15 CONCLUSIONS
381
Schumpeter (1942) would undoubtedly have seen present developments
as examples of potential creative destruction. However, while the old
system is being destroyed (or vehemently resisting destruction), it is hard
to see exactly what a new system will look like, and how fast it will come
into being. What is, however, not hard to assert is that the old system
is strained, and that it is difficult to see how it will survive in its present
form. At the same time, the system, especially the grid, needs to survive in
one form or another, for this wave of creative destruction and this disruptive technology to foster creation out of destruction, and to lead to a new
electricity paradigm.
This does not become easier if we conceive of it as an international as
well as a domestic problem, because a stronger grid is a solution to the
problems of intermittencies, not just within countries, but also between
them. The larger and more encompassing the grid can be made, the more
robust it becomes. Here, Japan always had a problem, being an island
with only moderately good relationships with its neighbors. Granted, in
the wake of Fukushima, SoftBank CEO, Son Masayoshi, introduced the
idea of the Asia Super Grid, tying Japan together with China, Russia and
South Korea in an ultra-high-voltage grid over thousands of kilometers,
and in 2016 a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between SoftBank and China’s State Grid, the Korea Electric Power Corporation and
the Russian national transmission operator Rosetti. (Mongolia also wants
to join.) The Japanese government is however wary of this potential cooperation, and there are massive political hurdles that need to be negotiated
before this could be a solution to Japanese grid problems (Cleantechnica
2016; Energy Insider 2019).
European countries do not have this problem, even if interconnectors
have been a weak spot here, too. In 2002, EU member states agreed on
an interconnection target, saying that by 2005 interconnections would
correspond to 10% of installed production capacity. But as of 2015, the
average interconnection rate was still only 8%. The 10% target was reiterated for 2020, and there is a 15% target for 2030 (Planete Energies 2016;
Szulecki et al. 2016). If interconnections are however a problem already
at this stage of a renewable energy transition, it is hard to see how ambitious goals of establishing carbon-free energy systems in a few decades
can ever be fulfilled. The Norway chapter, among other things, looks
at how interconnectors (here: subsea cables) very fast became tensionfilled, and how difficult it can sometimes be to frame a genuinely global
problem (climate change) as one that requires international cooperation.
381
Schumpeter (1942) would undoubtedly have seen present developments
as examples of potential creative destruction. However, while the old
system is being destroyed (or vehemently resisting destruction), it is hard
to see exactly what a new system will look like, and how fast it will come
into being. What is, however, not hard to assert is that the old system
is strained, and that it is difficult to see how it will survive in its present
form. At the same time, the system, especially the grid, needs to survive in
one form or another, for this wave of creative destruction and this disruptive technology to foster creation out of destruction, and to lead to a new
electricity paradigm.
This does not become easier if we conceive of it as an international as
well as a domestic problem, because a stronger grid is a solution to the
problems of intermittencies, not just within countries, but also between
them. The larger and more encompassing the grid can be made, the more
robust it becomes. Here, Japan always had a problem, being an island
with only moderately good relationships with its neighbors. Granted, in
the wake of Fukushima, SoftBank CEO, Son Masayoshi, introduced the
idea of the Asia Super Grid, tying Japan together with China, Russia and
South Korea in an ultra-high-voltage grid over thousands of kilometers,
and in 2016 a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between SoftBank and China’s State Grid, the Korea Electric Power Corporation and
the Russian national transmission operator Rosetti. (Mongolia also wants
to join.) The Japanese government is however wary of this potential cooperation, and there are massive political hurdles that need to be negotiated
before this could be a solution to Japanese grid problems (Cleantechnica
2016; Energy Insider 2019).
European countries do not have this problem, even if interconnectors
have been a weak spot here, too. In 2002, EU member states agreed on
an interconnection target, saying that by 2005 interconnections would
correspond to 10% of installed production capacity. But as of 2015, the
average interconnection rate was still only 8%. The 10% target was reiterated for 2020, and there is a 15% target for 2030 (Planete Energies 2016;
Szulecki et al. 2016). If interconnections are however a problem already
at this stage of a renewable energy transition, it is hard to see how ambitious goals of establishing carbon-free energy systems in a few decades
can ever be fulfilled. The Norway chapter, among other things, looks
at how interconnectors (here: subsea cables) very fast became tensionfilled, and how difficult it can sometimes be to frame a genuinely global
problem (climate change) as one that requires international cooperation.