Article

Why do we get wind power we don't need?

We do not need wind power in this country. We have a surplus of hydropower, and for the past ten years have exported an average of about 10 Twh per year. Because of the enormous damage in the nature of the encroachment, the wind power industry is therefore trying to give wind power on land in Norway a positive "climate stamp". Because we already have power surpluses, all new wind power leads to increased power exports. 

Through so-called "green" certificates, rising electricity prices and higher, more efficient turbines, wind power on land in Norway has become a good store for the "wind barons".

For more than 100 years, Norway has developed hydropower as an infrastructure, in line with roads, water and drains. This gave "light in the house", and Norwegian industry gained a competitive advantage. This policy was changed in 1990, and the competitive advantage from hydropower has been gradually reduced from then on. The responsibility for this lies with all governments from and including the government Jan P. Syse (1989/90).

One of the reasons why the energy policy was changed was the wave of liberalization that reached Norway in the 1980s. After the Energy Act came in 1990, electricity was no longer infrastructure, but a commercial product in line with pizzas, potatoes, cars and southern tours. Unfortunately, all governments have since accepted this.

In 1993 we saw a new crossroads in Norwegian energy policy, when the third maritime cable to Denmark gave us optimal capacity out and inland. The advantage of foreign connections meant we did not need to "over-invest" in hydropower capacity to secure energy during in dry years, and that we could export profits in wet years. The disadvantage was that foreign connections could mean importing higher electricity prices from abroad.

Unfortunately, after 1993, all governments had accepted the construction of new foreign policy under pressure from the power industry. Statnett has willingly built the cables the industry wants. This resulted in unnecessarily high electricity prices for households, while at the same time the business sector experienced weakened competitiveness abroad. In particular, high electricity prices could mean the end of the energy-consuming industry in this country.

Today we see that the higher electricity prices from foreign connections have opened up for the fierce investment in onshore wind power, with the associated destruction of untouched nature.

The fact that the power industry will have more and more foreign cables is easy to understand, considering the price effect. New cables to Germany and England will now increase capacity out of the country by approx. 45 percent. Both the hydropower industry and the wind power industry want the NorthConnect cable project to also receive a license. The case processing in NVE is obviously complete, but Minister Kjell-Børge Freiberg has postponed the case after the election. It probably tells us what the conclusion will be.

Each of the new cables costs NOK 15-18 billion, but there will be no more electricity to export from building more cables. So how should new cables be funded? The answer is bottleneck revenue. There is revenue that the cable owner, Statnett, can collect by trading two-way in the cables. Electricity prices in the EU vary continuously, and are consistently the lowest at night. Because we can control hydropower, Statnett can import at night and export by day. This is how Statnett can earn the cables. There will be no surplus to speak of, but this is also not the most important thing for the power companies. Their interest lies in the fact that constantly new cables drive the electricity price further up in Norway. And that's where the power companies sell the power they produce.

Through so-called "green" certificates, all households have until 2035 to contribute tens of billions of NOK to subsidize wind power. Along with rising electricity prices from the cables and reduced production costs from ever higher turbines, now up to 250 meters high, the subsidies have made wind power a good store for the "wind barons". These are entrepreneurs who develop projects, and then sell them to foreign interests, often before they are realized. So far, on average, 90 per cent of the wind turbines have been sold to foreign interests, which benefit from the subsidies Norwegian households have to pay in the form of supplements in the electricity price.

We do not need wind power in this country. We have a surplus of hydropower, and for the past ten years have exported an average of about 10 Twh per year. Because of the enormous damage in the nature of the encroachment, the wind power industry is therefore trying to give wind power on land in Norway a positive "climate stamp". Because we already have power surpluses, all new wind power leads to increased power exports. This increase in exports claims that the industry is producing a corresponding reduction in fossil energy production in the EU.

No effect has been documented on this effect, nor is NVE. Ellen Hambro, Director of the Environment Directorate, was asked whether increased exports of renewable energy from Norway will reduce CO2 emissions abroad. The answer was this, via Hambro's advisor: "Your question cannot be answered easily and to my acquaintance no one in or outside Norway has made a thorough assessment


Source: https://www.midtnorskdebatt...

AUG 11 2019
https://www.windaction.org/posts/51180-why-do-we-get-wind-power-we-don-t-need
back to top