300 E. MOE ET AL.
When interviewing politicians today, most of the reasoning from the
Stoltenberg administration is echoed both in the opposition and in the
conservative-led government with Erna Solberg (Conservative Party) as
prime minister of a shifting coalition of parties on the Norwegian right.
Several of our interviewees particularly stress how the green battery term
erroneously suggests that Norway can simply serve the Continent in
a one-way-street manner, whereas the figures rather enable Norway to
become a balancing power. Industrial policy spokesman for the Labor
Party, MP Terje Aasland (2018, interview), even claimed that the green
battery idea has primarily been pushed by the interests that benefit the
most from it, predominantly the power sector.
If there is little support for the green battery idea, does that also
mean that climate concerns are unimportant for Norwegian politicians
with respect to cable construction? The answers vary. Our interviews with
MPs Kjetil Kjenseth (Liberal Party) and Lars Haltbrekken (Socialist Left
Party) suggest that climate and environmental issues were very important
for their parties’ acceptance of NordLink and North Sea Link.
For the three biggest Norwegian parties over the past few decades—
the Labor Party, the Conservative Party and the Progress Party—the
emphasis is far more clearly on what benefits Norway economically, especially from a social profit point of view, and on how best to manage
Norwegian energy resources and provide energy security for Norway.
These correspond with long-standing Norwegian energy policy goals. For
these parties, any climate benefit is a major bonus, but no independent
reason for building cables. Beyond this, our interviews uncover an ideological nuance. The Labor Party places substantial weight on utilizing
Norwegian resources in a manner that explicitly supports Norwegian
industry. Thus, renewable energy expansion should not simply be export
oriented (Aasland 2018, interview). With the two parties on the political right, we rather see a tendency toward emphasizing the power sector
(interviews with Odd Henriksen, Tord Lien, and Oskar Jarle Grimstad,
2018). Since Norway has a power surplus, not building cables for exports
would lead to falling power prices and an erosion of profits for the power
sector, subsequently also lowering social profits for the country.
Apart from the party Red, there has been political consensus around
the building of two subsea cables, and on the expansion of domestic wind
power. The way forward may however not hold the same consensus on
these core prerequisites for the green battery. The potential construction of a third cable, NorthConnect, illustrates the withering consensus.
When interviewing politicians today, most of the reasoning from the
Stoltenberg administration is echoed both in the opposition and in the
conservative-led government with Erna Solberg (Conservative Party) as
prime minister of a shifting coalition of parties on the Norwegian right.
Several of our interviewees particularly stress how the green battery term
erroneously suggests that Norway can simply serve the Continent in
a one-way-street manner, whereas the figures rather enable Norway to
become a balancing power. Industrial policy spokesman for the Labor
Party, MP Terje Aasland (2018, interview), even claimed that the green
battery idea has primarily been pushed by the interests that benefit the
most from it, predominantly the power sector.
If there is little support for the green battery idea, does that also
mean that climate concerns are unimportant for Norwegian politicians
with respect to cable construction? The answers vary. Our interviews with
MPs Kjetil Kjenseth (Liberal Party) and Lars Haltbrekken (Socialist Left
Party) suggest that climate and environmental issues were very important
for their parties’ acceptance of NordLink and North Sea Link.
For the three biggest Norwegian parties over the past few decades—
the Labor Party, the Conservative Party and the Progress Party—the
emphasis is far more clearly on what benefits Norway economically, especially from a social profit point of view, and on how best to manage
Norwegian energy resources and provide energy security for Norway.
These correspond with long-standing Norwegian energy policy goals. For
these parties, any climate benefit is a major bonus, but no independent
reason for building cables. Beyond this, our interviews uncover an ideological nuance. The Labor Party places substantial weight on utilizing
Norwegian resources in a manner that explicitly supports Norwegian
industry. Thus, renewable energy expansion should not simply be export
oriented (Aasland 2018, interview). With the two parties on the political right, we rather see a tendency toward emphasizing the power sector
(interviews with Odd Henriksen, Tord Lien, and Oskar Jarle Grimstad,
2018). Since Norway has a power surplus, not building cables for exports
would lead to falling power prices and an erosion of profits for the power
sector, subsequently also lowering social profits for the country.
Apart from the party Red, there has been political consensus around
the building of two subsea cables, and on the expansion of domestic wind
power. The way forward may however not hold the same consensus on
these core prerequisites for the green battery. The potential construction of a third cable, NorthConnect, illustrates the withering consensus.