EXPLAINED: Norway opens up protected rivers to power plants
What change did the Norwegian parliament vote through?
The parliament voted through a proposal to allow consent to be granted to small hydro projects on protected rivers, without the applications needing to be decided by parliament, as they would be today.
"Consent processing will be opened for power plants with over 1 MW capacity in protected watercourses where the social benefit, for example in the form of flood mitigation effects, is considered significant at the same time as the environmental consequences are considered acceptable," reads the controversial clause.
The proposal was part of a larger package of measures designed to improve flood protection, which was backed by a broad majority, with a total of 78 MPs in favour and 21 against.
The Labour Party, Conservative Party, Centre Party and Progress Party all voted in favour of the proposal, while the Green Party, Socialist Left Party, Liberal Party and Christian Democrats all voted against.
What are protected watercourses?
Norway in 1973 brought in a new plan permanently protecting 95 rivers and lakes and temporarily protecting 45 more, with further plans in 1980, 1983, 1993, 2005, and 2009, giving new watercourses protected status.
There are currently 390 rivers and lakes with protected status, covering roughly 25 percent of Norway's catchment areas.
What are opponents saying?
Conservationist groups have been up in arms about the decision, mounting protests outside the parliament ahead of the vote.
Truls Gulowsen, leader of the Norwegian Association for Nature Conservation, called the vote "terribly disappointing".
"We will fight for every single protected waterway, for every river, every waterfall and every lake. We will not give up what we have won through more than a hundred years of watercourse struggle because of an ill-considered and irresponsible hasty decision."
Une Bastholm, an MP for the Green Party, called it an "historic attack on Norwegian nature", and called on the parties that voted for it to stand by their promise not to let it mean "massive development in protected waterways".
Lars Haltbrekken, an MP for the Socialist Left Party, called it "a sad day for nature."
"These rivers should have been protected forever, and now a majority in the parliament is instead ready to destroy them forever," he said.
Groups representing users of Norway's rivers were also critical with Pål Mugaas, spokesperson for Norske Lakseelver (Norwegian Salmon Rivers), telling The Guardian newspaper it was "a sad day for the wild salmon", and Live Steihaug Aasheim, general manager of Sjoa Rafting, telling NRK it could mean the end of "the entire rafting industry" on the Sjoa river.
What are supporters saying?
The government and the other parties backing the change have downplayed its significance, with Ingvild Kjerkol, the Labour Party MP who leads the Energy and Environment Committee, claiming that the vote will not mean rivers losing their protected status.
"Just so there is absolutely no doubt: The protection has not been lifted. It remains. The Water Resources Act is not changing. Protected watercourses remain protected," she told NRK.
"There won't be many projects. But a few projects can prevent floods from causing major damage to nature. And that can prevent days with extreme prices."
The parties in favour argue that it is necessary to dam rivers in order to control flooding during periods of extreme rainfall, a consideration that has become more pressing after the severe floods in August 2023 destroyed bridges, roads and property.
How many more hydropower projects are possible?
While the change has been largely justified on the grounds of flood protection, Fornybar Norge, the Norwegian renewable energy lobby group, said in a statement last week that it supported the proposal to loosen river protections.
'This will, among other things, be relevant for projects that have a significant flood-reducing effect. At the same time, it is good that the decision is not a free pass for the construction of new facilities in protected watercourses.'
The lobby group has long been calling for more hydropower to be built, claiming a need for new plants designed to ramp production up and down as rapidly as possible to make up for periods of low wind, when wind power production in the country can drop sharply.
Will the change mean more power plants?
Not automatically. Power plant developers will still need to submit proposals to the Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate, and secure all the necessary environmental permits, so it's likely to be years, perhaps as long as a decade before the change results in any new plants being built.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Local Norway
7 hours ago
- Local Norway
Norway steps closer to defining rape as lack of consent
The legislation, backed by a majority in the country's parliament, is modelled on the "only yes means yes" law in neighbouring Sweden. Once adopted in a second parliamentary vote, the amendment would be applied to the existing criminal statute. Violators would face a maximum prison term of six years in cases where consent was not given. Denmark, Greece and Spain already treat non-consensual sexual acts as rape. Under the change in the Norwegian law, consent must be clearly expressed verbally or with a gesture. Advertisement "(Currently) the law considers it rape only if there has been violence, threats or if someone has taken advantage of the vulnerability of a person unable to resist," Justice Minister Astri Aas-Hansen said in April when she presented the government's bill. "But there may be other reason why a person cannot, or fails to, refuse a sexual advance," she added. Whether victims of sexual assault remained motionless, intoxicated or paralysed by fear during the act and were unable to fight back would be taken into account under the amendment.
Local Norway
2 days ago
- Local Norway
Norway votes down plan to limit investment in Israeli companies
Lawmakers voted by 88 to 16 against a proposal to order the fund to withdraw from companies "that contribute to Israel's war crimes and the illegal occupation" of the West Bank. Norway's sovereign wealth fund, fuelled by vast revenue from the country's oil and gas exports, is the biggest the world and has nearly $1.65 trillion invested around the globe. The government though is under pressure to use its financial clout to influence Israeli policy in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, where its settlement policy has been deemed illegal under international law. In a letter signed by about 50 non-governmental organisations, Norway's main union LO called on the Labour government to ensure that the fund's investments were in line with the country's legal obligations. The UN special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories on May 20 urged Oslo to "fully and unconditionally divest from all entities linked to Israel's unlawful presence in the occupied Palestinian territory". Francesca Albanese said Norway's fund held $121.5 billion -- or 6.9 percent of its total value -- in companies "involved in supporting or enabling egregious violations of international law in the occupied Palestinian territories". Advertisement Norwegian Finance Minister Jens Stoltenberg in response called for an end to violence, the liberation of Israeli hostages kidnapped on October 7, 2023 and the resumption of humanitarian aid. But he said the fund's investments "do not violate Norway's obligations under international law". The fund is regulated by a raft of ethical rules and has already divested from 11 companies because of their activities in the occupied West Bank. In May, it withdrew its investment in Paz Retail and Energy, which distributes fuel in Israeli settlements. Relations between Norway and Israel have soured since May 2024, when the country joined Spain and Ireland in recognising the state of Palestine
Local Norway
3 days ago
- Local Norway
'Without BankID you are nobody': Foreigners in Norway lament bureaucratic headaches
Getting a Bank ID When asked to list their worst bureaucratic headaches in Norway the single most widespread gripe among our international readership and online groups was the complex and drawn-out process of obtaining a BankID, Norway's digital identity system. Without it, daily life grinds to a halt. 'You are effectively locked out of Norwegian society,' one reader said. 'No mobile phone number, no online shopping, no Vipps. There are some places where that is the only payment option, which is very frustrating." One respondent, Abby Noble, described it as a 'chicken and egg' conundrum. To get a BankID, you need a bank account. But to open a bank account, you need a registered address — which you often can't get without a bank account. "Why is a bank account necessary for having access to your health page in Norway?" complained Sebastian Rojas, from Chile. READ ALSO: What are the rules for getting a BankID at Norway's banks? The frustrations of having a D-number Many people, such as newly arrived asylum seekers or EU citizens planning to work in Norway for less than six months, or other foreign workers on job seeker permits, are only eligible for a D-number, which can make it hard to open a bank account or access a wide range of other services. Megan Thorsen said that after she was given a D-number on the back of her job-seeker visa, she struggled to set up something as basic as an internet connection. Others found that banks simply had no process for D-number holders, even when they had job offers in hand. 'I went to four banks,' one reader recalled. 'Eventually my Norwegian friend called his banker, who was shocked they couldn't help. They just hadn't seen the issue before.' But even getting a D-number seemed to take some time. 'Without a D-number, you are nobody. And nobody tells you what you're supposed to do next," one respondent moaned. Advertisement READ ALSO: How to switch from a D-number to a fødselsnummer in Norway Trouble opening bank accounts It wasn't only people on D-visas who had trouble opening bank accounts. One Polish respondent said the most frustrating thing about living and working in Norway was simply "waiting". "Over two months to open a bank account!" he exclaimed. "I think the response time to get all the papers ready is sometimes too much," Sebastian Rojas said. "To get my National ID number and the bank account took me at least three months. Without those two things in Norway you are very restricted to what you can actually do." Banks require physical documents, which are sent by post, and Norwegian post won't deliver unless your name is on the letter box. 'It was a nightmare,' said Abby Noble. 'I was only able to solve it thanks to kind Airbnb owners and friends I made at Norskkurs.' READ ALSO: What you need to know about opening a bank account in Norway UDI processing times Advertisement The Norwegian Directorate of Immigration (UDI) also came in for heavy criticism — particularly for long waits for family reunification and citizenship applications. 'Family visas are taking 12 to 15 months,' said Frida Cota, who had to endure a long-distance relationship while waiting. "Citizenship applications are now taking 30 months if they are not automatically processed. And nobody knows or will tell what the criteria is for automatic processing." Carla Colombon, from Mexico, was unable to work for over 18 months while waiting to get all the necessary paperwork done. 'Such a waste of time and skills and super expensive for my partner and me to live on only one income." She said it has also been "incredibly frustrating" not to be able to travel freely when living in Norway on a temporary visa. Advertisement Problems getting appointments/phone contact "Have you tried calling any institutions? Waiting times of 30 min and more," complained one anonymous respondent, who described Norway as "close to a failed state". "And there is no feedback, as in normal countries (you don't get an option to evaluate how the phone call went)". "When you have to register in the country, the next appointment with the police is like half a year away somewhere in Finnmark," the commenter added. Contradictory answers/poor information Several respondents complained of getting contradictory information from different government officials, or on different government websites. "The information is not coherent," complained Elva Popsen from Greece. "When you register at UDI as a job seeker, nobody tells you that you should go to NAV [the unemployment service]. Also at the tax office, nobody tells you that you should try NAV first if you don't have a job yet." "Any interaction with government institutions leads to contradictory answers," agreed an anonymous respondent, pointing to a "discrepancy between what is indicated on the website and what was provided by direct communication". Lack of understanding among ordinary Norwegians "The challenges immigrants face are not relatable to most locals," Amber Renee explained. "They've never had to get a personal number, never had to deal with UDI, and never had to understand or care about any of these processes." "This seems to carry over to the native Norwegians who design the processes or are working in service positions for the bureaucracy. They still do not relate or understand the full picture and do not really care because it doesn't affect them." Would you add any other obvious bureaucratic hurdles? Share your own experience in the comments section below.
