A pretty visualisation of the European power grid (2022)
An interactive “Copper Sushi” visualization of the European power grid prompts reflections on how electricity actually flows across borders and why siting generation is as important as building it. Commenters compare the tool to services like ElectricityMaps, then dive into broader energy-policy themes: France’s nuclear-heavy mix versus Germany’s renewables-plus-coal path, the role of interconnectors and pumped hydro, and the growing challenge of curtailment when grids can’t absorb all wind and solar output. The exchange highlights that decarbonizing heating and transport with electricity is feasible in principle, but hinges on grid capacity, storage, pricing signals, and long-term choices between nuclear and variable renewables.
Visualization & Related Tools
- Many praise the “Copper Sushi” map as visually impressive and educational about power flows and grid complexity.
- Several compare it to ElectricityMaps and other dashboards (gridwatch, energygraph, ENTSO‑E, etc.):
- ElectricityMaps is better for real-time mix and CO₂ intensity.
- Copper Sushi shows finer-grained transmission networks and simulated power flows.
- It’s based on PyPSA-Eur with modeled, not actual, plant outputs; some generation and grid elements are missing or outdated.
Grid Physics, Trade, and Measurement
- Discussion on how imports/exports are determined on a synchronized grid:
- Technically, flows across interconnectors are directly measured (current, voltage, vector product).
- Market-wise, there’s a regulated trading system; physical flows can differ from commercial trades.
- Europe has multiple synchronous areas; Baltics are leaving the Russian/Belarus BRELL grid to join the continental system.
Nuclear vs Renewables (France, Germany, Costs, Emissions)
- Strong debate around France’s nuclear-heavy mix vs Germany’s renewable-heavy but coal/gas‑backed mix:
- France: low CO₂ intensity (often cited as ~40–50 gCO₂/kWh), majority of electricity from nuclear; exports to neighbors; some argue nuclear was crucial for Europe’s emissions.
- Germany: high renewables share but still heavy coal/lignite use, much higher CO₂ intensity; critics call Energiewende slow and dirty, defenders emphasize long-term downward trends and nuclear phase‑out as democratic choice.
- Disagreement on nuclear economics:
- Some cite LCOE data showing nuclear 3× cost of wind/solar in EU/US; others cite French and Canadian experience with amortized fleets as cheap and stable.
- New builds like Flamanville EPR seen as cautionary examples (delays, overruns); others argue costs would drop with serial construction and regained expertise.
- Waste and fuel concerns:
- Critics point to finite uranium and lack of “safe” waste solution.
- Pro‑nuclear voices respond that current waste practices have had no major accidents and uranium constraints are distant.
Storage, Electrification, and Flexibility
- Some argue we could cut most developed‑world emissions by electrifying heating and transport, if electricity is low‑carbon.
- Counterpoint: large-scale storage is a hard unsolved problem; claims range from needing “weeks” of storage to studies suggesting less.
- Others note:
- Nighttime EV charging and thermal storage (water, sand, larger boilers) can shift loads without massive grid batteries.
- Pumped hydro, especially in Alpine regions, already acts as a large “battery,” though good sites are limited.
UI/UX and Technical Feedback
- Mixed reactions to 3D map tilt: some like it, others find it disorienting; workarounds (right‑click drag, key combos, multi‑touch) are shared.
- Performance issues and missing plant names/data (e.g., closed plants still shown) are noted.
Security and Miscellaneous
- Light concern about publishing infrastructure maps; others respond that models ≠ territory and such data is already broadly available.
- Observations on EV uptake in Nordic/Baltic countries, and how cheap, clean electricity and good infrastructure support high adoption.