Response to interpellation 2022/23:167 on short-term regulation of hydropower
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
L argues that the government takes responsibility by creating conditions for all fossil-free electricity production to create a robust system where short-term regulations do not affect local communities 1 2. L believes that the lack of fossil-free and dispatchable electricity production is the root cause of extreme occurrences on the electricity market and that hydropower must be utilized to stabilize the system 1 2. L emphasizes that modern environmental conditions should promote the greatest possible dispatchability 3. L argues that the current situation is fragile and requires a review 4. L believes that short-term regulation becomes more significant when weather-dependent energy sources are expanded 4. S argues that short-term regulation creates challenges for people, animals, and nature 5.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Madam Speaker! Lars Isacsson has asked me whether I and the government will take the initiative so that hydropower producers shall take a greater responsibility so that short-term regulation does not affect the environment and local communities in the way it does today, and whether I and the government will take the initiative to more clearly regulate the short-term regulation for all hydropower producers.
Water activities for the production of hydropower require permits according to the Environmental Code, which also covers the activity's potential short-term regulation. Many of today's hydropower plants, however, are operated with the support of so-called older rights or permits under older legislation that are not characterized by the environmental consideration found in the Environmental Code. In 2019, new provisions were therefore introduced stating that the person who operates a permit-required water activity for the production of hydropower shall ensure that the activity meets modern environmental conditions. These permits are applied for by the operator to the Land and Environment Court.
Madam Speaker! In June 2020, the government decided on a national plan for modern environmental conditions. The plan specifies a national holistic view in terms of ensuring that activities are provided with modern environmental conditions in a coordinated manner, with the greatest possible benefit for the aquatic environment and for a national, efficient access to hydropower. The plan means that a large number of activities will be reviewed in a coordinated and systematic manner during the coming years.
These modern environmental conditions mean, among other things, that the permits shall contain the conditions needed to ensure that the quality of the waters affected by the activities meets the requirements of EU law. Section 27(1) of the Ordinance on Water Activities simultaneously states that the national plan shall, among other things, promote the greatest possible controllability in electricity production.
An assessment in accordance with the national plan shall ensure that trade-offs between, among other things, the greatest possible regulation capacity in electricity production and the need for water environment improvement measures in the individual assessment are made from a national holistic perspective. In the individual court assessments, the conditions and provisions that shall apply for short-term regulation are determined.
Lars Isacsson (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Environment Minister Romina Pourmokhtari!
My interpellation concerns short-term regulation. It implies a possibility for more predictable hydropower, but it is also a challenge for people, animals, and nature. Today, short-term regulation is carried out with consideration taken for electricity use, but less consideration is taken for the environment and the people who are affected. The purpose of my interpellation is actually to discuss whether there could be ways forward where Sweden finds cooperation and good agreements regarding short-term regulation.
Over time, short-term regulation has gained increased importance. It is used to quickly manage hydropower production to match the variation in electricity consumption and is made possible by the storage capacity that hydropower has. We know that the use of electricity fluctuates over the day, and with short-term regulation, the hydropower companies can quickly release or throttle the water supply to the turbine. Wind power also increases the need for short-term regulation.
Short-term regulation sounds good, but it also has major consequences. The flow in a watercourse varies very strongly over a short period, and the jerky water flow affects the environment, animals, and people. I intended to show how it can affect people in everyday life with examples from Dalälven. Six years ago, extensive short-term regulation was introduced, and particularly downstream of Näs power station, the impact has been negative.
In Kyrkby in Avesta municipality, the problems are tangible. A development group in the village has tried to discuss the issue and find possible ways forward, and right now, great challenges are seen. It is a distance of about 3 miles along the river where it is almost impossible to use the water as it has been done previously. The water level can vary by up to 50 centimeters or 1 meter in a day.
This affects farmers in areas where pasture suddenly turns into mud. It affects the important car ferry at Hovnäs, which cannot run as planned. Having a boat is almost impossible. Sometimes the boat stands on the bottom, and sometimes it is difficult to reach due to high water flows.
The Dalälven also carries a legacy of industrialization with environmental toxins on the bottom that are now at risk of being spread onto land. Furthermore, wildlife and fauna are affected when the shoreline can be changed by between 5 and 150 meters with some days' notice.
I asked the Minister whether she would take the initiative for hydropower producers to take greater responsibility so that the environment and local communities are not affected in the way they are today. In her response, the Minister referred to the national plan for modern environmental conditions which was decided upon in June 2020. It is established there that water activities will be examined in a coordinated and systematic manner. For the middle Dalälven, this coordinated and systematic examination is to take place in 2034. Does the Minister think that this—that they will receive a new examination in 2034—is a reasonable message to give to the residents along the shores of Dalälven?
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Madam Speaker! I am aware of the conditions at Näs power plant in Avesta, and I understand that people are very upset about how it looks. It is a misfortune to have one's land flooded; this is something that we all want to work to counteract in different ways. I also understand that the risk of environmental toxins spreading must be taken very seriously.
Of course, one may wonder how it is that it takes so much time. The fact is that Swedish administration is designed in a certain way. Assessments must be carried out in a thorough and legally secure manner, and we have different conditions that form the basis for how these assessments shall be conducted. A large number of the assessments will, as the member mentioned, need to be carried out in a coordinated and systematic manner during the coming years. For this to be done in a coordinated manner, certain resources and a certain capacity are required, which means that, in purely practical terms, it is not possible to carry it out more expeditiously than what is planned.
The government has also recently decided to postpone the deadline for application for review of modern conditions by twelve months. The need to take these measures has not affected our pause, but what has affected it is the fragile situation that Sweden finds itself in given the country's energy and production. Sweden needs more fossil-free and controllable electricity production - the more, the better - to spread the load on individual parts of society and to ensure that situations do not arise where individual parts of society have to bear the entire burden, somewhat in the way that has occurred in Avesta.
It is the lack of fossil-free and controllable electricity production that is the root cause of all the extreme phenomena we see on the electricity market today, including high electricity prices and an extreme utilization of hydropower's regulation capacity. Purely practically, Madam Speaker, short-term regulation means that the difference between consumption and production during the day is balanced by the hydropower plants generating electricity as needed. This results in a varying flow rate downstream from the power plant.
It is this that can have major consequences when it is exploited in an extreme way. Why are we doing it? Why do we have the situation we have now? It is because we have had a lack of a holistic view of what the system requires of us and what production we need to have to meet the demand that exists for production in Sweden.
We have had an extensive expansion of wind power in Sweden, and it is positive that we have expanded so much wind power. Around the turn of the millennium, we had almost no wind power in Sweden, but now almost 30 terawatt-hours are produced per year with wind power. It is an enormous achievement.
But in addition to this, we need to expand more fossil-free electricity production. I believe it will be positive for our hydropower to receive relief in the form of other dispatchable electricity production in the future. We must have dispatchable production to a greater extent, so that we do not need to utilize short-term regulation in the extreme way that we do today. In the worst case, the shutdown of other electricity production and the shortage of electricity can lead to such situations and become one of the reasons for the situation that we see, among other things, in Avesta today.
Madam Speaker! This government will, unlike the previous government, take responsibility by creating conditions for all fossil-free electricity production, so that we have a more robust and stable system that does not let short-term regulations affect it in the way it does now.
Lars Isacsson (S)
Madam Speaker! I agree that more electricity production is needed, but the members of the development group in By may not care so much about whose fault it is. And that one should look at this in 2034 is nothing that inspires confidence or gives hope for the future.
When the problems with short-term regulation are so current and have such a great impact on the living conditions for both people and animals, and when the new assessment lies ten years ahead in time, the neighbors and those affected are left to drive the issue themselves and try to find compromises and solutions with the hydropower companies. It feels like David's fight against Goliath.
Madam Speaker! My question to the Minister is whether she has any answer on how the weighting between environmental requirements and the need for hydropower shall occur while awaiting the national plan and how the conflicts that arise shall be handled. The residents by a watercourse do not have the same legal capacity and power as the large hydropower companies.
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Madam Speaker! It may sound somewhat dry, but the conditions for short-term regulation at an individual hydropower plant are decided by the current water court order. Within the framework of the reviews for modern environmental conditions for hydropower, the current water court orders will be reviewed. The possibility of short-term regulation is decided by the court for each individual plant. That is how the process looks.
Of course, one may want the process to be designed in a different way and criticize, for example, that the processes take a long time and that it takes time to handle such questions. I understand that, and the government realizes the importance of taking environmental conditions into account to a greater extent. Those who read the cooperation basis for this government diligently see that there are formulations regarding, for example, fish migration routes. I believe this is one of many proofs that we want the greatest possible benefit for the aquatic environment. We must, however, simultaneously take into account the efficient availability of hydropower. This is what this government has needed to do.
Madam Speaker! I do not doubt that the member is well acquainted with the situation we face. We have a difficult situation that requires us to utilize hydropower to the greatest possible extent and simply utilize hydropower as the opportunity it represents to stabilize our system. One might think that this mostly applies to the large power plants, but it also applies to the small ones – it is precisely those that can contribute to the stability in certain parts of our system. It is precisely there that one can utilize, for example, short-term regulation so that our system holds together and so that the light shines when one presses the button.
I understand that the situation that prevails now is upsetting, especially regarding Näs power plant in Avesta. But one must also consider what is the basis of this problem. Even though MP Isacsson pointed out that those facing this difficult situation do not care about previous decisions, I would urge them to do so. Of course, one must handle the short-term difficult situations one faces, such as now with accidents, floods, and serious risks of environmental toxins spreading, but one must also think about what is the long-term plan and what long-term work needs to be done so that we do not have similar situations in the future.
If one is willing to hold both of these thoughts in mind, I believe it is difficult to see this in any other way than that we need to complement the possibility that hydropower production constitutes in our system with other fossil-free and dispatchable electricity production. That involves, among other things, nuclear power. It also involves expanding our wind power. It is about making the best use of all the types of power that are available to contribute to us having a more robust energy production - and specifically electricity production - in Sweden. It is the case that it is the lack of fossil-free and dispatchable production that is the root cause of why we get such extreme phenomena as we have on the electricity market today.
Lars Isacsson (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank Minister for the Environment Romina Pourmokhtari for the debate.
It is not a simple question, and I agree with the Minister for the Environment that we need an efficient energy production of all types of energy, not least hydropower. We also know that hydropower complements wind power in a very good way and that short-term regulation plays a key role. But the efficiencies must also be balanced against how they affect people, animals, and nature.
This does not only apply to downstream Näs. All people along our regulated rivers know how important the energy that the rivers produce is. The rivers have contributed with power and growth for hundreds of years. In Avesta municipality, there has been uninterrupted industrial production since 1630 – speaking of being long-term. The power from the river has contributed to jobs and is in many ways the reason why towns and villages are located where they are.
But in all the new energy production that we need in Sweden to meet the green transition with the jobs of the future, we also need to achieve a social acceptance for the energy production. Here we all have a responsibility, and here we are failing. This is shown, not least by the example I highlight from By kyrkby and By Utvecklingsgrupp with a water regulation that allows the shoreline to move 150 meters in a day.
I would like to conclude by wishing the Minister for the Environment good luck in her important work to find future energy solutions, where those who live nearby also feel that they are seen and listened to and that their opinions count.
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Madam Speaker! I thank Member Isacsson for an important interpellation.
We have a fragile system and an extreme situation. It is a situation we have not faced for a long time. It affects how we work and means that we need to review how we handle this situation in the best way.
Given the current situation, short-term regulation has already gained greater importance, but it can also potentially gain an even greater importance in the future because we are expanding our weather-dependent energy sources, such as wind and solar energy. If these constitute an increased share of our electricity production, we will also in the future see a potentially greater need for short-term regulation.
Furthermore, challenges arise with a changed climate, where the inflow size and distribution over the year change while we simultaneously face an increased risk of extreme flows. All of this places new demands on us from the political side, but also on all those who conduct the operations to, in the wisest possible way, review the information they can offer at the time of assessment so that we can best design our systems so that they constitute a safe and stable addition to the work.
The environmental impact of short-term regulation varies depending on the extent of the regulation. An example of environmental adaptation is re-regulation and limited short-term regulation which can occur during certain parts of the summer.
There is much to look at, and I can assure the members that we will look at all possibilities to best design Swedish production. We will also tackle the root of the problem, because we need a more robust and secure energy production in Sweden as a whole.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.