This winter, the Storting will discuss a proposal to supplement the conservation plan with the following five waterways: Gjengedalsvassdraget (Vestland) Garbergelva (Trøndelag) Hovda (Inland) Vinda (Inland) Skurvedalsåna (Rogaland) – The conservation values of these rivers are indisputable, says Ola Elvestuen, environmental and energy policy spokesperson for the Liberal Party. The background for the proposal is the new nature agreement on 30 per cent protection and what the Liberal Party perceives as “increasing pressure on the waterway”. Elvestuen refers to a statement from Oil and Energy Minister Terje Lien Aasland in Klassekampen that “the technology is much better now than before” and that the energy commission should therefore “look into whether it is possible to develop more of what has been protected”. The Minister of Energy: – The protection plan for watercourses must be fixed Oil and Energy Minister Terje Aasland (Ap): – The government believes the protection plan for watercourses must be fixed. In those waterways that need flood protection, there may still be reason to look at the possibility of some power production in line with the Storting’s guidelines. – If we are to further develop the power system and ensure security of supply and more stable prices in the face of increased consumption, it is important to facilitate an increase in Norwegian hydropower production, among other things by facilitating better maintenance, upgrading and renewal of existing hydropower plants. The most important contribution will be to facilitate the development of hydropower outside the protected waterways, among other things by upgrading and expanding existing hydropower plants. – The conservation plan, which consists of 390 objects, includes various watercourses which together will form a representative section of Norway’s watercourse nature. The international nature agreement that was adopted in Montreal in December contains the goal that at least 30 percent of land and sea on earth must be preserved by 2030. The government will now assess how the nature agreement is followed up in Norway and present this to the Storting. How protection and conservation can be strengthened is part of these assessments. Despite earlier signals of relaxation, the Storting decided in June that the protection of 390 Norwegian watercourses should remain in place. Photo: Hafslund Eco – It’s getting painful and difficult assessments Aasland has since clarified that he is “not as radical” as he has been made out to be: – It’s not like I’m considering putting the protection of waterways in a trap. But we must examine how we can get more power without reducing the natural values. It’s not worse than that, he says. Climate and Environment Minister Espen Barth Eide (Ap) has said that the country must prepare for “bad and difficult” assessments, but that “challenging previous conservation decisions should be quite far down the list”. Out in the municipalities, regulation of waterways is not just a trade-off between power and nature values. There is also a question of flume protection. The mayors who live closest to the five rivers therefore say no to protection. Stanley Wirak (Ap), mayor of Sandnes: – I see no reason to include new watercourses in the conservation plan. This has come about after good processes. Skurvedalsånå can be developed in a way that preserves the natural values. Leidulf Gloppestad (Sp), mayor of Gloppen: – A categorical protection of the Gjengedalsvassdraget would not be wise. We need more electricity to ensure our own consumption, and to meet the needs of the green shift. Ole Erik Hørstad (H), mayor of Åmot: – The left’s actions have no political roots in Åmot, and we foresee that an extension of the protection plan for watercourses will be ensured a sound solution with local roots. Even Moen (Sp), mayor of Stor-Elvdal: – I do not support Venstre’s proposal. Clean energy is important, and we have great needs. Then we have to look at several alternatives. Jon Askeland (Sp), county mayor in Vestland: – The left starts at the wrong end. I expect that the ministry will first assess the consequences of the new nature conservation agreement. We then get to assess new conservation areas. Odd Erik Holden (Sp), mayor of Øystre Slidre: – Now the Storting can first take a position on the proposal. The municipal board will give its opinion on the protection of Vinda, if it becomes relevant. Ole Morten Balstad (Ap), mayor of Selbu: – The issue of protection must be decided through local decisions, and not by peripheral parliamentary representatives. – A categorical protection of the Gjengedals watercourse would not be wise, says Leidulf Gloppestad (Sp), mayor of Gloppen. Photo: Aleksander Åsnes Power development in Garbergselva has been the subject of two municipal treatments. In 2019, a unanimous municipal council agreed to develop the upper part of the watercourse. The decision was overturned by the Ministry of Oil and Energy (OED), which pointed out that the power plant would have “too many disadvantages for Garbergselva’s natural diversity, such as stream gorges, waterfall spray zones and endangered species”. This is what the mayors Leidulf Gloppestad, Gloppen say – I think it would be very unwise to categorically protect this watercourse, a development here could supply electricity to 5,500 households. We need more electricity both to ensure our own consumption, but also to be able to meet the needs of the future in the green shift. Stanley Wirak, Sandnes – I see no reason to include new watercourses in the conservation plan. This has come about after good processes. When it comes to Skurvedalsånå, I believe that this can be developed in a way that preserves natural values. We have to question whether the protection rules are in some cases too categorical. We must dare to have a debate about this. But uncritically shaking up the main issue of expanding protected watercourses, no, I am clearly against that. Ole Morten Balstad, Selbu – I think the Minister of Oil and Energy has a very good point when he points out that the need for renewable energy is great. I also do not want to conclude from what source the new energy will come from, but hydropower is, in my eyes, perhaps the gentlest and most natural form of energy production. That something must be sacrificed if we are to get all the renewable energy we need is, in my eyes, a simple and realistic conclusion. Jon Askeland, Vestland – I think the Left here is starting at the wrong end after the global nature conservation agreement was negotiated before Christmas. I expect the Ministry of Climate and the Environment to first give us a thorough assessment in the form of a Parliamentary report or NOU of the consequences of the nature conservation agreement, including a consultation round. We then get to assess specific new conservation areas. There is more protection in Norway, at the same time we need more renewable energy, so we must first get a total overview of the conflicting objectives of the new protection, before we change the protection status. Ole Erik Hørstad, Åmot – In our municipality, we have already taken national responsibility by protecting the Åsta watercourse. In addition, the municipality has given large conservation areas to, among other things, the Hemmeldalen Nature Reserve. In addition to voluntary forest protection, it is realistic that Åmot will reach the (former) national target of 10 percent protection within a relatively short time. Unfortunately, the government has drastically cut funding for voluntary forest protection, so these protection processes have partially stopped. Correspondingly, the government, led by the Left, said no to the development of the Gjengedalsvassdraget in 2018. To the disappointment of Nils Magne Gjengedal, who owns parts of the Gjengedalsvassdraget in Nordfjord. – An own power plant will give a new lease of life to the village and our municipality, he told news last year. Last year, 22 hydropower projects with a total of half a TWh in annual production were put into operation. We have to go back to 1996 to find so few projects that have started production. Photo: Knut Slettemo / SCANPIX – Conservation is not always the best for nature At the Storting, the proposal to expand the conservation plan was met with a mixture of joy (see below) and shaking of the head. – This proposal has our full support Kristoffer Robin Haug, parliamentary representative MDG We must ensure that protection means protection, and that they are protected in practice. That is why we in MDG, together with SV and Raudt, put forward a proposal to ensure the protection of watercourses a permanent, legally binding and sector-wide protection, by the protection of the individual watercourses being directly enshrined in the law. If there is anything we have learned from the energy crisis, it is that we are completely dependent on reducing our energy use and taking care of nature, which provides us with the ecosystem services we are completely dependent on. We solve neither the energy crisis nor the nature and climate crisis by destroying more nature. On the contrary. Sofie Marhaug, Raudt – I understand well that the Liberals are worried. Raudt shares the fear that the politicians will let loose on protected waterways under the pretext of building their way out of the price crisis. But such a way of thinking begs for madness! We in Raudt believe that we should upgrade the existing hydropower plant before further development in the whole comes into question. Lars Haltbrekken, SV – This is a watercourse SV has proposed to protect in the past. Of course we will support it again. We share Venstre’s concern about the threats to the protected waterways. Truls Gulowsen, Naturvernforbundet – This is a great proposal from the Liberal Party, which has the Naturvernforbundet’s full support. We hope that the majority of the Storting will support this proposal. We are experiencing a lot of pressure for new waterway development, and then it is natural that these valuable waterways, which have been through harsh development plans in the past but were spared, are given permanent protection to avoid new struggles. – In some cases, conservation is not the best for nature, and old conservation decisions should not govern energy policy in the future. We have several examples that new developments do not spoil the natural values, says Bård Ludvig Thorheim (H). Last year, Høgre presented a list of ten protected waterways that should be subject to “gentle hydropower development”. Vestland Høgre went further and proposed to review the protection of all 58 waterways in Vestland. In 2020, the Progress Party only got the Center Party to agree on a proposal to go through the plans for the protection of waterways “with the aim of facilitating increased value creation through the development of hydropower”. – We will not support the proposal for expansion. The Progress Party has several times advocated for giving power companies the opportunity to apply for a licence, also in the protection of waterways, says Terje Halleland (Frp). – Failure to extend the current protection plan There are currently 390 watercourses in Norway that are fully or partially protected against development. Norway’s Directorate of Waterways and Energy (NVE) has previously stated that the gain from development in these waterways is limited to “a few terawatt hours”. – In a time of historically high power prices, and where all forecasts point to the fact that within a few years we will have a power shortage, it is wrong to expand the current protection plan, says Ole André Myhrvold (Sp) in the energy and environment committee at the Storting. He adds: – New developments will in any case be subject to a strict licensing system which will ensure that the various aspects, including the natural values, are taken care of.
ttn-69
The Storting will discuss the protection of five new waterways – news Vestland
