The Norwegian Power Adequacy Crisis is Accelerated by Intermittent Renewables Exploiting Grid Reserves

Solar and wind still do not pay their fair share in system costs, grid inertia, and expensive backup power. It is a threat to the security of our electricity supply.

Figure 1: Reporting of total power production capabilities and maximum loads in worst-case scenarios and an apocalyptic 2030 scenario, adopted from the Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate’s (NVE’s) latest report, “Norwegian and Nordic power balance toward 2030”.

The Norwegian electricity grid is currently in an “on-the-brink-of-collapse” situation with historically slim power margins. In 2021, the total installed electric power capacity in Norway was 38.9 GW, which could ideally create 52 million horsepower or supercharge 260 000 Tesla Model S cars simultaneously. However, we cannot provide more than two-thirds of this capability in the most critical time intervals during the winter, as seen in Figure 1.

There is currently a growing mismatch between installed and available power capacities (see Figure 2), mainly driven by the increasing penetration from non-dispatchable renewables like solar and wind. The basic challenge with too many of these intermittent sources is that they are inherently unreliable to be used for allocating the grid’s available power (i.e., the overall minimum contribution is only 3 percent of their capacity). The 2021 safety margin from system collapse was as low as 0.6 GW (i.e., 2.3 % power adequacy margin).

Figure 2: Reported development in installed power versus available power (estimated winter demand that can be provided), adopted from the Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate’s (NVE’s) latest report, “Norwegian and Nordic power balance toward 2030”.

The historically low safety margin can be found from production and consumption data on February 11th and 12th, 2021. The highest consumption was 25.2 GW (9:00–10:00, 12.2.2021), while the lowest available power production capacity was 25.8 GW (9:00–10:00, 11.2.2021), which was due to 2 GW hydropower out of service. It was even worse in the cold month of March 2018, with 1 GW of hydropower not operating in addition to low energy input. The available power was as low as 25.3 GW (9:00–10:00, 1.3.2018). With historically low energy inflow to the hydro reservoirs, the production capacity has been as low as 24.2 GW (8:00–9:00, 1.12.2010).

By considering plausible worst-case scenarios in the near future, such as colder weather, less wind power, and an expected increase in peak consumption, it is not unlikely that the Norwegian power adequacy balance will soon become zero or even negative (see 2030 scenario in Figure 1). The same will likely happen to our neighbors at the same time, so relying on them is a false hope.

This is a consequence of integrating new intermittent renewables into the grid. The goal of the Norwegian energy transition is set to electrify 200 TWh of carbon-based thermal energy to achieve net-zero emissions. So far, mainly intermittent renewable sources have been considered in the future Norwegian energy mix, while other carbon-free non-intermittent alternatives have been dismissed (e.g., nuclear).

As emphasized in a recent report by the Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE), Norway has recently transitioned from an energy-dimensioned to a power-dimensioned electricity grid. As a result, the demand for power adequacy, “the measure of the ability to supply the load in any condition”, will be a major problem in the future power system.

Norway has also recently increased its international exchange capacity from 6 GW to 8.8 GW, roughly a 50 percent increase. Rather than making our grid more resilient and robust (as earlier envisaged), the security of supply has been even more challenged. This is because the power adequacy problem is not merely a Norwegian one. Due to the ongoing European energy transition toward intermittent renewables, today’s international power-balancing support will quickly vanish in the future. As a result, power adequacy will inherently be a global problem – not a local one.

Another result of the energy transition worldwide is that the baseload of the power system is set up to collapse to reduce the system costs. It implies that the grid can no longer provide the minimum electric power consumption that needs to be supplied at any time instant. In fact, it is not economically viable to operate a grid with unreliable energy sources in the majority and with sufficient dispatchable backup power or energy storage. Saying goodbye to basepower will have a massive impact on the cost-competitiveness of our power-intensive industries (i.e., low utilization) and may also, in the extreme case, have life-altering effects on our civilization.

The power adequacy problem gets even worse when considering that Norway is part of a Nordic synchronized power grid. Our neighbors, such as Sweden, Finland, and Denmark, already have quite high power imbalances in the most extreme situations, which have been mainly driven by the periods of low contribution from wind power.

We got a small taste of this gigantic problem on February 2nd, 2021, 08:00, when the total power contribution from solar and wind in the Nordic power system was only in total 1.2 GW (i.e., only 25 % of Norway’s capacity alone), while the import was 5 GW, thanks to coal, natural gas, and pumped hydro. As Europe is also becoming increasingly dependent on unreliable sources as well while restricting natural gas and coal, the safety of trusting other countries to provide flexible balancing power should be highly questioned. By abandoning Europe’s nuclear, the power adequacy problems are going to be even worse.

The Norwegian power system is currently at a crossroads. We need to understand where we are going before it’s too late. Doubling down on the same ideas won’t help.

What if we start to require solar and wind to not only bring their installed capacity but also require them to provide a significant portion of their rating in backup power services to the grid? In this way, we expect them to help solve the problems they cause due to their penetration by securing stable and dispatchable power and providing grid inertia in addition to their own power generation.

But who would like to pay for balancing power when there is no competitive market for it? Large hydropower magazines already get good revenue from the energy they produce. Adding more turbines and installing more dispatchable power is not profitable if they do not get subsidized to do so. Is it time for intermittent renewables to pay their fair share and invest in their own backup?

Finally, by adding the burden of auxiliary services and the associated system costs to intermittent renewables, the cost estimate of their production would be much more realistic. Thus, one ends up solving renewable’s so-called “missing money problem”, which could free up capital to deal with the power adequacy crisis to restore the security of our electricity supply.