Why New Power Plants Don’t Guarantee Electricity Stability

The idea that stable electricity supply can be achieved simply by building more power plants may sound logical. Yet this very assumption has been driving energy policy into a dead end for years. The problem of electricity shortages is not only about generation capacity. It is about consumption patterns, incentives, tariff policy, and the system’s ability to handle peak demand.

This was the focus of a recent episode of the “Upgrade Your Energy” podcast, featuring Oleksii Korchmit, Director of Global 100 RE Ukraine. His key message was blunt but precise: “You can build as many new power plants as you want. But if we don’t reduce consumption, we will always remain in deficit.”

Watch the full interview here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2zOu6WtsTw

Peaks matter more than megawatts

Power systems do not fail because there is not enough electricity over the course of a year. They fail during peak hours — in the evening, in winter, or during extreme temperatures. It is peak demand that creates the real risk of blackouts, even when installed generation capacity appears sufficient.

A new power plant does not automatically solve this problem. It adds megawatts, but it does not make the system more flexible. Without balancing mechanisms and demand-side management, generation simply cannot respond fast enough to short-term spikes in consumption.

Energy efficiency as the fastest investment return

From an economic perspective, energy efficiency is the cheapest way to “increase” available energy. Every kilowatt-hour saved is a kilowatt-hour that does not need to be generated, transmitted, or balanced.

Comprehensive energy efficiency measures can reduce consumption by 30–50%. Crucially, they deliver the greatest impact precisely during peak periods, when the system is most vulnerable. For the energy market, this means reduced load without multi-billion-dollar investments in new power plants.

Populist tariffs as a systemic trap

Tariff policy is another structural problem. When electricity prices do not reflect the real cost of energy, consumers have no incentive to change their behavior. Without proper price signals, neither energy efficiency nor investment in modern technologies can function.

In mature energy markets, differentiated tariffs, night rates, and dynamic pricing fundamentally reshape consumption patterns. People shift loads, invest in automation, energy storage, and modernization — not for ideological reasons, but for economic ones.

Cheap electricity today almost always means an investment deficit tomorrow.

The grid problem no one likes to talk about

Even with sufficient generation, power systems can remain unstable due to aging electricity grids. High technical losses, limited transmission capacity, and frequent failures significantly reduce the effectiveness of any new generation assets.

Investments in grids may lack political appeal, but without them, the energy system is condemned to operate under constant stress.

BESS and flexibility instead of concrete

Energy storage systems are becoming a cornerstone of modern power systems. They smooth peak demand, balance renewable generation, and improve the reliability of electricity supply for businesses and communities.

In many cases, investments in energy storage deliver faster and cheaper system-level benefits than building new power plants.

Conclusion

Building new power plants is necessary — but it is not sufficient. Without energy efficiency, cost-reflective tariffs, grid modernization, and the development of flexible solutions, the system will remain in chronic deficit.

Energy reform does not start with megawatts. It starts with consumption — and with an honest answer to the question of what we are willing to pay for, and how much.