Orkuparadís

Þjóðir heims búa við afar misjafnan kost í orkumálum, og nægir í því sambandi að bera saman Danmörku og Ísland.  Eitthvað mun vera um olíu og gas í danskri lögsögu, en eina sjálfbæra orkuvinnslan þar í landi er með vindrafstöðvum og sólarhlöðum.

Áður fyrr fór megnið af raforkuvinnslunni fram í olíukyntum raforkuverum.  Eftir olíukreppuna 1973 var orkuverunum af kostnaðarástæðum breytt í kolakynt orkuver, og til að draga úr losun CO2/MWh er nú verið að auka hlut gaskyntra orkuvera auk vindrafstöðva.

Á Íslandi er orkumálunum allt öðru vísi varið.  Um 1930 var Reykjavík að miklu leyti kynt með kolum, og sýna ljósmyndir af höfuðstaðnum hann hulinn reyk- og sótmekki frá ófullkomum kolabruna á þessum tíma. Þá riðu Reykvíkingar á vaðið og hófu að bora eftir heitu vatni og dæla því upp í miðlunargeyma á Öskjuhlíð, þaðan sem það var leitt í öll hús höfuðstaðarins, og hann varð fyrir vikið hreinasta borg Evrópu, og þótt víðar væri leitað, þó að síðar hafi heldur sigið á ógæfuhliðina vegna mikillar fartækjaumferðar og gasmengunar frá gufuorkuveri á Hellisheiði.  Þessi mengun stendur til bóta, því að rafknúnum bifreiðum mun fjölga og virkjunarfyrirtækin eru að ráða bót á mengunarvandanum. 

Ísland býr ekki yfir mjög miklum náttúrulegum orkulindum í samanburði við ýmsar þjóðir Evrópu, t.d. Norðmenn, sem geta framleitt ferfalt meiri raforku en Íslendingar, þegar allir virkjanakostir hafa verið nýttir, þar sem nýtingargildið er talið meira en verndargildið.  Hins vegar eru meiri sjálfbærar virkjanlegar orkulindir á hvern mann á Íslandi en í öðrum löndum Evrópu, og Ísland er eitt af auðugustu ríkjum heims, reiknað í nýtanlegri sjálfbærri orku á mann.

Orkunotkun Íslendinga skiptist þannig árið 2013:

• Jarðhiti:     170,7 PJ eða 68 % ;29 % af raforkuvinnslu 
• Vatnsorka:  46,3  PJ eða 18 %; 71 % af raforkuvinnslu
• Olía:           30,4  PJ eða 12 %
• Kol:              4,0  PJ eða   2 %

Ísland er eitt örfárra landa í heiminum, þar sem öll raforkuvinnslan á sér stað með sjálfbærum hætti, og okkur verður ekki skotaskuld úr að útrýma oíunotkun með rafmagni, þegar tæknin mun leyfa það, en fregnir berast nú af þróun álrafgeyma, sem henta munu fartækjum vel, því að hlutfallið kWh/kg er tiltölulega hátt og langdrægni á milli endurhleðslna mun vera um 1000 km. 

Sjálfbæru orkulindir Íslands, sem mest kveður að við raforkuvinnslu, fallvötn og jarðgufa, eru samkeppnihæfar við orkulindir annarra landa með því að nýta þær hér innanlands og flytja afurðirnar utan með skipum, en þær geta ekki keppt við gasorkuver og kjarnorkuver, ef orkan er flutt beint utan með sæstreng.

Fyrrverandi prófessor við Verkfræðideild Háskóla Íslands og síðar Orkumálastjóri, Jakob Björnsson, rafmagnsverkfræðingur, þreyttist ekki á að rita fræðandi greinar í Morgunblaðið um það, að bezta framlag Íslendinga til varnar upphitunar andrúmsloftsins vegna koltvíildislosunar eldsneytiskyntra raforkuvera væri að laða orkukræfan iðnað til landsins.  Þetta hefur tekizt sæmilega.

Víkur nú sögunni til Þýzkalands.  Jolanta Zalpyté frá Litháen hefur samið Meistaraprófsritgerð um "Breytingastjórnun á heimsvísu" eða "Global Change Management" við Eberswalde háskóla sjálfbærrar þróunar í Þýzkalandi, þar sem hún starfar sem sérfræðingur í endurnýjanlegri orku, hagvexti og þróun sjálfbærrar orku m.m..  Jolanta hefur komið auga á styrk Íslands á þessu sviði, og landið uppfyllir öll skilyrði þess að vera flokkað sem orkuparadís, sem með samstarfi við alþjóðleg fyrirtæki getur lagt sitt að mörkum til að draga úr eldsneytisbrennslu og mengun í heiminum.  Jolanta hefur veitt góðfúslegt leyfi til birtingar úrdráttar hér úr téðri ritgerð.  Fyrst fá lesendur smjörþefinn af ritgerðinni með örstuttri þýðingu á íslenzku:

"Þrátt fyrir gnótt endurnýjanlegrar orku verður stjórnmálalegur stöðugleiki að vera fyrir hendi í viðkomandi landi, svo að unnt sé að flokka það sem "orkuparadís".  Til að laða til sín fjárfestingar verða ríki að vera stjórnmálalega stöðug (það er ekki nauðsynlegt fyrir "mengunarparadísir").  Ísland, sem tekið er sem dæmi um land, sem uppfyllir skilyrði um "orkuparadís", sannaði, að stjórnmálalegur stöðugleiki er lykilatriði fyrir hagþróunina.  Árið 2008 varð Ísland fyrsta fórnarlamb hinnar alþjóðlegu fjármálakreppu.  Þrír meginbankar landsins féllu.  Ísland varð fyrst þróaðra ríkja til að sækja um aðstoð Alþjóða gjaldeyrissjóðsins á síðustu 30 árum (Jón Daníelsson, 2013).  Landið hjarnaði fljótlega við.  Réttar stjórnvaldsákvarðanir framkölluðu hagvöxt, og Ísland er nú víða þekkt og dáð fyrir að nota árangursrík meðul við að fást við fjárhagskeppuna."     

  Mynd af höfundi ritgerðarinnar er hér til hægri.  Ritgerðarúrdrátturinn kemur betur fram og með öllum myndum í fylgiskjalinu neðst. 

 

 

 

   

 

„ENERGY HAVENS“: TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC FUTUREA study based on the example of Iceland Jolanta ŽalpytÄ—Master Study Program Global Change ManagementFaculty of Forest and Environment, Eberswalde University for Sustainable Development There are many concerns on how to enhance environmental policies through participating in the international market with opened borders. For many years already a strong cooperation with countries with lower environmental regulations developed between the United States of America and some Western European countries. This development has brought forward a raise of standards in environmental policies across the world but a big gap still prevails in the regulations between developed and developing countries. Some environmental economists claim that trade flows across countries with different environmental regulations may create the “pollution haven” effect and a “race to the bottom” in environmental standards. The term “pollution havens” is used when pollution intensive manufacturing is relocated from developed to developing countries where environmental regulations are assumed to be less stringent (Nahman & Antrobus, 2005). Globalization and international cross-border cooperation also play a vital role for international tax regimes. Different fiscal policies in one country influence the economic situation in others, even countries located far away. Companies and individual persons use the possibility of increased capital mobility and choose locations where the tax burden is lower. These locations are called “tax havens”. Similar to “pollution havens”, “tax havens” can create a “race to the bottom” in the collective tax base. The similarity of this terminology raises the question what makes a country a haven. Since the globalised market is being challenged by an increasing demand for energy and the energy supply is becoming one of the main cost factors in the production process for many industries, the research analysed a new definition of the term “energy havens”. The term “energy havens” describes countries which have a big potential of renewable energy creation that can be provided to “power-hungry” consumers/energy-intensive enterprises. This is the aspect which differentiates them from the previously mentioned “pollution havens” because the use of traditional energy sources to offer industries a cheap energy supply would result in the “pollution haven” effect. The exploitation of renewable energy sources has to be feasible and ecologically desirable in order not to cause harm to nature and "pollute" the environment. The main target groups of this master thesis are energy-intensive industries and the academic audience whose interest is the future energy market condition. The research conducted focuses on electricity, with production cost as the main factor.Electricity produced from fossil fuels is not favorable due to the unsecure conditions for future energy markets (import from politically unstable regions) as well as certain risks and impacts on the environment (e.g. oil spills, health risks from fossil fuel burning). Mainly, the origin of resources is from undesirable regions (such as the desert in Saudi Arabia) where the energy infrastructure can provide many challenges. Also, exploitation areas are changing over time. This kind of energy source does not attract many investments because it cannot promise a secure and infinite energy supply for the future. Conversely, renewable energy can help to decouple the correlation between the increasing energy demand and the negative impact on climate and nature.The leading example of an “energy haven” generating electricity from renewable energy is Iceland. The country can provide more electricity than required by all of its residents, businesses and industries. There are already many foreign companies investing in Iceland and relocating their facilities there. As Figure 1 shows, a steep rise in energy intensity since 2005 is due to an increased amount of energy-intensive companies migrating to the country (Nordic Energy Research, 2013).

Figure 1. Energy intensity in major economies 1990-2011

Source: Nordic Energy Research (2013).Interviews with foreign companies in Iceland were chosen as a method of receiving first-hand information about the decisions on the location. Figure 2 presents the outcome of a qualitative analysis of the questionnaires. This shows why Iceland was chosen as a leading “energy haven”.

Figure 2. Industry perspectives on Iceland as a priority location

Note: the figure was prepared by the author based on data collected from the interviewed companies. Potential “energy havens”Table 1 shows the similarities and differences of two country groups considered “havens”. The criteria explain how “havens” distinguish themselves from other countries. The set of criterions is used as a primary tool to determine “energy havens”. The identified criteria in the right column illustrate the necessary conditions for a country to become an “energy haven”. Iceland was chosen as a country which best fulfills the listed criteria.

Criteria	“Pollution havens”	“Tax havens”	“Energy havens”
Pre-existing condition	International cooperation		International cooperation
Resources	No necessary physical resources		Abundance of renewable energy
Policy	Lower environmental standards	Lower tax rates	Lower energy costs
Conditions	Lack of data availability and publicity		Promotion of environmentally-friendly production possibilities
Incentive for companies	Lax or non-enforced environmental regulations	Lenient requirements for establishing new business entities	Long-term contracts for a stable and cheap energy supply
Requirements	Low political control of production facilities	Political stability and security of financial assets	Political stability, good infrastructure and business-friendly environment
Advantages for companies	More savings due to lower pollution abatement costs	More savings due to a lower tax burden	More savings due to lower energy costs
Results	Higher FDI inflows		Higher FDI inflows
Effect on other countries	Enforcement of lower environmental standards	Enforcement of lower tax rates	Enforcement of lower energy costs
Limits	International agreements		Energy exports

Table 1. Criteria for a country to become a “haven”

Note: the table is prepared by the author. The criteria set for “energy havens” is determined by the author based on the example of Iceland (partly from the empirical results of the questionnaire) using the analogies of “tax and pollution havens”. Positive aspects are indicated in green, negative aspects are indicated in red, and aspects which cannot be assigned according to the author were left uncoloured.Despite an abundance of renewable energy another important factor categorising a country as an “energy haven” is political stability. In order to attract investments countries have to be politically stable (not in the case of “pollution havens”). Iceland, taken as an example for satisfying the listed criteria for “energy havens”, proved that political stability is a key factor determining a country’s development. In 2008, Iceland was the first country to suffer casualties on account of the Global Financial Crisis. All three banks of the country collapsed. Iceland was the first developed country requesting assistance from the International Monetary Fund in the last 30 years (Danielsson, 2013). But the country quickly recovered. Correct policy decisions nurtured economic growth and Iceland is now widely discussed and renowned for applying successful techniques in dealing with the financial crisis.This research identified nine countries around the globe which can be considered “energy havens”, Iceland being the leading candidate (others being Norway, New Zealand, Canada, Sweden, Bhutan, French Guiana, Costa Rica and Latvia). The selection of countries was based on five different criteria: the share of renewable energy in their electricity generation, the Corruption Perceptions Index, the Political Risk Index, the Global Peace Index and the Human Development Index. These criterions and their individual estimated value demonstrated the potential for sustainable energy development in each country, as well as necessary improvements which need to be undertaken in order to become an “energy haven”. The study also found 3 “energy haven” jurisdictions: Facebook, Inc. in Luleå (Sweden), Ford Liard in Northwest Territories (Canada) and Google, Inc. in Hamina (Finland). Figure 3 marks the locations of “energy havens” and “energy haven” jurisdictions on a world map.

Figure 3. “Energy havens” and “energy haven” jurisdictions

 Policy incentives supporting the existence of “energy havens”One criterion listed in Table 1 implies that the potential existence of “energy havens” may incline other countries to reduce their energy (electricity) prices. Germany is a good example when looking for a proof of the existence of “energy havens”. Germany’s competitiveness is being threatened by increasing energy costs. This is a result of the so called “Energiewende”, a transition towards a low-carbon energy economy while giving out subsidies for renewable energy (Folkerts-Landau, 2013). It is correct that this transition can potentially guarantee a long-term competitive solution for Germany, but in the meantime the cost of electricity has noticeably risen. Due to an increase of electricity prices Germany’s popularity as a production location for industries could decrease in the future. To prevent this from happening, energy-intensive enterprises are exempt from the Renewable Energy Sources Act  levy and pay significantly less for electricity. This is one of the ways that Germany is trying to prevent its energy-intensive companies from moving to “energy havens”.A different approach than Germany with its nuclear power phase-out is taken by Finland, which has created a competitive electricity market for energy-intensive ventures allowing them to continue building nuclear power plants. Compared to the electricity gained from fossil fuels, the costs of nuclear power are predictable. It remains to be seen whether or not this promising strategy implemented in Finland yields any results for furthering sustainable economic growth since power prices remain relatively low and the level of emissions is comparably lower than when using other conventional energy sources (coal, oil, gas, etc.). Finland was not classified as an “energy haven” in this thesis since nuclear power is widely believed to be non-renewable. The disposal of atomic waste and its implications are still considered a great potential burden for future generations. It is difficult to estimate costs which can occur even thousands of years after its initial use. The latent security threat is another problem especially in times of global terrorism.  Key limitations of the studyThe term “haven” refers to a location which provides an attractive investment climate and gives incentive to locate your activities there. The possibility to export energy from an “energy haven” would partially eliminate the given definition. But this is currently a criterion which is not very feasible yet. A good example of a failure to export energy is the “Desertec” project. An interconnector marine cable for power transmission situated at the bottom of the ocean between Iceland, the United Kingdom (UK) and mainland Europe is planned. This is a long-term project because the production and installation of this cable and other related tasks must be very carefully planned out. If the project is approved it is expected to be completed by 2020 at the earliest (Landsvirkjun, 2013). This thesis promotes the idea that industries could move to “energy havens” if electricity were a main production cost factor for them. When electricity becomes a good that can easily be shipped anywhere, there will be no more “energy havens” like the ones described earlier but “energy production havens” would develop instead. References1.       Nahman, Anton; Antrobus, Geoff (2005): Trade and the environmental Kuznets curve: is Southern Africa a pollution haven? In South African Journal of Economics 73 (4), pp. 803–814. Available online at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1813-6982.2005.00055.x/pdf, checked on 2/18/2013.2.       Nordic Energy Research (2013): Increasingly energy efficient economies. Nordic Energy Research. Available online at http://www.nordicenergy.org/thenordicway/topic/energy-systems-2/, updated on 4/12/2013, checked on 5/22/2013.3.       Danielsson, Jon (2013): Iceland’s post-Crisis economy: A myth or a miracle? Available online at http://www.voxeu.org/article/iceland-s-post-crisis-economy-myth-or-miracle, checked on 8/11/2013.4.       Folkerts-Landau, David (2013): Energiewende 2.0 - don't risk competitiveness. Deutsche Bank. Available online at https://www.dbresearch.com/PROD/DBR_INTERNET_EN-PROD/PROD0000000000324468/Energiewende+2_0+-+don't+risk+competitiveness.PDF, updated on 11/26/2013, checked on 3/21/2014.5.       Landsvirkjun (2013): Submarine cable to Europe. Landsvirkjun. Available online at http://www.landsvirkjun.com/ResearchDevelopment/Research/SubmarineCabletoEurope/, checked on 5/13/2013. This publication is based on the master thesis written by Jolanta ŽalpytÄ—. Jolanta ŽalpytÄ— has a bachelor degree in Economics (Vytautas Magnus University, Lithuania) and recently completed her M. Sc. degree in Global Change Management (Eberswalde University for Sustainable Development, Germany). Born in Lithuania and currently based in Germany, she specialises in renewable energy, economic growth, sustainable energy development and others. 

 

Skrár tengdar þessari bloggfærslu:

• "Energy Havens": Towards Sustainable Economic Future

Athugasemdir

[Ágúst H Bjarnason, 26.10.2014 kl. 12:30]

Takk fyrir góðan og áhugaverðan pistil Bjarni.

[Bjarni Jónsson, 26.10.2014 kl. 13:40]

Sæll, Ágúst;

Mér finnst sjónarhorn þeirra í háskóla sjálfbærrar þróunar í Eberswalde vera áhugavert fyrir Íslendinga.  Það er líka alltaf fróðlegt að fá erlent sjónarhorn á þróun mála hér.  Kveður þá oft við annan tón en við erum vön hérlendis.  Jolanta bendir á, að Þjóðverjar hafa undanþegið orkukræfan iðnað sínum háum sköttum á raforkuna.  Þar segir hún áhrifa orkuparadísanna gæta, því að auðvitað leitar alþjóðlegur iðnaður þangað, sem starfsskilyrði hans eru hagstæðust.  Þetta þurfa þeir að hafa í huga, sem verðleggja raforkuna hérlendis.