Giving 35 billion to offshore wind: – A recipe for top electrical energy costs

This week, the Labor Occasion, the Middle Occasion and SV revealed what they’ve agreed on on the subject of this

The revised nationwide finances is an replace of this 12 months’s nationwide finances, the place loads of new data is added. The federal government depends on SV to move the finances within the Storting.

” ” /> And so 35 billion was invested in offshore wind. SV known as the initiative successful. However affiliate professor Jonas Kristiansen Nøland at NTNU disagrees.

– This can be a unhealthy answer, as a result of no one desires to go for the perfect answer. The oil corporations are going for electrification, as a result of it will likely be cheaper for them than the quota costs. And the environmental motion – led by SV – thinks that if we’ll get oil and gasoline, they’ll a minimum of pay to construct renewable power, says Nøland.

However the problem, says Nøland, is that it must be linked to the shore anyway, as a result of native gasoline energy in backup doesn’t obtain zero emissions.

– The oil corporations wish to produce oil and gasoline on a regular basis, not simply when it is windy. Because of this they should entry sustainable water energy from the land. In return, the land receives variable sea breezes. This may improve electrical energy costs within the off-peak intervals and improve the community lease for all of us.

SV: – Needs to be extra sincere

Nøland criticizes the billion-dollar celebration at sea.

– I feel that SV ought to be extra sincere about what they’re doing right here: they aren’t reducing emissions, they’re producing emissions. They don’t present folks with low cost and steady electrical energy. However the oil corporations get it. A number of good tax cash is being invested in a really dangerous “enterprise journey” {that a} non-public individual won’t make investments sufficient cash into. Measured towards solar energy and onshore wind, offshore wind will stay prohibitively costly, maybe perpetually. It will not be an odd enterprise occasion that method.

One problem is that you just want social acceptance for each the challenge and the subsidies and exorbitant costs.

– Do you assume we’ll get it?

– No, it is a recipe for political discontent, excessive electrical energy costs and costly web lease. However the oil business will win. With such an costly and ineffective coverage, everybody hopes that the business will final perpetually, says Nøland.

Learn additionally: Costly electrical energy within the cabin? It should worsen within the coming years

Grey wash

– However absolutely it’s good that the oil corporations produce electrical energy?

– You hear how unsure that query is. That is like electrifying coal mines with wind floating on land. If offshore wind was that good, you would not want coal or oil. However sadly we cannot get there as it’s now.

And the FRP is not excited in regards to the offshore wind billions. Storting consultant Marius Arion Nilsen (Frp) sits on the power and surroundings committee. He says the FRP is strongly questionable.

– If the offshore wind business solely has the suitable to life with a set place on the expenditure facet of the nationwide finances, possibly this isn’t the suitable alternative for Norway?

Nilsen additionally says that he doesn’t see equal remedy of the body circumstances of the completely different power sources.

– We consider it’s pure to additional develop and increase hydropower, with nuclear energy within the combine in the long run.

– The FRP isn’t towards offshore wind as a expertise, however we doubt its capability to ship constant and cheap energy to Norwegian electrical energy clients, nicely illustrated by the necessity for state assist.

Learn additionally: Right here it’s determined who will get 23 billion offshore wind from the state

In Offshore Norway, they obtain the bizarre criticism.

– If Norway and the world are to achieve the local weather targets which were set, we should substitute fossil fuels with renewable power, the place we are able to. Electrifying components of the shelf is subsequently an necessary local weather step that can scale back emissions each in Norway and globally, managing director Hildegunn T. Blindheim of Offshore Norway advised Nettavisen.

Blindheim says the business has been clear that they wish to assist develop extra renewable power by offshore wind.

– That is the rationale we have now proposed that the CO₂ tax paid by the business ought to go in the direction of the event of extra energy. It should profit each the offshore and onshore business, and on the identical time we are able to scale back the prices of offshore wind within the coming years, which can allow the offshore wind business. All of Norway will want extra energy within the coming years and offshore wind will make a big contribution to assembly these wants.

Learn additionally: Proper-wing admirers: – They’ve the inexperienced motion to cancel the Norwegian continental shelf