability of a situation like last Friday recurring is so small that it is not necessary to make at least any major changes to the functioning of the electricity market"
I thought I’d share some graphs regarding 2023 solar and wind power production out of interest. One often encounters conclusions online suggesting that it rarely winds in winter, and that is a false conclusion.
Granted, no two years are exactly alike, but they show the direction. In March, solar power starts to provide some output during the day alongside wind power. The production capacity of both solar and wind power is being increased further, which will multiply both the production and the variance of output in the coming years compared to today.
Solar Power
According to Fingrid’s estimate, there could be seven gigawatts of solar power capacity operating in Finland by 2030. Since 2019, the solar power capacity connected to the grid has grown by about a hundred megawatts annually. In 2022, the growth in solar capacity more than doubled.
Wind Power
In the record year of 2022, as many as 437 units were built. The combined production capacity of operational and newly completed wind turbines will be around 7,200 megawatts at the end of this year. According to the forecast, a total of about 3,000 megawatts of new wind power capacity will be completed in Finland during 2024–2025.
Particularly in March, those on spot-priced electricity will be at the mercy of the weather as Olkiluoto 3 is out of operation. Even though solar output increases slightly and the weather warms up, heaven help us if the freezing temperatures continue severely past February. Perhaps by 2030, solar power will provide significant help (on a good day!), as solar capacity is predicted to increase more than tenfold, but in 2023, it won’t help much yet.
However, 2030 will arrive quite quickly if you consider the major electricity storage decisions. Those are starting to become quite urgent.
https://www.fingrid.fi/sahkomarkkinainformaatio/aurinkovoima/
https://www.fingrid.fi/sahkomarkkinainformaatio/tuulivoiman-tuotanto/
So, here is the solar power forecast for Finland:
I wonder if this is the right thread for this. I checked the compensation price for last year’s electricity energy and production surplus in my case. The result was that the average spot price + margin was 4.76 c/kWh, the average price for the sold solar panel production was 5.71 c/kWh, and I didn’t calculate a price for the panel production used for self-consumption. Fortunately, through my own actions, I can regulate the price of purchased electricity and adjust consumption so that I can live worry-free with spot-priced electricity.
Loviisa’s second reactor out of service for a few days.
Quite a farce these days..
How convenient that Tuesday is the coldest day of the week and it gets milder for the rest of the week.
When it’s freezing cold, the winds die down, and the demand for heating is at its peak, one can really appreciate the news below
Update: Jan 16, 2024, at 8:00 AM: The fault in the electrical system has been repaired, and the system’s functionality has been tested and verified. Power ramp-up began during the night. The plant is estimated to reach full capacity during the morning.
There has been a lot of talk about those small modular reactors, and it feels like it takes ages to get them if they’re ever going to be implemented. Now that we’re in NATO and a partner of the US, couldn’t we just rent a nuclear submarine from the beginning of November to mid-March to sit parked somewhere on the southern coast, from where it could pump power into the grid if needed? Surely they have some stashed away even without nuclear weapons; I suppose their reactors can generate a few megawatts, or maybe there are reactors in aircraft carriers too. We could give Russia the middle finger at the same time.
A good amount of new capacity is coming: 1,500 MW that reacts quickly to low electricity prices. Of that capacity, roughly 200 MW is currently in use.
This capacity can be used to lower district heating prices, for example, by using electricity for heat production when the price of electricity drops below the point where an energy company’s “normal” production method becomes more expensive.
Of course, for the electricity consumer, this will be reflected as a different daily equilibrium point for supply, demand, and price. In other words, the added demand during low-cost hours and days will push up electricity prices, which increases the average price for the customer—more rapidly for those on spot-price contracts and more slowly for those on fixed-rate contracts (electricity futures).
One could also speculate that these “kettles” (electric boilers) create a higher price floor, which could enable further investments.
A potential risk is that the incentive for local energy companies—or the politicians directing them—to develop their own production capacity may decrease in the future, as electricity can be easily sourced via the grid, and the energy company’s cash flow can be used for entirely different purposes.
https://twitter.com/Mikko_Heikkila/status/1750049482446635087?t=ETKQLBRMduW1vFS7tCd2KA&s=19
Isn’t there a risk with these that electricity production through combined heat and power (CHP) will decrease = electricity prices will rise on both cheap and expensive days?
[quote=“Salvelinus, post:281, topic:38264, full:true”]
Last night on A-studio, electricity was being discussed, and it really bugs me that people are focusing a bit too much on these few days and cold spells when prices have been really high or consumption close to exceeding production capacity. Overall, we’ve managed well and the situation is constantly improving. Out of curiosity, I went for a drive when it was cold and Fingrid warned of a possible electricity shortage; I didn’t see much sign of saving, at least regarding street lighting, outdoor lighting, etc., neither in residential areas nor on industrial properties. Of course, consumption showed that at least spot-price electricity customers cut their consumption to a minimum. The potential electricity shortage situation should be addressed at a national level, at least to the extent that when approaching a critical limit, a hazard warning is broadcasted on television and possibly via text message, similar to the test alerts that have often scrolled across the top of the TV screen. This potential electricity shortage affects everyone, whether they have a fixed-term or spot-price contract; consumers must also accept temporary flexibility and not always just blame the government or power companies. More balancing power and transmission grids are clearly needed, and more are on the way. The situation is simply that people got used to the situation in past years where electricity was cheap and always flowed effortlessly. The war started by our eastern neighbor scrambled the deck, but within a few years, we can tell Putin regarding energy to take a hike if he’s even still alive by then—that’s the best part of all this.
[/quote](I moved the above from the energy saving discussion here.)
From a professional’s point of view, the situation of the electricity infrastructure looks like this:
The situation is not constantly improving, but gradually getting worse, provided that the construction of additional wind and solar power continues. Wind power is still a hidden-subsidized form of electricity generation, even though direct subsidies from taxpayers are no longer funneled to new projects.
By the worsening of the situation, I mean that electricity will occasionally become in such severe short supply that the price will rise to the wild levels seen at the beginning of January and even higher, because at least currently there is no price cap defined in the system by, for example, legislation. The sky’s the limit. This price volatility mostly hits private households and small and medium-sized industries. It generally does not hit our basic industry, because large companies/basic industry have managed to secure their own electricity supply mainly outside the spot electricity market. They do not have demand response and are hardly interested in such an activity.
Spot electricity subjugates mostly private individuals. (That’s not how it was supposed to go?) Many private individuals are already signaling their fed-upness with having to stalk electricity prices as a “forced hobby” and on the worst days, like the ones seen at the beginning of January this year, heating can result in an extra bill of up to 100 euros in a single day! Nothing guarantees that there won’t be more such surprise-surprise days in the future.
The construction of additional transmission capacity abroad only ensures that the price of electricity will permanently rise to Central European levels, i.e., expensive for those who have gotten used to the 4-5 cents/kWh levels of past years. IF cables to Central Europe are carelessly built more, the new normal average price will likely be around 20 cents/kWh - unless people come to their senses in time and restrict the construction of transmission lines through, for example, political guidance.
It is not in the interest of energy companies to make this restriction. They just earn more from their electricity when the price level rises but production costs do not.
When I said that wind power is hidden-subsidized, I will explain what I meant here:
The assumption is that for the majority of consumers, the old, former electricity energy system, which was weather-independent and reliable, reasonably priced, even cheap (4-5 cents/kWh) regardless of the time of day, is the ideal system that people would like to return to, and for which they are even ready to pay a small extra price (1-2 cents/kWh), because stalking electricity prices is getting tiresome, the bingo days hitting in January with their 100-euro daily extra bills are already shaking the economies of some and above all: that Brave New Electricity Market with its demand responses envisioned for us by a certain sort of professors without asking anyone else’s opinion is not so nice after all: taking a sauna at 3 a.m. or running the laundry all night long (definitely an apartment building neighbor-appreciated activity) is just not that blissful.
On top of everything, that sort of demand response is just tinkering. The electricity market does not really “demand-affect” by consumers’ bows. People have a completely wrong idea about the scale of things. At the moment, an estimated few hundred megawatts of the sold electricity capacity is part of the spot electricity market - and thus even theoretically susceptible to demand response driven by price pressures. Out of that sold spot electricity as well, only a small part can flex.
Basic industry etc. do not flex because they have no need to. They buy electricity at mankala prices. Out of the basic industry, only Outokumpu has struggled slightly because of spot electricity, because they are such a huge electricity buyer in Finland that they cannot get all their electricity at fixed prices. The nuclear facility in Kemi, next to the steel mill, wasn’t built either… since it didn’t come to Pyhäjoki a bit lower down the coast, either. Therefore, Outokumpu has started studies to build its own small modular reactor next to its factory.
Here you see the real demand response intention from industry: Basic industry does not intend to flex - and maybe cannot even do so. Squatting down and up flexing is left as a nuisance for consumers. (Question to the professors: this wasn’t supposed to go this way either, was it? Didn’t you understand enough about the electricity usage side when you created this system for us? Or did you just not care… many of you have ideological roots in green ideologies and the 80s anti-nuclear movement…)
It is easy to understand even with common sense why basic industry does not demand-flex as envisioned in the slides of wacky professors back in 2010. How on earth are you going to demand-flex with an electricity-heated blast furnace? Turn off the power and let the batch freeze in the pot?
Demand response has otherwise been found according to the market “surprisingly little in Finland”. Would this matter also have been worth studying a bit better beforehand before jumping into this stupidity?
Consumers, even though they do not represent a very large share of the electricity market, are recommended by all sorts of DIY electricity experts like Osmo Soininvaara to “store energy”. Well, you just don’t store energy - or electricity - like that. Thermal energy could still somehow be stored, e.g., in pressurized water, but electricity storage: There are no cheap - or even really good - solutions for that.The best-known technology for electricity storage is pumped-storage hydroelectricity. In a pumped-storage plant, water is pumped to an upper reservoir using an electric pump. When electricity is needed, water flows from top to bottom, turning a turbine and a generator. In Norway, there are coastal elevation differences of up to 1 km. The highlands feature artificial reservoirs containing millions of cubic meters of water. There, the system works. We have those 1 km elevation differences in Finland… uh… yeah. There might be one hill in the very northernmost corner of Finland that reaches a kilometer above sea level (I don’t know how much relative to the surrounding terrain)… and it doesn’t even have a body of water nearby, so it doesn’t really work. Even if you were to build a pumped-storage plant there, there isn’t a single electricity consumer within hundreds of kilometers, so transmission losses kill the idea.
All other technologies envisioned for electricity storage are crap and expensive. Hydrogen (power-to-X) in particular is an especially expensive and crappy technology for storing electricity. No one has the ability or the nerve to say this out loud either, even though everyone in the industry knows it. By the way, this is also the reason why practical hydrogen plants are nowhere to be seen. Lots of talk, little action. No one wants to invest in this bullshit with their own money. Instead, the market is full of these charlatans who would invest in hydrogen using your money. “Would you be so kind and give us a little money, and we’ll certainly invest…”
So, if we take weather-independent generation as a desirable attribute of an electricity system, wind power is currently a cuckoo’s chick that fails to meet this condition. Furthermore, no conditions have been imposed on wind power stating that when the wind isn’t blowing, wind power owners should be obligated to supply electricity reliably regardless of the weather. Thus, every additional wind turbine is like another cuckoo’s chick added to the nest: one that crowds out the other chicks. In this case, wind power is slowly killing off thermal power plants, which are those weather-reliable power plants.
Thermal power plants involve high investment costs—and for the investment to be profitable, there need to be enough operating hours during the year to generate revenue. Wind power eats away at that number of hours, so weather-reliable generation is gradually disappearing from the market as old investments reach the end of their lifespan. As Anttonen from St1 pointed out a couple of years ago, no sound-minded board of directors will approve an investment proposal for an underutilized thermal power plant. Btw, this weekend’s Helsingin Sanomat has a short news item where Fortum states they are not interested in investing in a new nuclear plant in the current market: too much volatility, too unpredictable where the energy policy is heading. Are we going to continue subsidizing overt or covert “cuckoo’s chicks” in the future, i.e., market disturbers like wind power that take away the profitability of weather-reliable power—but then leave people stranded when the wind doesn’t blow?
Consequently, as a continuation of this development, we will inevitably have an electricity system where the main form of electricity production is wind turbines. Since there are no significant electricity storage facilities (= no one with basic math skills wants to put their money into such a crappy investment), we will inevitably face situations where there is a shortage of electricity. The 2 euros/kWh seen now is just the opening act. In the future, we could easily have situations where electricity costs 100 euros/kWh.
Our electricity grid might also collapse—or before it collapses, electricity rationing will begin through Fingrid’s coercive measures. We are moving into a rationed economy. Someone has compared the situation to a developing country’s electricity grid. You can compare it to that, too. When I was in Africa, electricity was only available for part of the day. The power might come on only twice a day for two hours at a time, and that’s when you had to cook food and brew coffee if you didn’t want to go outside to cook by a campfire… Perhaps this is the situation the Finnish population wants to drive things toward, since wind power is fantasized about so intensely? As a society and an economy, we are already heading toward the developing nation league, so it admittedly fits quite well that our electricity system is also at a developing country level? Isn’t that right? There is a certain strange synergy there.
Wind energy is also, from my perspective at least, a cancerous, dirty energy because biodiversity loss is increasing. The amounts of forest that are cleared, for example, for a new wind farm are not insignificant. Now, a working group had calculated very precisely what the minimum price for forests cleared under new roads or new fields, for example, should be. It was 5,000 euros per hectare. That was reportedly a very conservative and understated calculation. Do wind energy parks pay that price for the forest they destroy—the turbines, power transmission lines, maintenance roads? Well, of course they don’t. What is the profitability of wind power if they are made to pay even a somewhat more realistic price for the damage they cause? It certainly wouldn’t be profitable the old way.
And what about biodiversity loss: now the first outcries have been heard (e.g., from Suomen Luonto nature magazine) about how wind turbines are actually extremely harmful to nature. Many species flee wind turbines and their noise pollution. Many species die in the turbine blades and apparently even from infrasound (bats). People haven’t even started to outrage yet over the amounts of microplastics that the blades release into nature as the plastic wears away from the blade’s surface.
The list could go on. Wind power does not contribute in any way to the costs of the billions in additional investments the electricity transmission grid will need in the coming years simply because of wind turbines. The electricity grid is also losing so-called inertia, because as large thermal power plant units leave the grid, large rotating generators disappear with them. Wind turbines do not produce inertia for the grid, so this must be compensated for somehow. Now Fingrid is picking up that tab—at the taxpayers’ expense. (Or rather: it is being paid for by all electricity buyers without asking your opinion on whether you would have preferred to use that money to subsidize weather-reliable, more nature-friendly nuclear power instead.)Shouldn’t all of these actually be added up and we should consider whether any of this actually makes sense? Calculate some total cost for this whole thing? Also place a value on security of supply and peace of mind from price stability — as well as the fact that half the nation isn’t harnessed into staring pointlessly at the Fingrid Hourly Price app as a new “forced hobby”? Couldn’t Finns use their lives and time a bit better than by staring at the electricity price? In addition, we could actually calculate what the costs of wind power are when it is made the main form of electricity generation? Because as far as I know, no one has done that.
What if, in the long run, a reasonably affordable and practically the most convenient electricity system for everyone would actually be a bunch of well-run nuclear power plants supplemented by hydropower, bioenergy combined heat and power (CHP) plants, a moderate amount of solar power, and a limited amount of wind power (= including all hidden costs)? Even if that system cost 1–2 cents/kWh more than some theoretical windmill contraption where there are times when electricity is unavailable — at least I, personally, am willing to pay that price premium so that I don’t have to spend any more of my few remaining hours of life using electricity as a “hobby.” Would you be willing to do the same?
Would you yourself be willing to pay a flat rate of, say, 7 cents/kWh for your electricity year-round, if it meant you could get rid of staring at the Tuntihinta.app, never have to care about when you flip on the sauna, or ponder how many endangered birds a given windmill has chopped to pieces this month? Or how many tons of microplastics the windmills in the Gulf of Bothnia are releasing into the Baltic Sea with irreversible consequences that we perhaps cannot even foresee yet? At your next lunch, you’ll then eat those plastics along with the Baltic herring…
Yes, exactly right. And it’s not just a risk; that’s exactly what will happen.
CHP plants will be scrapped. In fact, electricity consumption will increase because energy that was previously mainly obtained from biofuels will have to come from electricity.
Zero prices for wind power will disappear completely. The lowest level will likely settle around 3-4 cents/kWh (unless wind power is actually made to pay for all the costs it causes, including biodiversity loss), and the average price of electricity on the market will rise significantly even with these settings. Note! This is the lowest level. In the future, we will no longer go to zero or negative prices; instead, the amplitude will swing to a maximum level of 2-3 cents before bouncing back up again. See the next paragraph for my guess on the average price.
The annual average price of electricity will likely be at the > 8-10 cents/kWh level eventually—maybe even more if large transmission lines to Central Europe are implemented, allowing the Germans to buy all our electricity. That is, significantly more than it was in the old days, just a few years ago when wind power didn’t dominate the system. Back then, I calculated that the annual average price in Finland was just under 5 cents/kWh from a ten-year exchange price time series.
For us, monitoring electricity prices and the “demand response dance” will remain a permanent nuisance because we wanted this kind of power system to replace the old one ourselves.
The alternative would have been a nuclear-based system producing electricity at under 10 cents/kWh with weather reliability (which Poland, among others, is investing in), but apparently, this is the choice we made.
Both systems cannot exist simultaneously. In other words, wind power will displace nuclear power if it is allowed to do so on the wrong grounds—that is, by not requiring weather reliability from the electricity system and not putting any price (value) on it.
Behind this windmill system, by the way, are energy sector professors who view nuclear power with loathing. They are high school teens from the 1980s who were part of the anti-nuclear movement. Nuclear energy is not good enough for them, and they try to sabotage it by all means. Wind energy was invented as a clever trick to carry out that destruction using the electricity market’s own tools.
I haven’t needed to do laundry or use the sauna at night yet, and I’ve been using spot-priced electricity for a long time now. There have been reasonably priced fixed contracts available throughout the autumn if spot pricing scares you. I won’t start an argument; everyone is entitled to their own opinion. That environmental impact is real, but nuclear power has its risks too—I’ve always supported nuclear power, though. Very gloomy thoughts above; I personally don’t see the future as being that ominous, time will tell. One quarter of the year is currently a bit trickier, namely the period from the start of November to the end of February; brief critical moments can occur then, as we’ve seen, but they are rare. You don’t really have to constantly monitor the spot prices; a false impression is often given that it takes over your whole life—it really doesn’t.
You are focusing on the present and don’t see further ahead. I’m not blaming you; most people act that way. As a professional, I try to anticipate a bit (make educated guesses, forecast, etc.) where we are headed if and when current trends continue. I also consider what has happened elsewhere and what research has revealed, such as information regarding European wind zones. According to the latest research, Europe shares similar wind zones to the extent that situations lasting several days can occur where the propellers aren’t churning out electricity anywhere. Thus, the nonsense fed to us by professors a while back—that building transmission lines would solve the problem because “it’s always blowing somewhere in Europe”—is not a fully functional solution.
So far, you haven’t had to experience a situation where electricity runs out across all of Europe because those old steam power plants still exist. But once “cuckoo policy” has phased them out over a 10–20 year period, then you too will get to experience (if you’re still alive) the feeling when all of Europe grinds to a halt (excluding a few countries like Poland, which isn’t investing in windmills but in nuclear power plants) due to power shortages. Spot prices will probably be interesting in that situation, but that’s secondary. The real tragedy is not being able to get electricity at all and what follows from that.
Wind turbines are much more harmful to nature than nuclear power plants. Nuclear plants in Finland are very safe because nuclear safety depends on who operates them. Finnish operators are extremely skilled and diligent. Likewise, the regulatory authority is strict. Therefore, our power plants are safe.
I don’t believe you see into the future at all. You are simply unable to do so because you don’t know how electricity energy systems work. You have a small-consumer perspective, and even that focuses on how your day has gone. One can see it in your comments: “at the moment” and “haven’t needed to”—these are all tenses focusing on the present or reflecting on how the past week went. They aren’t of much use when one needs to understand the future.
In January at the start of this year, there was a day when the heating cost for an average detached house owner was 100 euros using electricity. Just one single day! It’s great if your financial situation is such that a 100-euro daily electricity bill (i.e., 3,100 euros a month) doesn’t faze you at all. Most Finns certainly aren’t doing that well, so it would be good if you could reflect on things from a perspective other than your own navel.
On that expensive day, the consumption in my house was 4.7 kWh, so there wasn’t a terrible amount to pay. The house’s heating and domestic water system has been designed with my own ideas to be as versatile as possible, which enables the use of spot-priced electricity, and it was only those households that were hit by the expensive electricity back then. No one can predict the future and all kinds of scenarios are possible; you could be right, wrong, or somewhere in between, just like me. Every household can prepare for potential power outages and overpriced electricity prices by, for example, getting a generator to handle necessary basic functions if things get tough. March will be the next potential trial when OL3 goes into a maintenance shutdown; then we may see more significant price spikes. These will be partly mitigated by increased solar power, which has nearly doubled since last year and more is being added all the time. At that time, my own 5 kW panel system will produce more than I consume, and high spot prices would mean pure profit during the day, though I don’t actually wish for that. Even nuclear power plants aren’t guaranteed electricity producers; they’ve had outages every now and then too. Wind power is good in the sense that production volumes can be predicted fairly well for the coming days; if a fault occurs in a nuclear plant, the power is cut quite suddenly. Diversity in electricity production is in everyone’s interest so that the system doesn’t collapse, and as I understand it, that is what is being aimed for in Finland as well.
It is, of course, great that things are like that in your house, but from the perspective of the whole, it’s not very interesting. When trying to form a view of entire systems, filtering everything through your own navel like that is actually quite egoistic and even annoying.
For many people, their house is not like that—nor can it be easily adapted to be.
In my opinion, the discussion also goes astray when people start reflecting things through their own perspective and just keep harping on that “everything is fine for me right now.” Well, so it was for that famous frog, too, which was boiled alive by slowly raising the temperature.
The system change will hit you too, where the average annual price of electricity rises from the level of 4–5 c/kWh to, for example, double that, as it now seems to have risen (8–9 c/kWh)—and it looks like it will rise even further, perhaps to the 12 c/kWh level. If Finland’s electricity production system is subordinated to serve the electricity problems of the “Horsts” in Germany, then you too should get used to paying an average of 20 c/kWh for your electricity. It doesn’t matter if you are on spot price or fixed. That base level doesn’t care what type of contract you use—so don’t keep chanting it as a solution like you did in your previous messages. This matter is not dependent on the contract type.
At the very least, don’t reply to this by saying, “it doesn’t matter, my wallet can afford to pay double or even 4x what I did before.” It’s great if your wallet is in such good shape and you don’t care that the power system could have been designed differently—so that the looming price level rise wouldn’t happen. In the national economy, there is surely a large group of people whose wallets are not in your condition, and in the big picture, it matters how much money from our national economy is spent on a basic commodity like electricity.
We are discussing here (or at least I am) an entire system paradigm. If you are not interested in discussing it at that level, could you please stop spamming about your house and your contracts, because I—and probably others—am not interested in such irrelevant trivialities when we are talking about big system-level issues.
Diversity in electricity production is in everyone’s interest so the system doesn’t collapse, and as I understand it, that’s what is being aimed for in Finland too.
Finland is not aiming for diversity. At the moment, the direction is such that wind power is becoming the primary production method. Boiler plants are gradually dying out. There will be no more nuclear power. Even the old ones will be shut down as has happened in Sweden.
Our electricity system will likely eventually decay to a developing country level, and the average price of electricity will rise to Germany’s level. Maybe even higher during cold spells.