last discussion It expresses the opinion of the author.
Per Torbjørn Jystad makes a number of ridiculous claims about wind energy development in his Nettavisen article. Jystad claims that there have been “speculative development agreements punctuated by pure bribes from local communities and rights holders”.
This is a very serious claim, which Jystad must either document or recover.
This is the situation: Wind power has become sabotage characterized by breach of trust and rude operations
Low level of conflict
Furthermore, Jystad claims that wind farms are vandalism and would not be accessible to most people. Norway has 64 wind farms. The level of conflict is mostly low, and many parks have become popular tourist destinations. The planned areas are large, but direct interference in the form of roads and space for turbines accounts for only two to three percent of this area.
The area is not closed to outdoor activities and general traffic. On the contrary, roads to wind farms give people access to nature that was previously only accessible to a few people. Take the Midtfjelet Vindpark as an example. Cycling tours, downhill races and ski trails are available. The area is used for fishing trips and family trips.
Since its inception in 2011, about 17,000 have been on a guided tour of the area. When TrønderEnergi organized an open day at the Stokkfjellet wind farm in Selbu, between 800 and 1,000 people took part. The Øverbygda sports team provided sausages, burgers, cakes and soft drinks for the big gold medal. Other examples I can use are Bessakerfjellet, Guleslettene, or Marker, to name a few.
I made huge mistakes
Jystad is also wrong when he claims that the Norwegian public administration, the NHO and the industry are behaving as if nothing had happened when it came to Fosen’s ruling. The government is working comprehensively on this issue in order to make a well-founded decision that will stand the test of time. Nobody takes it lightly.
Another claim from Jystad is that vultures cannot live alongside windmills. In Smola, the sea eagle population has been stable or increasing since the construction of the wind farm.
I’ll give Gestad the right to one thing. Errors occurred during wind energy developments in Norway. Norwea has said this many times, and we have asked for, among other things, stricter environmental requirements and better local compensation. We have also emphasized the importance of local mooring.
The authorities are now planning a new concession system where municipalities are more involved in development. First, the municipality must agree to the investigation, then it can make a final decision on the project after discussing the pros and cons. This is a good starting point for setting high environmental requirements and for influencing the design of new facilities.
In some cases, it may relate to reversible interventions in nature during the construction phase or measures that increase bird populations. In other cases, there may be infrastructure reuse or other measures that keep land use to a minimum. It could also be about completely different scales. The developer, authorities, environmental interests and the host municipality, among others, must discover together the best way to design each individual project.
In recent years, authorities have strengthened the knowledge base about wind energy and its impact on nature. In addition, the NVE has received instructions from the government that ecology, reindeer husbandry and other important considerations must be given more weight than before. Production fees have also been introduced to ensure that the host municipalities will increase their income from wind farms.
Jystad claims that there is no point in providing further impact assessments, but here new requirements have also been introduced. This concerns, among other things, what methods to use and evaluate topics such as social security, public health and natural diversity. In addition, developers will naturally listen to municipalities that have opinions on how to conduct the studies, because there is a shared interest in trusting the studies.
More and more people will increase production
At the beginning of September, the research institute presented Cicero A survey of people’s attitudes toward climate metrics. It shows that 39 percent think Norway should increase onshore wind energy production, while 36 percent do not want to increase it. The numbers show a lower wind resistance than what I’ve seen before.
Now there are more people who want to increase production than who are opposed to doing so. I think an important part of the explanation is the improvements to the franchise system and the objections from the wind power opposition have been heard. The researchers behind the survey were familiar with this interpretation when they commented on the findings in the presentation.
Norway needs more renewable energy in the future, while at the same time we must take care of nature and increase social acceptance of developments. Almost half of the energy we use is from a fossil. It must be quickly replaced by renewable energy for Norway to do its part to halt climate change.
In addition, we need new renewable energy at the right price and at the right time to create new industry and jobs. We can’t do this without more onshore wind power, and this exposes society to difficult trade-offs. Like highways, shantytowns, forests and other energy production, wind energy requires land. If we as a society are to find the right solutions, we must have good dialogues and investigations before granting licenses. It is therefore important that the builders and the affected interests speak well together, and the new system provides.
He brings the world forward, contrary to Jystad’s terrible and undocumented claims.
“Web specialist. Lifelong zombie maven. Coffee ninja. Hipster-friendly analyst.”