The Renewable Energy Directive, Norway and the EU | Norway must veto the EU’s renewables directive

The EU’s energy commissioner Kadri Simson threatens Norway with consequences if the Renewable Energy Directive is not introduced by August 2024. The EU makes direct threats against Norway.

But the requirement is completely in accordance with the directive’s requirements for rapid processing of wind power. While the current processing time is 6 to 7 years, it should reach down to 2 years, 3 years for offshore wind. Acceleration areas must also be designated where the processing time must be reduced to 1 year, 2 years for offshore wind. Here, impact assessments for nature are not required. If deadlines are not met, the application shall automatically be approved.

Norway has recently introduced that applications must be processed according to plans and the Building Act. A license cannot be granted without a municipal area plan. In this way, the municipalities have gained a real right of veto. But EU law takes precedence over national law. Municipal proceedings are not compatible with the directive’s deadlines. In this way, the planning and building laws are put out of force and the municipalities are left with no influence on the use of their nature.

When the EU’s renewable share going up to 42.5%, we do not know how much the EU will demand from Norway. No to the EU believes that all these changes require thorough impact assessments followed by a broad public debate. But we do not need an impact assessment to reject the directive’s change to the current licensing system for wind power. It is an attack on our democracy. The broad public debate and thus the possibility of stopping or changing the project is amputated. We get developments of which no one knows the consequences, neither for the population, nature, climate nor the rights of indigenous people.

No until the EU wants, with this as a starting point, work to bring together as many organizations and individuals as possible in the work to have the directive stopped. Here the right of veto must be used.