Response to interpellation 2022/23:327 on participation in the North Sea Summit
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
KD argues that Sweden has not received an invitation to participate in the North Sea Summit, but that the country is part of the North Seas Energy Cooperation 1. KD emphasizes that the government wants 100 percent fossil-free electricity production by 2040 and that offshore wind power is needed to meet the electricity demand 1. KD wants it to go faster to build wind power where it is welcome and strategically justified 2. KD has no plans to remove the municipal veto 2. KD wants to avoid replacing virgin forest with "steel forest" and considers offshore wind power important to reduce the need to transfer electricity from northern to southern Sweden 2. KD argues that they have already made clear marks by approving two projects for offshore wind power in eight months 3. KD is open to international cooperation regarding renewable energy 3. MP argues that Sweden has a lower level of ambition than neighboring countries because Sweden is the only country missing from the North Sea Summit 4. MP considers wind power to be the cheapest production method and demands better compensation for those who are affected 5. KD argues that wind power in Sweden is being built too slowly due to sluggish permit processes 2.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)
Mr. Speaker! I took the liberty of staying here at the rostrum. We are working through several interpellations in a row. It feels nice to know that people are listening online to this debate, but I also want to say that those of you who are present in the chamber and in the gallery are warmly welcome.
Now we are going to talk about wind power. Marielle Lahti has asked me why Sweden is not participating in the North Sea Summit.
As Marielle Lathi presents, North Sea Summit is a gathering whose goal, according to Belgium's Prime Minister Alexander De Croo, is to build the world's largest green energy facility in the North Sea. The first North Sea Summit was held in Esbjerg on May 31, 2022. The signatories were Belgium, Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands - no Bellman this time. The second was held in April this year in Oostende with an expanded number of countries. During the time I have been minister, Sweden has not received a request to join North Sea Summit.
The Government has proposed to the Riksdag that one of the energy policy goals be changed to 100 percent fossil-free electricity production by 2040 because all fossil-free power sources are needed to achieve the green transition and to meet an electricity consumption of at least 300 terawatt-hours in 2045.
Sweden has a long coastline, and the interest in developing offshore wind power in Swedish waters is great. Offshore wind power has a role in our future power system, and the testing of offshore wind power needs to be accelerated. The Government therefore decided on 4 May 2023 to appoint an inquiry to streamline the establishment of offshore wind power. Furthermore, the Government decided on 15 May 2023 to allow two new offshore wind farms in Sweden's economic zone off the Halland coast.
I have, as the first minister in eight years, participated in Wind Europe's international conference held in Copenhagen on April 25 this year. Sweden has also participated for several years in North Seas Energy Cooperation, NSEC, which is a cooperation between Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark, Luxembourg, Ireland, Norway and the United Kingdom on developing offshore wind power in the North Sea. In December 2022, I signed together with the other participating countries a so-called memorandum of understanding with the United Kingdom for its continued participation in the cooperation, as the country left NSEC in connection with Brexit.
Furthermore, Sweden participates together with Denmark, Finland, Germany, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Norway, which are observers, in the Baltic Energy Market Interconnection Plan, where a special working group has been created with a focus on cooperating to develop offshore wind power in the Baltic Sea.
With this said, I will continue to work so that offshore wind power is established nationally where it is welcome and within the regional collaborations in which we participate.
Marielle Lahti (MP)
Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer. The interpellation was, therefore, about international cooperation regarding the construction of offshore wind power, just as was stated just now.
I want to give a short recap of what has happened. In May 2022, a so-called Esbjerg Declaration was issued where four countries decided on ambitious investments in offshore wind power. It was Germany, Denmark, Belgium and the Netherlands - no Sweden, although one is a bit eager to add it - that entered into the agreement. The background to that cooperation was the consequences of Russia's war of aggression in Ukraine. The purpose was to work together to create the conditions to break the dependence on fossil fuels.
These four countries decided to quadruple the total production of offshore wind power to 150 gigawatts by 2050. As a comparison, that corresponds to the annual consumption for 150 million European households. It is a very ambitious initiative.
Almost a year later, on April 24 this year, nine countries gathered to participate in the cooperation now called North Sea Summit. In addition to the four countries that were involved initially, France, Luxembourg, Ireland, Norway and the United Kingdom have also joined. Five more countries had thus raised their hands and wanted to participate in the cooperation.
The goals were further sharpened so that 150 gigawatts of wind power should be established by 2030 instead of 2050 and at least 300 gigawatts by 2050. The goal is therefore to build the world's largest green energy facility in the North Sea.
What exactly is it that the nine countries are going to do together? Well, partly they are going to build an energy island, and partly they are going to investigate where more energy islands can be built in the territories that the nine countries have. They are to jointly review how they can shorten permit processes as well as "pool" resources to seek funding for projects via EU funds.
It is thus nine countries that together shoulder this challenge. It sends powerful signals to energy actors, the business community and households about a political unity, which is absolutely crucial for investments in green industry and in the energy sector.
Mr. Speaker! I am pleased that the Minister mentions the cooperation in North Seas Energy Cooperation, which is a cooperation between the countries that the Minister mentioned earlier. They are, as stated, working to develop offshore wind power in the North Sea. Worth noting in this context is that all countries participating in North Seas Energy Cooperation also participate in North Sea Summit, except for one. It is only Sweden that is missing.
In view of this, I would like to ask the Minister the following question: Why is Sweden making a different assessment than the other countries in the cooperation group, two of which are our Nordic neighbors, Norway and Denmark? Both of these participate in both the Nordic Sea Summit and the North Seas Energy Cooperation. It is difficult to see any other explanation than that Sweden simply has a lower level of ambition than our neighboring countries.
Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)
Mr. Speaker! I want to extend a clear thank you to Marielle Lahti for the question, which is well-motivated and challenging in substance and points out the great need we have for cooperation regarding energy issues. We have a need for political cooperation in Sweden. That is why we have said that all good forces are needed.
It concerns, among other things, the power supply itself; we say clearly that we welcome solar, wind, water, and nuclear power as long as it is fossil-free and does not emit more but enables us to meet high-set climate goals and at the same time safeguard welfare and jobs through electrification. Enormous amounts more electricity will be required to do this.
Then we cannot say that it should only be renewable; we must say that it should be primarily fossil-free. Then we can release enough of the good forces that are needed. Above all, the types of power that exist – the sun, the wind, and nuclear power – and which have somewhat different characteristics, can provide a more robust energy system when one has the right balance between them. The renewables come and go depending on the weather, while hydropower and nuclear power provide a more stable supply. One needs, however, to be able to switch and achieve a good mix.
Today we are speaking about wind power and the need for international cooperation in these matters. Marielle Lahti and I agree on this need.
We may not have an immediate geographical connection to the North Sea in the same way. Rather, it is the fact that we are so clearly included in the North Seas Energy Cooperation, as Marielle Lahti very rightly pointed out, a signal that we have a somewhat broader commitment than just the immediate in the Baltic Sea or just off the west coast.
Let me answer as concretely as possible. I participated in another interpellation debate just now where I was accused of breaking promises and of not answering questions. I do not agree with any of that, but I try to take pride in answering questions. Then, perhaps one does not always like the answer, but that is another matter. Let me therefore answer what I perceived the interpellator is looking for.
I do not rule out that we engage further in this, but as we have said, we have not received any direct request for it. It is therefore nothing that we have actively said no to. Perhaps I should throw in a caveat: Sweden is not in a position where we set specific goals and lock ourselves in regarding how much power production we shall have from a particular type of power. We try to see, learn, and cooperate with other countries, but we have not locked in exactly how much we shall have from nuclear power or wind power.
We may come to a situation where we need to discuss it more to get the right mix. Right now, it is difficult to release much more wind power because the energy system is so fragile. We would need to bring in more hydropower and nuclear power in order to also be able to release more wind power. Then we might end up more in a discussion like this, but this is the bombshell I see that could make us choose not to be involved here or spend our time elsewhere.
That we have chosen not to be part of exactly this part is not about a lack of commitment. We are involved in the more overarching circle. It is a clear signal that we see the need for cooperation and for learning from each other also around the North Sea.
Marielle Lahti (MP)
Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer.
I read that there is some hope that one might eventually be able to participate in some form, but that there is no immediate need to participate in just the current project.
Let me go back to a part of the interpellation answer that dealt with the acceptance, that is, where wind power is welcome. I want to go into a bit of why it is so important to talk about wind power. Even the Minister touched upon that.
The question is important because our electricity demand is growing exponentially, and furthermore, it is doing so within a very short period of time. It is worth noting that the electricity demand has until now been practically constant for quite a long time. This means that it becomes a very large change for us now. The reason for the increased demand is the green transition to reach climate goals. This is, among other things, about the industry wanting to transition to fossil-free production and about an electrification of the transport sector.
We mean that one needs to work in several tracks to meet the needs. For example, one can save energy through energy efficiency. There are many terawatt-hours to be gained there. We must use energy smarter by utilizing the potential for flex that exists. Furthermore, we need to build more electricity production. In addition to that, we must of course also build more lines, power grids, which shall distribute the production to households and companies.
The type of production that can meet the production needs in a short time is wind power. It is relatively fast to build and is by far the cheapest type of production in our energy mix. As we have said, we have actors standing in line to build renewable energy locally, regionally, and along Sweden's coasts.
It is pleasing to hear that the Minister welcomes wind power and that decisions have been made to allow more wind farms, as well as that an investigation has been commissioned now in May for the streamlining of the establishment of offshore wind power. I also hear the Minister say that wind power is welcome where it is accepted, and I share that opinion. We are in complete agreement on that.
Acceptance and the issue of competing interests from, for example, the Defense Forces' side are two decisive factors for the establishment of wind power. The previous government commissioned the Incentive Study, the purpose of which was to find ways to compensate residents when building wind power in order to increase acceptance so that they will welcome the development of the energy system. In December, the Minister decided to delimit the assignment. It was a delimitation that the investigator himself argued rendered impossible the possibility of obtaining sufficient conditions to increase the acceptance or welcoming of wind power facilities.
I completely agree that it is very important that those affected by the construction of wind farms receive compensation, and this applies to both landowners and those who are in some way disturbed by the whole thing.
In light of that, I would like to ask the Minister the following: Why was the Incentive Inquiry limited so that it, according to the investigator themselves, could not submit proposals that could have increased the local incentives to say yes and welcome wind power and see it as a positive addition – money in the till, quite simply? The Minister says themselves that wind power is good and that it is needed where it is welcome.
Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)
Mr. Speaker! I would like to begin by endorsing some parts of Marielle Lahti's contribution, with some additions and nuances from the government's perspective.
The government shares the view that what can be released in the short term from additional new power production is wind power. There are applications pending in various instances around Sweden regarding land-based wind power. Some applications regarding offshore wind power in the economic zone have reached the government's desk and are being actively worked on.
During the previous eight years, a project for offshore wind power was approved. In eight months, this government has now approved two projects for offshore wind power. That is what we have the opportunity to release in terms of new power production in the short term.
It sometimes sounds in the debate from some representatives that it is quick to build wind power. But in Sweden, it goes slowly, far too slowly. According to the wind power industry itself, we have had an average time to build wind power that has been approximately 12-17 years. That is a long time. People usually talk about that nuclear power takes far too long to build because it can take more than 10 years.
Mr. Speaker! We have thus had a situation where there have many times been such contradictions in climate and environmental issues and in permit processes that it has taken longer to build wind power than to build the twelve nuclear reactors that Sweden had, which took barely 15 years. That says something about how sluggish it has become. We need to speed up the permit processes. We are now doing this for nuclear power by changing all the legislation concerning it - the fundamental foundations. But we are also doing it for wind power.
We are careful to say that it should go faster to build wind power and that we will pave the way for wind power where it is welcome, but it is not welcome everywhere. We have no plans to remove the municipal veto. A municipality must be allowed to decide this itself. I mean that one ended up aside from what was the government's goal with the investigation directive. The intention was that concrete proposals should emerge that can increase the willingness to welcome wind power locally by making people feel that they receive some type of compensation in some way. We will have reason to return to that question.
In addition to that, we are working on the reports from the Environmental Assessment Inquiry and the Climate Justice Inquiry, which also have implications for this. We have also announced an additional inquiry concerning more efficient permit processes, which will partially affect wind power.
We must increase the pace, and we must move away from the "battle over the power strike". We are holding the line - we still do not want to replace Swedish old-growth forest with steel forest. We shall have wind power where it is welcome and where it is useful in the energy system. We mean that, among other things, the two offshore wind farms that will now be built off the west coast are very important for both electricity area 4 and electricity area 3. They are strategically well-justified and placed and reduce the need to transfer electricity from northern Sweden to southern Sweden. That allows southern Sweden to begin taking responsibility for its own power production in relation to how much is used.
Marielle Lahti (MP)
Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answers to the questions.
We are in complete agreement that the municipal veto should not be touched. We share that view. It is very important to keep that right. But an investigation was conducted which showed that perhaps a forward shift could be made, so that one receives answers a bit earlier and avoids getting so far into the process during a wind power construction; in that way, one can save both money and resources. Therefore, it feels so important that we have solid proposals that provide incentives locally and regionally to welcome wind power. I look forward to proposals from the government in that area.
We are in absolute agreement on the importance of meeting the future's electricity needs. I have on several occasions heard the Minister say that every kilowatt-hour counts, and today she says that wind power was needed - with the caveat: when it is welcome. But I look forward to proposals in the area.
I mean that words must be followed by action. I am a bit worried that we are sitting on our hands while our neighbors start a full-scale cooperation to establish green energy islands in our geographical vicinity. I am a bit worried about what signals this sends regarding Sweden's level of ambition and willingness to cooperate as a country at the forefront regarding innovation, energy transition, and new green industries.
I would like to conclude by asking the Minister what steps the Minister intends to take so that Sweden can participate in an international project together with other countries. When will we see an international project linked to offshore wind power where Sweden actually participates?
Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)
Mr. Speaker! I would say that the best way to evaluate the new government's ambitions in the wind power area is to look at our actions. We have now made clear marks through actual decisions. In eight months, we have approved two projects for offshore wind power compared to one project in eight years by the previous government. I think that speaks for itself.
I also want to mention our clear position that we will continue to be part of the North Seas Energy Cooperation, the declaration that we were part of and signed regarding continued cooperation with the United Kingdom in December despite Brexit. We are open to seeing, learning, and cooperating with other countries. That is how we can pave the way for the right types of power where they are needed and when they are needed and provide the best possible conditions for that.
I also think that one can see the government in what we have driven during the Swedish presidency. I am personally heavily involved in what is called RED, Renewable Energy Directive, which concerns renewable energy. We have secured important parts that do not completely exclude or shut out nuclear power. But above all, the directive is about paving the way for new renewable energy and increasing the willingness for heavy investments within Europe.
We were present at the large wind conference in Copenhagen earlier this spring. It was the first time in eight years that a Swedish minister was present. The signal has been clear: We are open to continuing international cooperation on energy issues in general and around renewable energy.
Mr. Speaker! I thank you for a good and constructive interpellation.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.