Green or black windpower? Nordic Folkecenter Frede Hvelplund Aalborg Universitet Institut for samfundsudvikling og planlægning

Transcription

1 Green or black windpower? Nordic Folkecenter 2010 Frede Hvelplund Aalborg Universitet Institut for samfundsudvikling og planlægning

2 I. Background

3 Historical experience 1. The Danish heat and electricity system was locally developed and owned by consumers and municipalities. And this ownership model has been a success story. 2. The recent (since 1975) development of wind power and other Renewable Energy sources has been bottom up generated. And this has been an innovation success story.

4 Present development Towards monopoly and lack of democracy Towards: BLACK WIND POWER 1. Offshore mainly owned by large power companies. 2. Very expensive wind power(dong/anholt) 3. Monopoly when bidding (DONG/Anholt) 4. Lack of democracy in planning processes. (the Østerild testcenter case). 5. This is against a long tradition on the Danish energy scene.

5 II. Why is local/regional ownership necessary?

6 Characteristics of present situation 1. Large wind turbines (1-4 MW) 2. A need for integration of wind turbines in the grid. 3. Not a free market. Only DONG was bidding at the Anholt offshore park. 4. A need for income in the areas with much wind (hinterland areas). 5. Wind turbines are visible, and there is a need for not only accept, but also participation.

7 1. Large wind turbines a. Large investments, often more than 20 mill. Dkr. b. Visible in large areas. c. Consequence (1) : Ownership should be linked to a larger area than the closest neighbours. (Municipal etc. ownership)

8 2. From scarce stored (fossil fuel/uranium) energy to abundant fluctuating renewable energy.

9 Balance elect. system and grid stability In-active components Active components 3500 Consumption Central power and cogeneration units Wind/RE Decentral producers

10 System 2 Activating RE via increased electricity consumption (for heat pumps and transportation) In-active components Active components Consumption Central power plants and cogeneration Electricity distribution companies, heat companies, consumers, etc Wind/RE Decentral producers

11 System 2 Activating RE via increased electricity consumption (for heat pumps and transportation) In-active components Active components Consumption Central power plants and cogeneration Electricity distribution companies, heat companies, consumers, etc. Decentral producers Heat pumps 4000 Renewable energy

12 System 2 Activating RE via increased electricity consumption (for heat pumps and transportation) In-active components Active components Consumption Central power plants and cogeneration Electricity distribution companies, heat companies, consumers, etc Decentral producers Heat pumps 4000 Renewable energy Wind El for transportation etc.

13 Consequence for infrastructure and ownership - Establishment of heat pump capacity. - Establishment of heat storage capacity. - On long term establishment of a transition to electric cars. - Etc. Consequence (2): Important to include the consumers actively in the regulation infrastructure. For instance by giving ownership priority to households and organisations that establish the above regulation infrastructure.

14 3. Oligopolistic competition on the power market. 1. Low motivation for investing in wind power in DONG, Vattenfall, etc. 2. Insufficient competion in the bidding process for offshore parks. (Only DONG at the 400 MW Anholt park.) 3. Expensive wind power resulting in political resistance. Consequence (3) : Establish Municipal etc. ownership, as competitor to the power companies on offshore plants.

15 4a. Earnings from wind parks (example) Wind turbine onshore, 2200 hours/ pay back time 13 years. Income Total Municipality tax 20% National tax 30% Increase in local buying power Via electricity sale øre/kwh Via land rental Income to local entrepeneurs: 10% of investment I alt 25 (10) 5- (10) (2) 7.5 (3) 12.5 (5) Red numbers in i parenthesis, if the wind turbines are owned by extern organisations (Dong,Vattenfall,E.ON etc.)

16 4b. Earnings from wind parks (example) Wind turbine onshore, 2200 hours/ pay back time 13 years. Source Total øre/per sold kwh Via electricity sale 15 Via land rental 5 Income to local entrepeneurs: 10% of investment. Total 5 25 (If locally owned) (10) (If owned by distant owners)

17 Consequence (4) : Wind turbines should be owned by local/ regional actors in order to generate regional incomes.

18 5. Proposal for ownership model

19 1. 50% ownership by local municipalities and/or local electricity distribution companies % ownership by local/regional households, farms and companies % ownership by large power companies. Alltogether at least 75% local/regional ownership.

20 III. Democracy or not? The Østerild testcenter case.

21 The wind turbine testcenter

22 The wind turbine testcenter

23

24

25

26 An undemocratic decision process 1. No decent description of testcenter needs 2. No decent comparison of alternatives 3. Lack of openness in decision process 4. No sufficient environmental assessment process Alltogether a very undemocratic process

27 IV. Conclusions

28 Black wind power 1. Distant owners. (DONG,Vattenfall,E.On, etc.) 2. Only minimal money flow goes to local actors. 3. Minimal local and regional influence in the planning process behind locating wind parks. 4. Closed process, when establishing test centers. 5. Minimal environmental concern. 6. Minimal local and regional integration of wind power. 7. Expensive wind power 8. Wind power will only supply a limited share of energy supply in the future.

29 Green wind power 1. Local and regional owners.(municipalities, el.companies, households,etc.) 2. At least 75% of the ownership income stays in the region. 3. Local and regional influence in the planning Process. 4. Open process, when establishing test centers. 5. Environmental concern has high priority. 6. Maximum local and regional integration of wind power. 7. Relatively cheap wind power. 8. Wind power will supply a high share of energy production.

30 Conclusion: Change from black to green windpower! 1. There is a strong tendency towards a centralised and undemocratic wind power development, here named BLACK WIND POWER. 2. There is an urgent need for a change towards local and regional participation, openness in planning processes and local/regional ownership. There is an urgent need for a process towards GREEN WIND POWER!

31 Thank you!