In today’s speech at the Climate Summit in Glasgow Prime Minister Jonas Kar Store said the Petroleum Fund would be at the forefront of green investment.
He used rostrum to talk about hydrogen, carbon capture and sea air.
In an interview with Aftenposten However, he goes even further and says that Norwegian gas is part of the solution to the global climate crisis.
It was the most popular reaction on Twitter. Among them is Evident Traddle (MDG)
Norway’s contribution to the climate summit in Glasgow did not go unnoticed.
Among other things, during COP26 Norway was hung as the worst climate by the Climate Action Network (CAN), which named it the “fossil of the day”.
CAN believes that Norway promotes oil and gas production and is lobbying the COP and abroad for this.
Among other things, Lord Caroline, secretary general of the WWF World White Fund for Nature, told Lord NRK that the award shows that Norway’s climate contribution “fades into oily skin”.
– He says if Norway really wants to contribute to reducing emissions, it must start by restricting our own oil and gas production.
He adds that our “dual role” as a climate activist and oil and gas producer has received attention at the climate summit in Glasgow.
But now Støre is getting support from another part of the climate segment.
– Today’s fossil appraisal in Glasgow is nonsense. The store has been prime minister for a month, and Bellona chairman Frederick Hawke told NRK that new blocks for oil in the north have not yet been announced.
The reason for the solution
Hauge agrees with most of the store’s news during the UN climate summit.
The store believes that carbon capture and storage, sea air and hydrogen have good prospects for Norway to become a world leader.
Hajj is particularly interested in carbon capture and storage. He then believes that Norwegian gas production is also part of the solution.
– We must be based on facts. There are no shots that take us towards the 1.5 degree target without the extensive use of CO₂ capture and storage. For energy production, industry and hydrogen production.
– But the UN does not agree?
– The UN says we need to have CO₂ capture and storage, so they communicate twice.
He believes it is time to settle with parts of the environmental movement.
– I think there is a real reason to take a stand against parts of the environmental movement that oppose this technology. And adds:
– I compare it to anti-vaccine vaccines during infections.
He believes climate goals cannot be achieved without co-capture and storage.
– For me it was absolutely a dream, it was nonsense. In this context the environmental movement functions somewhat negatively.
He thinks it is hard to imagine that we will convert hydrogen into energy for the next 20 years without this technology.
– I think those who oppose this should sit down and explore mathematics that can solve climate problems. I think it is unheard of that there is still opposition to this. It has simply become symbols and ideology rather than realistic ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. And it makes me violent.
“Music geek. Coffee lover. Devoted food scholar. Web buff. Passionate internet guru.”