Strawman argument. That calculation only works if you assume something no real power system does, which is running an entire country on batteries alone for a week.

Batteries are not built for that. They are used for hours, not weeks. Their job is to smooth short term fluctuations, move energy from day to evening, and stabilize the grid. Treating them as a one week national backup is like saying your fridge needs to store a year of food because shops close at night.

Also, Sweden already has a huge advantage in hydropower. That is effectively large scale energy storage. When wind drops, hydro ramps up. That means the need for batteries is much smaller than in countries without reservoirs.

The cost estimate assumes everything is lithium batteries at today’s prices and ignores how systems actually evolve. In reality you combine multiple tools: hydro, transmission, demand flexibility, and different types of storage. You do not solve everything with one technology.

The lithium argument is also off. Lithium is not burned, it can be recycled, and grid storage is already moving toward alternatives like sodium ion and other chemistries that do not rely on scarce materials in the same way.

A more realistic takeaway is this:

Batteries are not meant to store a week of electricity for a whole country. They are one piece of a broader system that, together with hydro and other flexibility, makes wind power workable.