13 BEYOND WIND: NEW CHALLENGES TO THE EXPANSION …
325
The second energy plan also promoted wind power and electricity
interconnections with neighboring countries and continued the existing
investment subsidy schemes for wind turbines, available since 1979.
The government initially covered 30% of the capital costs of new wind
turbines, which had to be certified by a national test center (International
Renewable Energy Agency 2013; Hvelplund et al. 2017). These grants
were progressively reduced to 20%, then to 10%, and eliminated in the late
1980s. They supported the Danish wind industry during the collapse of
the California market for wind turbines during the mid-1980s (Hvelplund
et al. 2017). As early as 1981, Denmark introduced feed-in tariffs for wind
power output. These were fixed at a discount relative to the electricity
retail price paid by a 20,000 kWh/year consumer (Sovacool et al. 2008;
Hvelplund et al. 2017). By the late 1970s, local wind cooperatives, where
organized community groups—e.g., farmers—invested together in wind
turbines, were emerging (International Renewable Energy Agency 2013).
The number of cooperatives involved in community ownership exceeded
two-thousand by the late 1990s (Oteman et al. 2014).
Nonetheless, the government’s stance remained favorable for nuclear
power. The Danish public debate on nuclear power (1974–1985) gained
considerable attention and exemplifies how Danish grassroots political
movements succeeded in reversing an initially favorable consensus for the
nuclear option in the Danish parliament. In line with Denmark’s democratic tradition of organizing public participation and allowing dissent,
the Danish government sponsored an information campaign where both
camps could raise their arguments. The technical and scientific community was divided between enthusiasts and moderates, who advocated for
nuclear power based on the possibility of having long-term clean energy
supplies. The main arguments raised against nuclear power were the risk
of irreversible accidents, the lack of safe radioactive waste disposal facilities, and the risk of fissile material ending in terrorists’ hands. Later,
underestimated decommissioning costs were also brought up as relevant
issues against nuclear power (Danielsen 2005; Meyer 2000). The nuclear
debate also resulted in renewable energy sources such as wind and solar
becoming increasingly present in the public opinion.
Once the question mark about nuclear power was removed in 1985,
the Danish government embraced wind power development in a more
systematic manner. One early measure was the “100 MW agreement” of
1985 between the Energy Ministry and electric utilities, which aimed at
developing 100 MW between 1986 and 1990. New agreements came
325
The second energy plan also promoted wind power and electricity
interconnections with neighboring countries and continued the existing
investment subsidy schemes for wind turbines, available since 1979.
The government initially covered 30% of the capital costs of new wind
turbines, which had to be certified by a national test center (International
Renewable Energy Agency 2013; Hvelplund et al. 2017). These grants
were progressively reduced to 20%, then to 10%, and eliminated in the late
1980s. They supported the Danish wind industry during the collapse of
the California market for wind turbines during the mid-1980s (Hvelplund
et al. 2017). As early as 1981, Denmark introduced feed-in tariffs for wind
power output. These were fixed at a discount relative to the electricity
retail price paid by a 20,000 kWh/year consumer (Sovacool et al. 2008;
Hvelplund et al. 2017). By the late 1970s, local wind cooperatives, where
organized community groups—e.g., farmers—invested together in wind
turbines, were emerging (International Renewable Energy Agency 2013).
The number of cooperatives involved in community ownership exceeded
two-thousand by the late 1990s (Oteman et al. 2014).
Nonetheless, the government’s stance remained favorable for nuclear
power. The Danish public debate on nuclear power (1974–1985) gained
considerable attention and exemplifies how Danish grassroots political
movements succeeded in reversing an initially favorable consensus for the
nuclear option in the Danish parliament. In line with Denmark’s democratic tradition of organizing public participation and allowing dissent,
the Danish government sponsored an information campaign where both
camps could raise their arguments. The technical and scientific community was divided between enthusiasts and moderates, who advocated for
nuclear power based on the possibility of having long-term clean energy
supplies. The main arguments raised against nuclear power were the risk
of irreversible accidents, the lack of safe radioactive waste disposal facilities, and the risk of fissile material ending in terrorists’ hands. Later,
underestimated decommissioning costs were also brought up as relevant
issues against nuclear power (Danielsen 2005; Meyer 2000). The nuclear
debate also resulted in renewable energy sources such as wind and solar
becoming increasingly present in the public opinion.
Once the question mark about nuclear power was removed in 1985,
the Danish government embraced wind power development in a more
systematic manner. One early measure was the “100 MW agreement” of
1985 between the Energy Ministry and electric utilities, which aimed at
developing 100 MW between 1986 and 1990. New agreements came