{"id":2653,"date":"2023-02-02T16:22:56","date_gmt":"2023-02-02T15:22:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/nmf.no\/?p=2653"},"modified":"2025-03-10T10:10:21","modified_gmt":"2025-03-10T09:10:21","slug":"regjeringens-energipolitikk-mer-av-alt-raskere","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nmf.no\/en\/regjeringens-energipolitikk-mer-av-alt-raskere\/","title":{"rendered":"Regjeringens Energipolitikk: «Mer av alt \u2013 raskere» Truer Norsk Natur og Demokrati"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div><\/div><\/div>
<\/div>
<\/div>
<\/div>

Regjeringens Energipolitikk: ``Mer av alt \u2013 raskere`` Truer Norsk Natur og Demokrati<\/h2><\/div>\n\t
\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t
Published 02.02.2023<\/h6>\n\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n\n\t
\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t

Regjeringens energiplan «Mer av alt \u2013 raskere» kan f\u00e5 alvorlige konsekvenser for Norges natur, milj\u00f8 og demokratiske prosesser. Kritikken retter seg mot forslag om raskere utbygging av vindkraft og eksportfokusert energipolitikk som ofrer Norske interesser for EUs behov.<\/p>\n\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\"\"\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/figure>
<\/div>\n\t
\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t

Regjeringens energipolitikk p\u00e5 ville veier<\/strong><\/h4>\n

What is happening now is not just a threat to what remains of our nature, environment, and communities \u2013 it\u2019s also an attack on democracy\u2019s right to protest against unwanted developments. This report, now under consultation, is an extreme version of RePowerEU, a policy that risks everything to meet insatiable energy demands, without considering the long-term consequences for us as a nation.<\/p>\n

\n

\nSe Olje- og energidepartementets h\u00f8ring av NOU 2023:3 \u201cMer av alt \u2013 raskere\u201d her<\/a>\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The report from the Energy Commission appears to have predetermined conclusions, focusing on supplying Europe with more energy at the expense of Norway\u2019s natural resources. The goal is to prioritize Europe\u2019s energy needs, including gas, electricity, and hydrogen, without restrictions, while sacrificing Norway\u2019s remaining nature and marine areas. The report suggests that Norway will become a supplier for foreign demands, disregarding the needs of its own citizens and economy. This compromises the country's environmental integrity for the benefit of others.<\/p>\n

The pressure to expand wind and offshore wind energy is being framed as a response to the alleged threat of energy shortages, pushing for developments at the expense of nature. This narrative is structured to put democracy in a difficult position, with the aim of advancing policies that prioritize energy expansion while disregarding environmental concerns. The approach appears to be part of a deliberate strategy to promote such developments, despite the long-term consequences for both nature and democracy.<\/p>\n

The main concern is not just the use of misleading data to \"greenwash\" wind energy but also the dismissal of alternative solutions like geothermal and ground-source heating proposed by organizations such as the Environmental Protection Union. The report's conclusions seem predetermined to legitimize the government's flawed policies, which are so misguided that they represent an unprecedented course of action.<\/p>\n

What stands out as especially concerning is the government's refusal to release meeting minutes from the Energy Commission and their failure to maintain the legally required public records. This represents a political process that is not only incorrect but also undemocratic.<\/p>\n\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\"\"\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/figure>
<\/div>\n\t
\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t

RePowerEU p\u00e5 steroider: en u\u00f8nsket endring i Norsk energipolitikk<\/strong><\/h4>\n

\"More of everything \u2013 faster\" is essentially RePowerEU on steroids, in a new and more aggressive form, with the government doing little to hide it. The consultation document clearly refers to how the EU Commission, as part of the \"RePowerEU\" package, proposes extensive changes to directives on renewables, energy efficiency, and building energy. The goal is to accelerate the transition from fossil to renewable energy sources, with the EU identifying several bottlenecks in the current process that need to be resolved to achieve this.<\/p>\n

The proposed changes include a simplified system for granting permits for renewable energy projects. Member states must establish predefined \"go-to areas\" for wind and solar power, both on land and offshore. For smaller projects within these areas, the permit process should not exceed six months, while larger projects are given up to a year. Applications outside these areas, however, can take up to two years for processing.<\/p>\n

The Norwegian government aims to implement a new standard, following EU proposals for renewable energy projects. However, Milj\u00f8vernforbundet argues this undermines Norwegian sovereignty and democratic processes. They contend that the proposed directives contradict Norwegian law and management principles, and should not be based on EU regulations that are not part of Norwegian law.<\/p>\n

The Energy Commission seems to align Norway's energy policies with EU interests, disregarding the country\u2019s needs. The consultation and strategy to promote these changes appear to manipulate the public into accepting an unwanted policy, attacking national self-determination and democratic rights. Milj\u00f8vernforbundet emphasizes that this approach undermines Norway\u2019s sovereignty.<\/p>\n

Norway has rejected EU membership in two referendums, and it is crucial to focus on national laws and interests rather than adapting to EU demands. As a country rich in natural resources, Norway should prioritize its own sustainability and take responsibility for balancing consumption with nature's capacity. Instead of aligning with EU directives, it is time for Norway to assert its position and protect its sovereignty.<\/p>\n

For more information about the hearing and NMFs response, se the links provided at the end of the article.<\/p>\n\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\"\"\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/figure>
<\/div>\n\t
\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t

En konstruert krise: regjeringens energipolitikk setter Norge i risiko<\/strong><\/h4>\n

The ongoing discussion revolving the commisions hearing \"Mer av alt- raskere\" (More of everything - faster)<\/em> Has unconvered a play where the government has seemingly maneuvered major energy policy decisions in advance, with many proposed measures already receiving approval before the commission has had time to assess their consequences. Through subsidies and permits for large energy consumers like electrifying offshore installations, data centers, battery factories, and hydrogen\/ammonia production, the government is setting the stage for future energy consumption with a strong focus on export, possibly at the expense of national needs.<\/p>\n

A significant portion of Norway's hydrogen and ammonia production, utilizing Norwegian electricity, is planned for export, particularly to Germany. The Norwegian government has formalized agreements with Germany to supply hydrogen, designating Norway as the producer and Germany as the consumer. Furthermore, Equinor has entered into a partnership with German company RWE to deliver hydrogen via a pipeline from Norway to Germany, with operations expected to commence by 2030<\/p>\n

Hydrogen, often deemed the least efficient energy carrier, poses significant technical and environmental challenges. Around 70\u201375% of the energy used in its production is lost, while issues like leakage and storage further complicate its use. Ammonia, a more transportable hydrogen form, releases harmful NOx gases\u2014more damaging than CO2\u2014during its use, and its role in fertilizer production could prioritize industrial use over food security. These factors make both hydrogen and ammonia controversial and less sustainable energy solutions.<\/p>\n

The environmental uncertainty surrounding hydrogen has raised concerns, even from respected institutions like CICERO. On August 12, 2022, CICERO announced plans to research the climate effects of hydrogen emissions. However, the article was later removed from their website. Fortunately, it was archived online, revealing that the research was halted before any significant progress was made. This incident highlights the sensitive nature of hydrogen\u2019s environmental impacts and the lack of comprehensive studies to clarify its role in a sustainable energy future.<\/p>\n

Silent consent<\/strong><\/h4>\n

In addition to technological challenges, critics argue that agreements for energy projects could make Norway liable for compensation if regulations change in the future. This could prioritize energy exports over domestic needs, potentially leaving Norwegian households with insufficient power for years. The government has not clarified how energy will be distributed between domestic and international customers or implemented measures to manage the rising industrial energy demand. This lack of planning raises concerns about long-term energy security and fair allocation.<\/p>\n

Norway currently has no restrictions on energy exports, meaning electricity generated domestically is shared freely with European customers. As a result, even with large-scale renewable energy development like wind turbines, much of this energy would still be exported. This system does not guarantee benefits for Norwegian households or industries. With Europe's continuous demand for energy, Norway lacks control over how much electricity stays within its borders, raising concerns about prioritizing domestic energy needs.<\/p>\n

In recent months, energy prices in southern Norway, which has high transmission capacity to Europe, have soared significantly above the rest of the country due to European market dynamics. This price shock has put Norwegian industry in a precarious position, undermining one of Norway's key competitive advantages: access to affordable energy. As energy exports rise, the ability for Norway to maintain low domestic prices diminishes, leaving questions about how the country can remain competitive in a European energy market with increasing costs.<\/p>\n

Should Norway truly become a raw material colony, offering cheap energy quotas to foreign nations while its own citizens and industries suffer? The government's energy policy is tailored to meet Europe\u2019s insatiable energy demands but comes at the cost of Norwegian sovereignty and sustainability. This is a dangerous path, with potentially catastrophic long-term consequences for the environment, economy, and democracy.<\/p>\n\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\"\"\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/figure>
<\/div>\n\t
\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t

Norway as Europes battery<\/strong><\/h4>\n

Electricity prices in Southern Norway have skyrocketed, while new power lines from Northern to Southern Norway are increasing export capacity to Europe. This aligns with the EU's energy strategy, which emphasizes integrating markets and enhancing cross-border energy flow. Such developments may prioritize European energy needs over Norway's, raising concerns about domestic energy affordability and sustainability. eHighway2050<\/em>-prosjekt, hvor Norge spiller rollen som \u00abEuropas batteri\u00bb \u2013 en plan Norge selv har v\u00e6rt med p\u00e5 \u00e5 utforme. SINTEF har hatt en sentral rolle i utarbeidelsen av prosjektet, som legger opp til maksimal eksport av norsk energi for \u00e5 styrke europeisk industri.<\/p>\n

The upgrade of Norway's power grid will grant Europe greater access to Norwegian electricity, but it offers limited benefits to Norwegian consumers, especially in the north. High export levels drive increased demand, which keeps electricity prices elevated, resulting in fewer advantages for Norway's population.<\/p>\n

\"More of everything - faster\": Rushing the issue?<\/strong><\/p>\n

The government is now pushing the initiative \"Mer av alt- raskere\" (More of everything - faster)<\/em>, som speiler EUs RePowerEU<\/em>The government's program to accelerate the development of renewable energy has raised concerns about its process. Past experience shows that public consultations are often superficial, with the government moving forward with plans despite popular dissent. Critical local leaders may be swayed with promises of financial benefits for wind projects, undermining the influence of public opinion and raising fears of weakened democratic processes.<\/p>\n

Destruction to satisfy Europe?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Regardless of how much we expand our production capabilities the prices will remain the same. As long as Norway maintains high export capacity through undersea cables, the country will continue to face high electricity prices. The energy generated in Norway will flow freely to meet Europe's growing demand, potentially turning Norway into a raw material supplier for Europe's energy needs. This could harm both the environment and Norway's energy benefits.<\/p>\n

The question of how Norway manages its energy and natural resources, and how the public's voice influences this development, has never been more central. The decisions made now will shape the country's future, highlighting the importance of democratic engagement and responsible energy policies to ensure that both the environment and the people's needs are prioritized moving forward.<\/p>\n\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n\t
\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t