Response to interpellation 2023/24:638 on power output increase in hydropower
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns power output increases in hydropower and how environmental assessments should be carried out. L argues that the government protects hydropower owners by pausing the reassessments to improve the process and listen to the industry's concerns 1. L argues that the extended pause is necessary to ensure orderly, predictable, and legally secure environmental assessments without harming the function of hydropower 2. L trusts the operators' ability to make their own assessments regarding investments 3 and emphasizes that the government wants to protect the aquatic environment and biodiversity 3. S argues that the government has misjudged the issue and set it aside 4. S wants the budget bill to be scrutinized thoroughly 4.
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)
Mr. Speaker! Isak From has asked the Minister for Energy and Business if she and the government, in addition to new pauses, are also considering some measures to involve companies and responsible authorities in the work to ensure the possibility of increasing the capacity of hydropower, and whether she and the government intend to take further initiatives to also create clarity in the assessment conditions for the operators.
The work within the government is distributed in such a way that it is I who shall answer the interpellation.
According to the bill Water Environment and Hydropower (prop. 2017/18:243), the expansion of hydropower shall primarily take place through power increases in existing plants with modern environmental permits. However, it is the individual operator who decides whether it is profitable to invest in power-increasing measures.
The rules on modification permits, which were introduced in connection with the provisions on modern environmental conditions, aim, among other things, to ensure that an operator has the possibility to apply for power-increasing measures without having to wait for the reassessment according to the national plan for modern environmental conditions. Practice from the Land and Environment Courts shows that the provision on modification permits has functioned as intended. Several permits for power-increasing measures in existing power plants have already been granted with the support of the new rules. There is also nothing preventing operators from applying for permits for power-increasing measures in connection with the submission of the application for reassessment for modern environmental conditions. There is therefore no reason for the government to take any specific measures linked to the national plan to ensure hydropower's opportunities for power-increasing measures.
The starting point in the planning of the reassessments has been that a certain impact on the electricity system is acceptable. In view of the serious situation for the electricity system, the government decided in January 2023 that the reassessment should be paused for twelve months and the reassessment system reviewed. The pause has since been extended twice, most recently to 1 June 2024.
The Government intends to take measures that contribute to ensuring that the impact of the reassessments on hydropower becomes acceptable from a power system perspective. Within the Government Offices, preparation of proposals for such measures is therefore underway. The position on the need for changes is based, among other things, on the mappings and analyses that the relevant authorities have carried out during the pause on behalf of the government, as well as dialogue with the hydropower industry. In order to allow sufficient time for the government to complete the work of producing legislative amendments and other measures to improve the reassessment process and provide hydropower with modern environmental conditions in an orderly, predictable, and legally secure manner, the government decided on 23 May to further extend the pause. The decision means that the assessment groups which, according to currently applicable regulations, should submit an application by 1 June 2024 at the latest, shall instead submit an application by 1 July 2025 at the latest, and that the time for other assessment groups to submit an application is moved forward by one year. This is the final and definitive extension of the pause. After that, the reassessments will be resumed, and the important work of providing hydropower with modern environmental conditions, creating free migration routes, and promoting biodiversity in our watercourses continues.
Isak From (S)
Mr. Speaker! I thank Romina Pourmokhtari for the answer.
I submitted this interpellation to Minister for Energy and Business Ebba Busch as a question on increasing power, but in its response, the government has judged that this is more of an environmental and regulatory issue. Therefore, Minister for Climate and Environment Romina Pourmokhtari is answering it.
The interpellation should have been answered by March 20th. But, Mr. Speaker, it feels as if it was already decided then that the government would press the pause button one more time, for it has taken quite a long time to produce this answer.
Just as the Minister says in the response, there was an additional pause on 23 May, which means that the applications must be submitted by 1 July 2025 at the latest.
I asked Minister for Enterprise Ebba Busch if the minister is considering any new measures besides the pause. When I wrote the interpellation, I thought it would be a pause of two months and that the government was close. Even the operators out in the country who are to carry out and apply for permits in the re-evaluations probably thought the government was close to taking action. Now it turns out that they need an additional little over a year.
The government also sticks to lightning-fast referrals when it comes to extending the breaks. The authorities' views on the breaks must also be quickly provided to the government.
Mr. Speaker! I also submitted an interpellation to Parisa Liljestrand earlier regarding the Swedish National Heritage Board's conditions for deciding on industrial heritage by water. That interpellation was also answered by Romina Pourmokhtari. In that answer, it appears very clearly that these investments are very expensive. From the answer now from Romina Pourmokhtari, it appears that it is the operators who shall assess whether the investments can be carried out.
I understand the operators' frustration. The major stakeholders behind the Water Power Environmental Fund have written a debate article that I am quite sure Romina Pourmokhtari is aware of, regarding the fact that the government must take action on the steering rod.
I wonder: Does Romina Pourmokhtari have any answer for the operators regarding what they are expected to and can do now that the government has extended the pause further? What is expected? Is the environmental fund for hydropower also to be paused so that no work continues during the coming years?
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Mr. Speaker! There are many aspects of hydropower that can be discussed. Let us begin with the fundamental aspect that hydropower holds a special position in Sweden's energy supply and, above all, in the electricity supply through its ability to store and offer a controllable electricity production.
The existing hydropower regulatory framework and the existing production capacities are something that we want to develop and preserve. Hydroelectricity's unique capabilities are something that one really needs to take advantage of to the greatest extent possible. The government means that we do this, not least by pausing the ongoing reviews to improve them and actually listening to the hydropower owners who for a long time have expressed great frustration over how the reviews are conducted and how they affect their ability to contribute with, for example, their unique capability in the electricity system.
Hydropower has a great capacity to contribute to our electricity system. This capacity cannot be utilized by ignoring the concerns when they arise - the concerns regarding how the trials are conducted and how they affect the possibility of continuing.
The answer to the question posed by the member, Mr. Speaker, is in my view that the government protects hydropower owners in Sweden by seriously taking their concerns into account and not allowing the trials to proceed as they did previously. Instead, we are pausing them to review how they can be improved in a way that does not harm hydropower to the extent that it was about to do. This, we believe, is taking responsibility for the function that hydropower fulfills in our electricity system.
Isak From (S)
Mr. Speaker! As stated in the SvD article from April 12 with the headline "Major threats to Sweden's hydropower," the government paused the review almost immediately. We judged that it was probably relevant. It was judged that one would get started after a year. After a year, it was paused for an additional two months, and now the government has once again made a decision to extend the pause.
It is clear that it feels a bit as if this issue has fallen between the cracks and that the government has simply set it aside because it has been fully occupied with handling other types of energy than hydropower. Then it becomes very clear, just as the hydropower advocates write, that hydropower is needed to ensure our common security of supply of electricity.
It is demanded that the government ensure that the impact of environmental assessments on hydropower becomes acceptable from a power system perspective. A number of requirements are set, including that the government shall create an effective governance of the environmental assessments for hydropower, so that it becomes legally secure for all operators, and that the government shall develop and ensure that the national target value of a maximum of 1.5 terawatt-hours in production loss becomes binding.
Just as the Minister says in his answer, it is the operators who shall assess whether an investment in a power-increasing measure should be carried out. Such measures are large and costly and must be carried out largely across the entire line. The entire river's capacity must therefore be included. Since we have different operators in the same river, it needs to be coordinated, and it is not strange that the operators request guidance. Where is the government heading?
It appears that there is a lack of order in the Government Offices. It also clearly emerges that different parties in the government base may have different starting points in this issue. In Naturskyddsföreningen's survey 2022, the Liberals answered that they want to safeguard and maintain the pace in the environmental adaptation of hydropower.
Romina Pourmokhtari does not want to comment on the new delays. It looks like it is now the Liberals who are delaying the process in the Government Offices. Outside observers can easily get the impression that the different parties in the Tidö agreement are not in agreement on this issue. That, Mr. Speaker, will eventually affect our energy supply, where hydropower is completely fundamental.
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Mr. Speaker! I think it is somewhat comical when the member mentions that I, as a minister, do not want to comment on the question of how the pauses for hydropower's environmental assessments are handled. It is in fact what we are doing right now, Mr. Speaker. We are standing and discussing and debating the question of hydropower's environmental conditions, hydropower's function in our electricity system, and how the pauses should be handled in the best way.
The claim that I do not want to comment on this, I actually find a bit funny. I do, in fact, comment on this at regular intervals. What I just pointed out to the member, Mr. Speaker, was that there are reasons why the pauses are carried out, and they are reasons that the Liberals do not ignore.
The Liberals are very keen that the extended pause shall provide time for the work to improve the environmental assessments so that they can be carried out in the best possible way. If one is environmentally conscious, one is keen that the assessments should be conducted in a good way so that we can also retain the hydropower and so that we do not shut down functioning production which, even if it is small-scale, contributes to the electricity system. There are assessments of how much it contributes.
I do not agree that the Liberals' environmental policy and protection of a high pace goes against what is now being done. What is happening here is that Sweden's environmental policy shall be ambitious and protect competitiveness. It does not protect competitiveness if it leads to domestic hydropower production being shut down because the environmental assessments are too heavy for the actors to carry out.
The tests shall be carried out in a manner that does not create unacceptable impact on the operators' activities, which is something that the government does not want to see continue. At least the hydropower owners I have met are very grateful that we, unlike the previous government, do not push on without listening when they express concern about how the work is being conducted.
Measures need to be taken to ensure that the impact of the reassessments is acceptable from a power system perspective, that cooperation is improved, and that the reassessment processes proceed in an orderly, predictable, and legally secure manner. It is this work that is now being carried out by the government.
At a referral meeting on May 14 regarding the proposed extension of the break, the Government Offices informed that the government intends to refer the legislative proposals before the summer. In other words, the proposals for measures being prepared within the Government Offices will then be presented.
This is, as has been said, a task that is carried out so that we can achieve the much-needed constitutional amendments, Mr. Speaker, as well as other measures that are needed in this work. I can only regret that it is not a task that has been carried out despite the fact that these examinations have been criticized for a long time. For a long time, it has been pointed out that there is a problem in how they are carried out.
The pause has thus been extended in order to give us sufficient time to complete the work that needs to be done. It is clear that as a politician, one is frustrated that things take time, but that is how it is – politics and work at the state level need to be carried out in a correct manner, and that sometimes takes time. I do not think anyone is particularly surprised that this is a task that is complex and very difficult. We will hopefully very soon be able to have more debates on the impact on hydropower of the environmental assessments, which will also be able to take place in a slightly different way.
Isak From (S)
Mr. Speaker! It is clear that we shall look at the constitutional amendment proposals that the government is submitting and read them carefully. So far, it appears that this has been misjudged.
It is clear that it perhaps would have been better to initially take a longer break, as obviously the government had other work which caused this issue to be sidelined. I do not hear that the government has announced any legislative changes, and in that part, the cards are laid short. The question then is: Which parts are it that one can influence? That remains to be seen.
Just as Romina Pourmokhtari highlighted here, it will probably also mean that we will need to discuss this again in the future. For us Social Democrats, it is absolutely crucial that hydropower meets its environmental commitments - and also that the fund that the large hydropower producers have actually created to alleviate the burden for the small ones is put to work and that that work can also continue. We see now that it has been paused, and we regret that, as said.
We see that the government is obviously fully occupied with other matters, but we hope that this is now underway. We will also read the budget bill very carefully and see which assignments, if so, will be given to the responsible authorities. It is, after all, the responsible authorities that must in some way change their work, because it will not be possible to influence the courts if the legislation is not changed, Mr. Speaker.
Last but not least, I wish you a pleasant summer. If the Minister has time, she is welcome to read Älven i mig by Jannete Hentati. It describes the origin of the Lule River and the conflicts linked to large-scale hydropower.
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Mr. Speaker! I understand that the Social Democrats have a tendency to become frustrated that it is the individual operator who decides whether it is profitable to invest in power-increasing measures or not, and mostly wonders why the government and the state do not step in and get things done. But as a liberal, and also as a minister who is regularly in good dialogue with various operators, I, in any case, trust in their ability to make such assessments.
We have an ongoing work where we involve the operators and the authorities in different ways to initiate the dialogue and review how the work should be carried out. Several actors in the industry have already begun work on implementing various efficiency increases in connection with their applications for modern environmental conditions, and that includes the owners of some of the largest facilities. It is, of course, something we view very positively.
The work is, therefore, in full swing, and regarding the environmental aspects of the whole, it is truly the case that we are working to ensure that it can be carried out in the best possible way. The need to implement these measures is nothing that has changed during this time; it is simply a matter of ensuring they can be implemented in the best possible way.
We are very keen to implement these measures so that they will reduce hydropower's negative impact on the environment. The member surely knows very well that there is a great will even among the government to, through the environmental assessments that take place, work to protect the aquatic environment, protect the ecosystems, and safeguard biodiversity. The question is how we implement them in the best way so that they do not affect the hydropower owners in the same way as during previous periods.
It is, as has been said, frustrating when work takes time, but that is how it became because the government needed to begin a task that could have been carried out from the start.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.