Response to interpellation 2023/24:292 on changed target year for a new Gotlandic energy connection
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
KD argues that it is not the government's responsibility to establish exact timelines for transmission grid projects 1. KD clarifies that Svenska kraftnät never communicated 2030 as a target year, but that the cables are expected to be in operation in 2031 1. KD emphasizes that they are delivering on the promise of new cables and that it is important that Gotland has a secure electricity supply 2. S considers that the goal has been 2030 for a long time and argues that it matters whether it becomes 2030 or 2031 in order to secure jobs and security of supply 3 4. M argues that a social democratic government later decided that there would be no new cable 5. M points out that projects such as Energicentrum Gotland have been financed with Gotlanders' own tax money 6. M expresses doubts regarding how the power to Gotland should be handled and argues that the process requires major trade-offs and more work from both the state level and the local electricity company 6. KD acknowledges the needs in Gotland and argues that the decision to save the cement factory in Slite was brave and correct 7. KD emphasizes that the process must take its course without political interference but that the government is doing a lot to streamline permit processes through investigations and budget increases 7 8. S argues that it is possible to accelerate the timeline and that the government has the power to do so to secure Gotland's need for a secure energy connection 9.
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)
Madam Speaker! Hanna Westerén has asked me whether I have taken the initiative for an analysis of what risks the timeline for the new cable to Gotland, which forecasts a new energy connection only in 2031 instead of 2030, may entail and if I can, in that case, account for the outcome of the analysis.
I want to begin by emphasizing that it is important that Gotland has a secure and long-term robust electricity supply. The Government has therefore, in the regulatory letter for 2023, tasked Svenska kraftnät with expanding the transmission grid to also include Gotland, as well as specifying a timetable that ensures a transmission grid point on Gotland well before the current feed is phased out due to age. Judging by Hanna Westerén's question, there however seem to be misunderstandings regarding the project's timetable and what the Government's role is in establishing it. I would therefore like to take this opportunity to clarify this.
Firstly, it is not the government's responsibility to produce exact timelines for transmission grid projects, especially not regarding specific years. That responsibility lies with Svenska kraftnät within the framework of its mandate to develop the transmission grid. The government has only clarified that the timeline shall take into account that a new transmission grid point must be in place before the current feed is phased out, which is estimated to occur between 2035 and 2045 when the cables are expected to reach their technical lifespan.
Secondly, Svenska kraftnät has never communicated 2030 as the target year for taking the connection into operation. In May 2023, the board of Svenska kraftnät decided to build two new 220 kilovolt underwater cables to Gotland, which are estimated to be in operation in 2031. The claim that the government has clarified that the year 2031 instead of the year 2030 constitutes the target year for reinforcements in Gotland's energy supply is therefore incorrect.
Hanna Westerén (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for that the debate can be conducted. It feels extra appropriate that the Minister responsible for energy and business policy is here today. That is, of course, because I will devote my speeches to both energy and business issues. I will also likely touch upon preparedness. It is a hot topic in these bitter times.
I want to emphasize that it is pleasing that an energy connection is planned for Gotland. We have longed for that for a long time. But I also think it is regrettable that there are different perceptions regarding Gotland's needs and the timeline for meeting them.
In my opinion, the collective Gotland has long communicated the importance of having a new energy connection in place by 2030 at the latest. Since 2009, Gotland has been promised to be connected to the Swedish main grid. The most serious reason for Gotland's pursuit of a new energy connection is, after all, that the ones we have are becoming outdated. There is, as the minister himself points out, a forecast for the lifespan, and then the goal must, of course, be to replace them in good time - not least for reasons of preparedness and security.
I want to mean that Gotland deserves a secure energy supply, and for a long time, the goal has been to have the connection in place by 2030 at the latest. Given how often Region Gotland and Länsstyrelsen Gotland have highlighted this need in various contexts and that Members of Parliament of different colors have said exactly 2030, it is a bit strange to me that this information is claimed to be new or incorrect.
It may be that the government and Svenska kraftnät do not acknowledge this figure now, but the united Gotland has brought forward 2030 many times. Hopefully, representatives for Kristdemokraterna have perhaps also done so. It feels strange that we would not have reached out at all, because we need this energy connection immediately, for security reasons and safety reasons, and to manage the transition and the jobs. The upgrading of the Armed Forces that is taking place right now also has a large energy requirement.
In summary: If both the Minister and Svenska kraftnät remain somewhat cold toward the needs that I have listed – preparedness, security of supply, and jobs – it is still those things that we Gotlanders consider to be quite lovely and fundamental. I wonder how the Minister for Energy and Industry views the fact that Gotland is also home to an industry that, as far as I can see, is a key player in the entire Swedish transition. That should reasonably be of significance. I know that the timeline also says exactly 2030.
Jesper Skalberg Karlsson (M)
Madam Speaker! Thank you to Member Westerén for raising this pressing issue! We are in complete agreement that industry, the Armed Forces, and other socially important interests need electricity on Gotland. We also know that for everyday life to function, a secure and stable electricity supply is needed. It is not just about the jobs in industry. It is about being able to pay at the grocery store and about the washing of the children's clothes not being paused in the middle of the program.
That it is necessary to have new power supply to Gotland has been known for a very long time. When the pioneering first cables were laid, it was known that they have a technical lifespan and that it is limited. Therefore, since 2009, as Member of Parliament Westerén also mentioned, there have been promises, plans, and investment decisions regarding new cables to Gotland. For approximately a decade, between 2009 and 2017, these plans were at Svenska kraftnät. During the entire time that Mikael Odenberg was director-general of the authority, there were plans to build a cable to Gotland. When the Social Democratic government appointed a new director-general, however, the first decision made was that there would be no new cable to Gotland. I regret that.
Instead, as a bandage on the wounds or as an alternative way forward, a project was launched. It was a project that aimed for Gotland to have a completely renewable and completely self-sufficient energy system, that is to say that one would basically manage on island operation. That can be a good idea in these times when we need to increase our preparedness, but the project as such never received any political backing. It was not funded. No responsibility was taken by the authority. There were some reports - they are worth reading - but no real push to increase electricity production on Gotland came from a national level.
All these reports also had sub-clauses stating that cable to Gotland was still needed – new cabling with greater capacity. It is worth mentioning then that the energy ministers Sweden had during the period, namely Ygeman, Baylan and Farmanbar, had the opportunity to commission Svenska kraftnät to expand the transmission to Gotland. The chance was there to do so in regulatory letters 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022. There were five occasions over approximately six years. We had six years of a limbo period for Gotland, when there was no decision and no commission was given to the responsible authority.
I also, just like Member Westerén, would have wanted the process of building the cables to go faster. I do not think it is possible to have any other opinion than that it would be good if it went faster. But I believe it is essential that these six years of not making a decision affect more than the 80 days it took for Ebba Busch to give Svenska kraftnät this assignment.
Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)
Madam Speaker! I truly appreciate this interpellation and that we are given the opportunity to discuss this today. Gotland is a wonderfully beautiful and important part of Sweden. Many of us have, over the years, spoken with colleagues, business representatives, and citizens on Gotland and heard the recurring points regarding the problem with the power shortage. Note that I use the word power.
Svenska kraftnät justifies the project that they have initiated in the following way: The security situation has become more uncertain, which requires a secure and robust electricity supply on Gotland, the transition to a carbon-neutral industry on Gotland implies a significantly increased demand for electricity already at the beginning of the 2030s, and the fossil-free electricity production from energy sources such as wind and solar power is being expanded.
This is incredibly important for Gotland and for Sweden as a whole from many different perspectives. I myself had the chance, as opposition party leader, to visit Gotland and then personally give the promise of a new cable to Gotland together with the Moderate Party's party leader Ulf Kristersson, who is now also Prime Minister. Many of us in and outside this chamber have followed this discussion for a long time. We completely share the conviction that this is right, correct, and necessary.
This is, as said, something that has been discussed for very many years. I want to say with emphasis that in my head I have tried to deliberate on whether I, as the newly appointed Minister for Energy and Industry, could have made the decision a bit earlier. It is possible that there is some such part, and then it is a question of a week or two. Otherwise, I want all Gotlanders listening to this interpellation debate to know that one of the first decisions I myself took as Minister for Energy and Industry was to deliver on the promise of new cables to Gotland. Now we shall see to it that this is brought all the way to completion.
We see the needs. We understand that it is important that we work together with crucial parts of industry and total defense. It is also right and proper from a citizen's perspective that we have sufficient capacity on Gotland where it is needed and when it is needed. This we will fulfill, and I think that is actually the most important thing to know in this debate.
Different years seem to have been circulating: 2030 and 2031. I want to emphasize what I said in my interpellation response: As minister, I do not set the exact year. With the current plan, we have a margin until the current cable expires and reaches its potential technical lifespan. The problem is that one cable is not enough. That is why this was one of the first decisions we took and is one of the most important we have taken so far. More will follow.
Hanna Westerén (S)
Madam Speaker! Minister for Energy and Business Ebba Busch was a Member of Parliament during the previous parliamentary term. So was I. At that time, there was quite a lot of talk about the cement crisis and the need for an expedited legislative process so as not to jeopardize Swedish jobs and Swedish supply capacity. At that time, there was, thankfully, a large consensus in the Swedish Parliament for amended legislation. I regret that this attitude has not persisted and that the interest in securing supply capacity and Swedish jobs seems to have diminished somewhat since then. It is, after all, the same industrial transition that is jeopardized when Gotland does not have an energy connection in place by 2030.
Those listening now may wonder how much of a role it plays whether it is a year here or there – 2030 or 2031. But I want to emphasize that I believe it does matter. I hear the Minister for Energy and Industry's reasoning about how quickly she has worked to make this possible, and I appreciate that. But I also mean that there is more to be done, because the market for climate-smart products is changing incredibly fast. If Sweden falls behind in delivering carbon-neutral cement or coal-free steel, we can rest assured that those market shares will be swallowed up by someone else. The goal for the factory in Slite is, if I am to speak plainly, to deliver carbon-neutral cement in 2030. I believe that goal is something Minister for Energy and Industry Busch is aware of, even if it is not fully embraced. I believe it would be outstanding if Ebba Busch also gave that work a boost and embraced the transition.
Given the turns that have occurred regarding the energy connection to Gotland - Jesper Skalberg Karlsson gave an insight into what has happened over the years - it is with some skepticism that I take part in the minister's reasoning regarding the possibilities for the government to influence. I want to remind once again that during the previous mandate period we legislated to avoid a cement crisis in Sweden and to secure Swedish jobs and Swedish security of supply. There is more to be done. That is my conviction. I want to believe that we can do more and can endure more.
I still wonder why it is not possible to accelerate this energy connection further. There have been several pushes from the collective Gotland. Regardless of what has happened here in Stockholm, the demands from Gotland have been the same over time. There are points from the industry about business opportunities that are being lost. Swedish industry risks falling behind in the transition. I really want to be wrong in this regard, Madam Speaker. I would really wish that more was done and hope that it is possible to accelerate this further, so that we get 2030 and not 2031 as the target year.
Jesper Skalberg Karlsson (M)
Madam Speaker! I thank both the interpellor and the minister for the follow-up answers.
First and foremost, I want to say that Gotland is a very energy-rich location. There are good conditions for both wind power and solar power. But we will need more power in the grid. It is also worth saying that the projects that have been driven during the recent years as plan B, so to speak, regarding a new cable are not undone. In this context, it is for example worth mentioning Energicentrum Gotland, which was created to meet what the state level would deliver at the regional level. This has, however, not been financed nationally but has had to be financed with Gotlanders' tax money. It is a successful operation that testifies to that promises and hopes from previous politicians have actually been put into practice on Gotland. But it has happened with the Gotlanders' money and with their time and effort.
When it comes to what is happening on Gotland, there are reasons to raise a warning finger regarding the time that lies ahead of us. Now we have received a decision on two new cables that are to be ready by 2031. It is good that the work will soon begin.
We all hope that it happens as quickly as possible. But there are great doubts about how to handle all the power that will come to Gotland. Running a cable on land from a connection point to the factory that is now to become carbon-free will require enormous compromises and trade-offs.
There is probably more to be done to get that process started, both from the state level regarding permits and environmental permits, and from the Gotland side and the local electricity company. I believe that is a major issue ahead and not just that the cable should be built.
Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)
Madam Speaker! I would still like to speak a little further about this regarding the process forward. I begin by saying the following, Madam Speaker.
We naturally embrace the needs in Gotland. We truly do. Very heavy initiatives are now being taken to secure jobs and crucial components, parts, and materials needed for Sweden to stand strong in a restless time and so that we can continue to arm Sweden strongly for the coming years.
The cement factory in Slite alone accounts for approximately 3 percent of Sweden's total emissions today. From here also comes about three-quarters of the cement used in the Swedish civil construction sector. Therefore, it was a rather radical decision that the previous government was forced to make. I think it was made correctly. You have my full support in this.
It was also a brave decision. But it was actually a completely unorthodox decision to have to make. To compensate for what the government did with one hand, it was corrected with the other by pushing forward to a rarely seen decision to save this very important activity. I emphasize again that it was brave and right. But it is this type of short-sightedness that we want to move away from.
Let me nerd out a bit here. When Svenska kraftnät has identified a suitable location and technical design for the line, they prepare an application with an associated environmental impact assessment. That is what Jesper Skalberg Karlsson is touching upon, among other things, namely the possible consequences. It is to be submitted to EI. EI then takes a position on whether the power line meets the requirements of the Electricity Act and the Environmental Code.
Within the framework of EI's review, it is not uncommon that additional supplements and so on are requested from Svenska kraftnät. Before EI decides on the matter, the underlying material is always sent out for consultation so that those concerned have the opportunity to comment. The decision can then be appealed to the government.
We fast-forward a bit. After Svenska kraftnät has secured all necessary permits and procured contractors and construction components, construction can begin, and after that, the line can be in operation.
Someone asked me at some point: How long does it take to lay a cable? There are many women over the years who have wondered that and asked that question. It takes some time. That is why it is so problematic that the decision was not made earlier.
I have tried to examine myself. Could I have made the decision a few weeks earlier? Perhaps. But we made it as quickly as it was possible. The problem is that we are a few years behind what is actually Gotland's needs. I cannot magic that away, unfortunately.
Given the process I have just described, it is not until a potential appeal has been received by the government that the government can assess the basis. Before that, it is important that the process is allowed to take its course without political interference.
You will also hear statements, possibly from me, that it should be decided faster. On the other hand, I would like to see that we solve as many energy problems as Sweden has as soon as possible. I would like to come back to that. It is about all the decisions that we are making now anyway to facilitate and streamline permit processes and that we allocate more funds to be able to handle permits in all possible different instances.
We will pamper and cuddle as much as possible so that things go faster with the two cables to Gotland.
Hanna Westerén (S)
Madam Speaker! A lot of information came in over a relatively short period of time regarding curling, cables and other matters. I appreciate that the Minister for Energy and Business is clear that the transition on Gotland is being embraced and that Gotland will receive a better starting position than the one we have today.
I want to return to the fact that we on Gotland have one of Sweden's largest individual emission points. It is important. It is also where we have a great potential in terms of jobs and the industry's transition.
I also want to emphasize that Gotland has fundamental needs. One of them is the secure energy connection that secures life as we live it today but perhaps even more so in the future, if we are to speak about the future and not just history. It takes leaps toward the future, the transition, the resilience, the jobs of the future and development.
That is why it pains me a little that the Minister for Energy and Industry returns to what she did during her first weeks on the job. I live in the belief that agency governance does not function solely in that way. I believe that it is possible to accelerate and change the timeline. I would really wish that were possible. Otherwise, I believe it will become expensive for us, not least in terms of jobs and transition.
Madam Speaker! Gotland has waited long enough. Gotland needs a new energy connection by 2030 at the latest. The Minister for Energy and Business said that Gotland is a part of Sweden. One part of showing that is to invite us into the main grid and let us contribute to the transition.
I mean that the Minister for Energy and Industry has that power in her hands. I wish she would use it a bit differently and perhaps, in the name of honesty, a bit better than she does right now. Thank you for the floor and for the debate!
Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)
Madam Speaker! Hanna Westerén shall be informed of what has been done not only during my first weeks at work but also during all my other weeks at work so far.
We have made decisions on investigations for more efficient permit assessments. This concerns the environmental assessment investigation and simplified and shortened permit processes according to the Environmental Code. We have the climate justice investigation. We will process several parts of it as we go. The Government has decided on a referral to the Council of Legislation with proposals aimed at clarifying and shortening the permit processes in connection with expansion and our maintenance of the electricity grid.
Madam Speaker! The Government has also commissioned further investigations based on proposals submitted in the climate justice investigation. These concern the assignment on magnetic fields, the assignment on compensation upon land acquisition, and the assignment to produce a guideline regarding the impact on birds. Now, you may be wondering in the gallery what on earth it is for a debate you have ended up in, but it is, therefore, about the cable to Gotland.
The government is making budget investments for more efficient permit processes. The County Administrative Boards will receive increased appropriations of 60 million kronor for the work with environmental assessment and 40 million kronor for the work with environmental supervision in 2024.
The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency's appropriation for environmental assessment and permit guidance is increased by 13 million and so on. Additionally, we are adding to the appropriation for Sweden's courts. We provide an appropriation to the Energy Markets Inspectorate which is increased. This concerns, among other things, permit processes. A new appropriation for energy planning is also provided with additional funds to, among other things, be able to review this and so on.
A lot is happening in the area. We promise to continue to maintain the pace in a very active governance moving forward. But it must be done correctly and properly. I think we have shown that we are taking action. We then hope for broad support in the chamber for the energy policy orientation bill. It would also be good for Gotland. Thank you for a very good debate!
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.