Sweden will not pay curtailment fees, such a thing does not exist. The reason is exactly what you quote at the end.

To state it again:

1. The intranational powercables means that German demand raises electricity prices in southern Sweden, which means businesses and consumers pay a premium vs what they would have paid without the cable

2. The extra charge is captured by network operators as what is called bottleneck fees and it's billions of euros per year, very large sums

3. The EC first wanted to confiscate these funds, which come from Swedish consumers and businesses. Now they want to rule about their use. Obviously this is completely unacceptable and nothing more than a bureaucratic powergrab, and no country would accept it.

▲

m101 12 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Costs not born by those who made the decision is kind of a key property of the EU integration project in general.

▲

try-working 11 hours ago | parent [-]

You must always remember that the European Commission is unelected and has the same level of democratic involvement as that of China's Standing Committee.

▲

master-lincoln 11 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The European council (which consists of elected country heads) nominates a Comission President and the members of the parliament (elected politicians) vote on the nominated president candidate and need absolute majority to confirm. That president then tries to form the commission with one representative from each member state. The parliament then has to vote again to confirm the commission.

Sure it's not ideal. But compared to China, the population of the EU has influence.

▲

try-working 10 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The European population had no say in VDLs appointment and she would not be there if we did.

▲

amiga386 9 hours ago | parent [-]

Each member state elected their own government, which in turned determined their head of state by their own country's rules, then those heads of governments appointed VDL.

	▲	selfhoster1312 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Do we even have a real choice with our governments? As a minor yet dramatic exemple, last year in France the Front Populaire won the last parliamentary elections, and according to republican tradition and common interpretation of the constitution, should have formed a government. But that was refused by Macron who named yet again an even more impopular proto-fascist government because it's technically in his power.

▲

selfhoster1312 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I hate to make this argument because the PRC is far from a political ideal for me, but the chinese political system also has elections and votes. Voting is not what democracy is about, and very indirect elections for a vast body with immense powers even less so.

I have yet to meet anyone happy with the european commission policies, except for very minor and timid arrangements such as the USB-C connector (and even then, Apple fanboys complained). The rest is all about destroying every pro-consumer/pro-worker/pro-environment regulation in favor of big multinationals who employs thousands of lobbyists across Brussels and Strasbourg.

	▲	Gud 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Indeed. Every time it is mentioned(without fail) how undemocratic the European Commission is, someone points out that the demos has a say via 3 levels of indirections. But that is not at all what democracy is all about. I am supposed to have a say about how the country I live in is run. That is democracy. Not that I get to vote on a person who votes on a person who votes on another person who may or may not agree with me. It's why I live in Switzerland now, and not the EU.

▲

surgical_fire 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Following that logic, any minister appointed by a head of government is "unelected and has the same level of democratic involvement as that of China's Standing Committee".

But that statement would be bullshit.

▲

amiga386 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

So,

1. What does this have to do with Denmark? This is about upgrading an existing link from Sweden to Denmark (seems mainly for maintenance reasons, not capacity; it's only increasing from 715MW to 1000MW)

2. Why did the EU have to reassure Sweden wouldn't have to pay bottleneck fees to Denmark?

3. If you have such great power generation in the north of Sweden, why isn't it available to South Sweden where the demand is? (whether that's to Germany, Denmark or Sweden itself)

▲

try-working 10 hours ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

	▲	amiga386 9 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Rude. 1. Let's consult the map: https://www.entsoe.eu/data/map/ Also https://www.svk.se/services/imagehandler/v1/image/55796/1300 Germany is currently getting power from you directly, as well as via the existing Denmark connection (this project is merely upgrading it from 700MW to 1000MW), as well as via Lithuania if it wanted. Germany gets more of its energy from Norway and Denmark directly without involving you. Not to mention all the other countries that surround Germany. So if your problem is Germany, why are you complaining about Denmark? 2. No, I see the issue now. It's not that Sweden objects paying money to Denmark, it's that Sweden objects paying for any other country's grid upgrade. 3. I ask about Northern Sweden because I heard it had lots of potential for electricity generation, but it can't even get it to Stockholm, never mind Malmö, due to north/south grid capacity issues purely inside Sweden. Your current curtailment is about 3.8TWh per year. I read that when you can't get power into the SE4 area, which can happen daily, the prices shoot up as it needs to import from Denmark, Germany, etc. Wouldn't it be better for all concerned if this was addressed? You then wouldn't have such a price differential between areas of your own country.