Response to interpellation 2024/25:169 on the electricity supply in Halland
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
KD welcomes all fossil-free power sources and argues that the expansion of hydropower, combined heat and power, existing nuclear power, as well as land-based wind power and solar power can meet the increasing electricity demand 1. KD argues that the current electricity shortage in southern Sweden is due to previous policies 2 and the decommissioning of Ringhals 1 and 2 3. KD emphasizes technology neutrality but points out that the capacity factor of wind power is significantly lower than that of nuclear power 4 3. S believes that the state must expand the offshore grid 5 and wants a long-term energy agreement for Halland and Sweden 5 6. MP argues that electrification can be achieved with wind and solar power if the systems are complemented with flexibility 7. C questions the government's position 8.
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! Aida Birinxhiku has asked me what measures the government and I intend to take so that Kattegatt Syd and other important sea-based wind power projects do not come to nothing in the same way as has happened with Kriegers flak - so is the question formulated.
The Government welcomes all fossil-free power sources. In the short term, up to 2030-2035, the Swedish Energy Agency assesses that it is primarily power increases within hydropower, combined heat and power, and existing nuclear power, as well as an expansion of land-based wind power and solar power, that can meet an increasing electricity demand.
I want to start by reminding that this government has so far granted permits for three offshore wind farms in the economic zone. During the Social Democrats' eight years in government, permits were granted for only one offshore wind farm. To speed up the permit processes for offshore wind power, the government has allocated 15 million kronor per year to the county administrative boards for the preparation of cases regarding offshore wind power.
The enterprise Svenska kraftnät has analyzed the issue of using so-called congestion revenues to finance submarine cables for the connection of offshore wind power. The authority assesses that it is not compatible with the EU's electricity market regulation to use congestion revenues in this way. Svenska kraftnät also assesses that such financing may constitute impermissible state aid.
Svenska kraftnät shall, according to its instructions, expand the transmission grid based on socio-economic profitability assessments. There is nothing that prevents an expansion of the transmission grid in the sea, if Svenska kraftnät assesses that it is socio-economically justified to any extent. If the cost of connecting offshore wind power were instead to be borne by the grid customer collective in a way that is not socio-economically justified, it would mean that the grid customers are subsidizing investments in offshore wind power.
In addition to granting permits for three offshore wind farms, the government has commissioned an investigation into offshore wind power to review how the permit process can become more efficient and clearer, for example by having the state designate suitable sites for establishment. The purpose is to create conditions for an increased expansion of offshore wind power, while other societal interests are taken into account. The assignment is to be reported by December 13, 2024, at the latest.
On 12 December 2024, the government announced two new assignments to strengthen the contribution of intermittent, weather-dependent power production to operational security and resource adequacy. The assignments will also include reviewing what incentives can be developed so that investments in technical measures for a better power contribution can be implemented.
The Government is working on a wind power package intended to improve the conditions for expanding land-based and coastal wind power. To increase the incentives for municipalities to support new wind power and compensate those municipalities that have already allowed wind power to be built, the Government proposes in the budget bill for 2025, which has now entered into force, that a support to municipalities for wind power installations be established, based on the property tax. The Government also intends to pursue proposals regarding compensation to neighbors and the local community that were presented in the report The Value of the Wind (SOU 2023:18), in order to strengthen the local benefit and acceptance of wind power.
The government appointed a special investigator in January 2024 who shall analyze and propose how the Swedish electricity market can be developed and regulated to improve the conditions for investments in new electricity production. Sweden needs a powerful expansion of new fossil-free electricity production, with the right characteristics and in the right location, to be able to meet the demand for electricity.
Aida Birinxhiku (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, the Minister for Energy and Business, for the answer to my interpellation! This is an interpellation debate that I have looked forward to very much because it was unfortunately postponed previously. I am glad that we now have the opportunity to discuss these questions, which are extremely important for my constituency and for the country as a whole.
What I am initially struck by after the minister's answer is that it has not always sounded like that from the government's side. Before the election, it was about steel forests. Now it sounds different, and it is obviously welcome given the situation we find ourselves in. I welcome much of the ongoing work that the minister recently accounted for. But it must not become an excuse for not doing what is required here and now.
The investigation on offshore wind power, which the Minister mentioned, itself states that the investigation's proposals are not sufficient for more projects to become a reality. If we are to accelerate the expansion of electricity production in the coming years, which we need, the government must urgently handle the applications and projects that already exist.
Madam Speaker! This autumn, Vattenfall announced that the Kriegers Flak project is being paused due to the high costs of connection to the national grid. Now, Vattenfall warns that the Kattegatt Syd project off the coast of my home municipality, Falkenberg, also risks being paused for the same reasons. Furthermore, the Galene wind farm off the coast of Varberg is currently facing major challenges and delays.
We risk losing necessary fossil-free electricity production that could be in place within the next few years. This will have serious consequences for households, the business sector, and the electricity supply in my home county of Halland, but also for the country as a whole, not only in the form of higher electricity prices but also in missed investments and lost jobs.
Madam Speaker! That the state finances an expansion of the offshore grid in accordance with what is being done in many other countries is a prerequisite for projects such as Kattegatt Syd to become a reality. This is stated by Vattenfall and the government's own offshore wind study, and it was said by the governing parties themselves when they entered into the energy agreement in 2016. But after the change of government, they changed their minds and stopped Svenska kraftnät's expansion of the offshore grid. The consequences of that we see here and now.
Given what is at stake, the government should change its mind and task Svenska kraftnät with using the billions available in so-called bottleneck revenues to expand the offshore grid. According to the Minister, there are no obstacles to doing so if it is judged to be socio-economically justified. Therefore, the government should task Svenska kraftnät with making socio-economic calculations and thereby actively use the bottleneck revenues to expand the offshore grid.
Madam Speaker! My question in this interpellation debate is quite simply whether the Minister for Energy and Industry is prepared to give Svenska kraftnät such a mandate to expand the transmission grid for lower electricity prices and to meet the industry's electricity needs during the coming years.
Jan Riise (MP)
Madam Speaker! Aida Birinxhiku has asked some extraordinarily relevant questions concerning the expansion of offshore wind power, and I would like to thank her very much for that. It warms the heart of a Halland environmentalist. Thanks also to the Minister for the answers so far.
My own place on earth is located some miles north of Member of Parliament Birinxhikus Falkenberg, more specifically on the northern side of Kungsbackafjorden where it flows out into Kattegatt. If I go down to the beach and look south, I see 20 land-based wind turbines and four reactor buildings at Ringhals, two of which, as is known, are being decommissioned and demolished. If I shift my gaze slightly westward, I should soon be able to see at least parts of the proposed offshore wind farms Galene and Warberg Offshore Wind.
We naturally welcome the support for the relevant county administrative boards and, not least, the assignment to the County Administrative Board in Halland to account for the coordination and compilation of experiences and knowledge when it comes to permit processes for wind power. With the urgency we should have, it is of course both a necessary and presumably profitable or in any case cost-saving effort.
Halland is a net supplier of electrical energy. That is, of course, due to the fact that we are a nuclear power county. But administrative regions are hardly any particularly valuable basis for distributing statistics in this context. It is more about conditions, distances and, not least, competence. That should not be underestimated.
In Varberg, which is the municipality where Ringhals is located, there may not be many employees left - if any - who were involved in building nuclear power. Ringhals 3 and 4 were put into operation in 1981 and 1983, i.e., more than 40 years ago. But that is not the important thing. The important thing is that there is a local structure and a tradition surrounding energy issues.
This is visible, among other things, in Varberg Energi, which has built battery storage and wind turbine towers in wood, and is participating in EU-funded projects on so-called agrivoltaics, that is, sites for both solar cells and agriculture. It is those kinds of local structures that are strong and which I also believe will provide important additions to civil defense in the event of war or crisis.
To return to the question that Aida Birinxhiku asked: Why is it moving so slowly with decisions and the subsequent workshop when it comes to assignments to ensure long-term infrastructure to be able to deliver electricity from offshore wind power? Is there work being done towards the EU to get clarity on whether, and if so, why it would matter if the connection points are on land, for example in the Ringhals area?
The Minister briefly touched upon this in the response and spoke of how Svenska kraftnät has analyzed the issue of using so-called bottleneck revenues to finance submarine cables. The authority assesses that it is not compatible with the EU's electricity market regulation. It may also not be compatible with the rules on state aid.
Now I have been under the impression that it is Energimarknadsinspektionen that makes those types of assessments, or that makes decisions about them. In that case, we can possibly leave Svenska kraftnät's views and uncertain statements a bit aside.
This is, as far as I can see, parts of what not only the government but also we in the opposition usually highlight as positive characteristics of good politics. It is about long-term rules of the game and correct information.
Christofer Bergenblock (C)
Madam Speaker! I also come from Halland. I live in Träslövsläge, slightly south of Varberg. I will come if it is ever built that it has a view over both Galenes and Kattegatt Syd's wind farms.
Madam Speaker! A year ago, I had a debate with the Minister for Energy regarding the issue of the expansion of offshore wind power off the coast of Halland. That debate arose because Vattenfall's CEO Anna Borg had been interviewed in Ekot's Saturday interview on December 2, 2023, and there hinted that one might potentially pause Kriegers Flak due to the changes in conditions that the government had created by saying no to the expansion of the transmission network at sea with Svenska kraftnät as it was planned. It was also sensed that Kattegatt Syd was in the danger zone in her statement.
Madam Speaker! Anna Borg also gave a proposal for a solution. She suggested that it should be done in such a way that the developers were allowed to build out the transmission grid and then debit or sell it to Svenska kraftnät. It would have been a palatable way for the government to get away with the honor intact while simultaneously ensuring that it was still Svenska kraftnät that was responsible for the transmission grid in the end, as it had been for our larger energy facilities overall earlier in this country. That was not the case. The Minister for Energy was also very clear that she did not intend to go with the proposal that Vattenfall's CEO had put forward.
During the past year, what was precisely warned about occurred. Vattenfall announced in September that they were pausing Kriegers Flak with 2.7 terawatt-hours, which had pleased the residents of Skåne very much given the high electricity prices we have seen this winter. Barely a month later, Vattenfall suggested that they will likely also pause Kattegatt Syd, which is to provide 5 terawatt-hours of electricity supply.
It is very large projects involved with a very large amount of electricity supply. We hear the Minister for Energy say that the government has now approved three offshore wind power projects in Sweden. At the same time, one has by all means said no to 13 or even 14 offshore wind power projects. But it doesn't matter, Madam Speaker, if one says yes to projects that are never carried out. What does it help if one gives 10 projects permission if there are no conditions to carry them out in reality? Then there is nothing to boast about or brag about.
We need all the energy supply that we can get to this country. The calculation is that we largely need to double our electricity production by 2040-2045. In that case, offshore wind power is a supporting part of the transition.
It may happen that we have new nuclear power in Sweden in 15 or 20 years, but until then we must make use of the resources that exist. In the short and medium-term perspective, it is offshore wind power that can provide such a supply. But then the government must dare to make the decisions required to enable an expansion. Until now, decisions have been made in the opposite direction.
Madam Speaker! My question to the Minister for Energy is: What is the government prepared to do to enable the expansion of offshore wind power off the coast of Halland and in other parts of Sweden?
Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)
Madam Speaker! I want to begin with some facts about our energy system. Over the last eleven years, 13,000 megawatts of newly installed production capacity have been added to the power system. That might make one raise their eyebrows. I see that some of the members in the chamber are doing so now that I am once again returning with facts about the energy system.
In southern Sweden, we have the worst power shortage in the entire EU, despite the fact that we have available installed production capacity equivalent to ten nuclear reactors. The worst power shortage means that we have the worst imbalance between how much electricity is demanded and how much electricity is available at any given second. But if one does not understand why it looks like this, it is perhaps not so strange that today we hear Social Democrats, Green Party members, and Center Party members continue to propose exactly the same medicine that gave Sweden the disease that we now have to deal with.
During 2023 and 2024, it looks like we have been able to expand the electricity system by 6,100 megawatts. However, I have not had time to see the final figures for December. This is as much installed production capacity as what Mats Dillén proposed in the nuclear power investigation. It is, therefore, a huge amount of installed production capacity. But it is primarily about wind, wind, wind and a little solar. It is not more base load in the form of, for example, water or nuclear power, which means that we continue to have a serious capacity problem.
Therefore, we should not continue to do more of the same and at the same time say that the Swedish people should pay more for this situation, which is what is proposed when one wants the network customer collective to bear the cost of the connection fee for offshore wind power in a way that does not occur for any other type of power.
I believe that in my written response I gave a detailed answer, Madam Speaker, and did not intend to repeat it. This applies, among other things, to what is stated in the fourth and fifth paragraphs. The only thing I want to restate is something that Svenska kraftnät has expressed: Grid investments aimed at radial connections of producers do not comply with the electricity market regulation's framework for how bottleneck revenues may be used. This is, therefore, SVK's comment on how compatible this is with the legislation we have to adhere to.
Let me answer the specific question regarding the Energy Markets Inspectorate. It is indeed that body which decides on this. But SVK has announced that they will not submit any application because the authority assesses that it would constitute an impermissible state aid.
In conclusion, I would like to mention that the Norwegian company Statkraft submitted an application on December 16 for two new offshore wind power projects corresponding to 20 terawatt-hours. We perceive that the interest remains great and we have a close dialogue with actors for wind power both on land and at sea.
Aida Birinxhiku (S)
Madam Speaker! There is much to unpack in the Minister's response, but the message seems, therefore, to be that, firstly, no offshore wind power will be built during the next ten years and that, secondly, according to the Minister for Energy and Business, it is perfectly acceptable despite it being crucial to achieve lower electricity prices in Halland and southern Sweden and to meet the industry's electricity needs by 2030-2035.
Madam Speaker! That the state expands the offshore grid, which we agreed upon in 2016, is a prerequisite for such projects to become a reality. It is not only we who say this, but Vattenfall has also stated it. So did the government's own offshore wind study when it presented its report in the middle of December.
The Minister referred to Norway. I would like us to also focus on another neighboring country. In Denmark, an auction-based system has already been introduced. There, three areas were identified, but without any support whatsoever from the state, simply no bids were received. That was the result when the bidding was completed in early December.
Madam Speaker! It is strange when the government emphasizes the importance of socio-economic analysis or, for that matter, technology neutrality. The government would gladly have done so if it were the case that one listened to the responses from the own expert agencies and proceeded from a holistic view of the electricity system. But the reality is unfortunately different when one now moves forward with heavy subsidies that risk pushing out other necessary electricity production.
At the same time, I am not particularly surprised. Deteriorated conditions for offshore wind power are a direct consequence of the Tidö Agreement. But we cannot afford to wage culture wars against individual types of power, Madam Speaker, instead we need to see the potential in all fossil-free types of power: hydropower, nuclear power, solar energy, and wind power on land and at sea. The Halland energy mix is a good example of that. It involves seeing the potential in what needs to be done in the short and long term.
My question concerns how Halland households and companies are to get more of cheap electricity on-site here and now and not in some distant future. That is why the interpellation concerns the Kattegatt Syd project, which could have been completed in the early 2030s. Now, instead, it risks being paused.
Madam Speaker! The so-called culture war in the field of energy policy not only hinders the possibility of a constructive debate, but it also makes it much more difficult to establish long-term, clear and predictable rules of the game. Consequently, more investments risk being paused or simply not happening at all.
What we need is a long-term energy agreement for the best of Halland and Sweden. I mean that it is what should be prioritized for the government, not to contribute to an increased level of conflict that does not benefit the country's electricity supply.
Jan Riise (MP)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answers so far and for the discussion.
I began my previous contribution by speaking about my view south towards Ringhals and Kattegatt. If I instead cycle a few kilometers north, I reach the Onsala Space Observatory. It admittedly has nothing to do with this, but it is a world-leading observatory and is part of Chalmers Institution of Space, Geo-Engineering and Environment.
There are many pleasant and extremely knowledgeable people there, including Filip Johnsson, professor of energy systems and a diligent writer on the subject, and his colleague Lisa Göransson, docent in the same subject. Filip is, as is known, now also vice chairman of the Climate Policy Council. It is they and their colleagues who give me such confidence that solutions already exist or are in the works. These are solutions based on many years of successful international research, and those solutions can provide us with the energy and power we need within the foreseeable future. Among other things, they presented a research report a year ago showing that electrification can be achieved with a large share of wind and solar power if the systems are supplemented with measures to achieve flexibility. It is also in cooperation with, for example, Hitachi ABB in Ludvika that new solutions are developed.
But politics should, of course, not only take part in ongoing research, but we must also put things into relation to what we need. Shortly before Christmas, a couple of months ago, the role of defense in the application processes came into focus in a somewhat unfortunate way when 13 of 14 projects were rejected. Dagens industri considered it remarkable that this defense expansion cannot be combined with electricity production in the Baltic Sea, but the same applies partly on our side of Sweden. It is troublesome that it is not possible to consult in time on such matters, and we have also heard that from the County Administrative Board.
Can the Minister give any reassuring message that efforts and actions are being made in this area in order to carry out the dialogues earlier and faster in this way?
Christofer Bergenblock (C)
Madam Speaker! Usually, we received a small lecture from the Minister for Energy and Industry regarding facts in the energy system. The laws of physics were not mentioned this time, but they are usually brought up.
The Minister for Energy summarized by saying that we have now expanded wind power in Sweden for a long time, and we do not need more of the same. But then I don't quite understand how that fits together. On one hand, the government boasts about how many permits it has managed to grant during this period for new offshore wind power compared to previous governments. On the other hand, the minister stands here and says that we do not need more of the same. We do not need more wind power, then. What is it that applies? Does one want more wind power, or does one not want more wind power?
Then we are back to what I said earlier, namely that permits do not build new wind farms, but it is the conditions for being able to build the farms that can provide something in reality. The government has effectively ensured that the conditions have deteriorated so much that the state-owned company Vattenfall is withdrawing and pausing its projects. They have said "pauses", perhaps in anticipation of a new government that takes the issues seriously.
We still need an expansion of the electricity system, but not in 15 years. We need an expansion in the next 5 years, the next 10 years, and the next 15 years.
I turn again to the Minister: How does the government intend to ensure that we can expand wind power, especially offshore wind power, during the coming 10-15-year period?
Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)
Madam Speaker! I shall try to avoid repetitions, and I begin with Christofer Bergenblock's relevant question about how it is consistent that we both boast about having made decisions on more offshore wind power and at the same time say that we should not have more of the same.
The answer is technology neutrality and an understanding that all fossil-free power sources are needed - and that is the line of the government and the four coalition parties - but that they fulfill different functions in the system. We have been able to see that wind power has been good for pushing down the price in periods. We also have an active dialogue with the wind power companies regarding what, as some point out in theory, would be possible, namely storage possibilities, flexibility, aggregation services and so on. Much of that exists, but not on the large scale needed to balance out Sweden's system. There, we are talking with the wind power companies about whether they can do this on a larger scale and get the wind farms to run in sync with, for example, hydrogen production. But much is still in its infancy.
This is happening at the same time as we pave the way for more base load, power increases in existing base load, which in itself ensures that we get better utilization of the intermittent power production. That is how it is connected, but one should not believe that the solution is to do it only for wind power. Then we will only get more of the same that has led us here, namely the worst power shortage.
Then I turn to Jan Riise and his comments regarding the defense. I want to take the opportunity again to say here in the chamber that it has been a very, very long process with the Armed Forces. We have taken part in every single small detail - much of which has furthermore been classified - regarding exactly what effect the sea-based wind farms in the Baltic Sea would have on our defense capability. We have asked every conceivable counter-question lengthwise and crosswise, compared with other countries, and had dialogues with companies that say they would compensate in this or that way. We have truly turned this over and over. Therefore, it was a heavy message to land that we cannot do anything other than weigh the Armed Forces' assessment and the defense so heavily.
I am glad that we now have an investigation on the table showing that Sweden, even though it became late, can leave the open-door system that has made Sweden stand out compared to others and where the defense interest has arrived far too late. The wind power companies have had to guess where it is worth spending time and effort to apply. We must move away from this.
Aida Birinxhiku mentioned that the line she represents needs conditions for lower prices. Yes, sometimes. But when they do not deliver, it results in high and volatile electricity prices.
I would like to know if Aida Birinxhiku can tell the opposition members how many more factories, companies, and firms could connect with the policy that the member advocates. Do the Social Democrats know? Is any capacity shortage solved with the help of, for example, Krieger's flak? How much? Does Aida Birinxhiku know what the capacity factor is for offshore wind power? It is 74 for nuclear power, and it is 11 for onshore wind power. Does Aida Birinxhiku know what the capacity factor is for offshore wind power?
Aida Birinxhiku (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for Energy and Industry for the debate.
If we are to secure the electricity supply in Halland and in the rest of the country, the government needs to do much more. We need to do several things, namely quickly expand electricity production over the coming years, and then we also need to expand the offshore grid to be able to connect more electricity production.
In addition to new production, we need to increase transmission capacity and existing capacity through power increases and life extensions. Last, but not least, we need clear, long-term, and predictable rules of the game.
This is something we should all agree on, but instead, some representatives seem more interested in painting fictional contradictions between different types of energy and spreading inaccuracies about other parties' past energy policies rather than arriving at solutions that move us forward.
Madam Speaker! Our message is clear. I would also like to have that message from the Minister for Energy and Business when it comes to a long-term and broad energy agreement for the best of Halland and Sweden. That is what would benefit Halland households and companies. If this is the case, I have not received any answer in this interpellation debate from the minister.
But I expect that Ebba Busch, as the country's Minister for Energy and Industry, can answer the questions she poses to the members in the debate and can also give a clear statement that one wants to see long-term, clear and predictable rules of the game for Halland households and companies. Something else we simply cannot afford. Halland households or companies, which risk being hit by higher electricity prices, cannot afford it, and neither can the county or the country as a whole, which will lose important jobs and important investments.
Energi- och näringsministern Ebba Busch (KD)
Madam Speaker! Yes, I can answer the questions that I myself am posing here. The capacity factor for offshore wind power is 18 percent and it is, as mentioned, 74 percent for nuclear power and 84 percent for Swedish hydropower. That is the reason why I often point out that all fossil-free power sources are needed, but they contribute different things to the system.
I hope that all the people of Halland listening to this debate hear that the reason why Halland has one of the worst power shortages in the country is the decommissioning of Ringhals 1 and 2. And now one stands here and speaks about the need to be in agreement. Sometimes it is more important and braver to do what is right than what everyone agrees on.
It would serve Halland well if we can get more focus on technology neutrality and on providing more power, so that the companies in Halland can connect to the power grid. It is not just a matter of more electricity, which can be exported and which companies can profit from when the wind blows. When it is dunkelflaute, meaning both dark and windless, Halland stands still.
I therefore gladly make agreements that serve the Swedish people, but not so that we politicians can pat each other on the back and say: "Look! We reached an agreement, but we left Halland and Sweden in the lurch." I will not participate in doing that again.
That is why we have focused on over 60 assignments aimed at, in the very short, acute term and in the medium term to 2030 and 2035, increasing the possibility of extracting more effect from all the electricity produced in Sweden, so that more households can get more stable electricity prices and more even access to electricity and more companies can connect to the power grid. It is to serve both Sweden and Halland best.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.