Unit 12 - Essays - Norway and Ulla Forre Flashcards
(4 cards)
For one country’s overall electrical energy strategy, assess the extent to which environmental impacts have been overcome.
Paragraph 1 – Major environmental successes: near-zero emissions
98%+ of electricity is from renewables (mainly hydropower and wind).
Among the world’s lowest carbon emissions from electricity production.
Hydropower and electrification of transport reduce urban air pollution.
Paragraph 2 – Efficient use of natural resources
Hydropower makes use of glacial rivers and steep terrain.
Gravity-fed dams minimise operational emissions and energy losses.
Renewable energy supports green transport and low-carbon industry.
Paragraph 3 – Environmental challenges remain: climate vulnerability
Hydropower depends on precipitation/snowmelt → dry winters (e.g. 2022) reduce generation.
Overdependence on hydropower makes the system sensitive to droughts.
Paragraph 4 – Social-environmental tensions: wind power opposition
Onshore wind farms (e.g. Fosen project) face backlash from Sámi communities.
Legal rulings highlight human rights and environmental issues.
Paragraph 5 – Mixed impacts of electricity exports
Clean electricity exported to Europe (e.g. UK, Germany) via interconnectors.
Domestic resentment when exports cause local price spikes.
Risk of prioritising trade over national sustainability goals.
Conclusion – Judgement:
Norway has largely overcome environmental impacts, with one of the cleanest electricity systems globally, but some challenges persist due to climate sensitivity, wind farm opposition, and export tensions.
With reference to one country’s overall electrical energy strategy, assess the extent to which changes in the location of power production led to issues.
Paragraph 1 – North–South production–demand mismatch
Hydropower is mainly in the north/west; demand is in the south/east (Oslo, Stavanger).
Causes grid bottlenecks and price differences despite national energy surplus.
Paragraph 2 – Transmission challenges
Long-distance high-voltage lines are aging or insufficient.
Peak demand periods (e.g. winter) cause transmission strain and higher southern prices.
Paragraph 3 – Environmental and legal constraints in power-producing areas
Many new renewable sites are in protected or indigenous Sámi land.
Legal disputes (e.g. Fosen wind farm) delay projects and reduce capacity.
Paragraph 4 – Export infrastructure located near high-demand coastal areas
Southern Norway near export cables (e.g. North Sea Link) prioritises EU demand.
This increases price volatility and political pressure to restrict exports.
Paragraph 5 – Isolated and underdeveloped areas still lack grid access
Northern municipalities like Finnmark are not fully integrated into the national grid.
Some areas rely on diesel generators, contradicting the national green image.
Conclusion – Judgement:
Location of power production has clearly led to regional imbalances, price disparities, and socio-political conflict, despite Norway’s clean energy success.
Evaluate the success of one named located scheme to produce electricity
Paragraph 1 – Renewable, large-scale output
2,100 MW capacity; ~4.5 TWh/year = 3.5% of Norway’s electricity.
Zero direct CO₂ emissions—aligns with national climate targets.
Paragraph 2 – Innovative pumped storage capacity
Saurdal plant allows for peak-demand supply and off-peak storage.
Enhances national grid flexibility and supports wind/solar balancing.
Paragraph 3 – Cost-effective use of natural geography
Blåsjø reservoir and mountain tunnels allow efficient hydro energy generation.
Low operational costs and effective seasonal water storage.
Paragraph 4 – Ongoing challenges from infrastructure and climate
Built in 1980s–90s; aging equipment needs maintenance.
Output varies seasonally (dry winters or droughts reduce performance).
Paragraph 5 – Environmental regulations constrain flexibility
Protected ecosystems require minimum river flows and limit water release timing.
Some areas off-limits due to ecological sensitivity.
Conclusion – Judgement:
Ulla-Førre is a highly successful renewable project in terms of energy output, flexibility, and emissions, but its long-term success is threatened by aging infrastructure and climate variability.
With reference to one named located scheme to produce electricity, assess the extent to which the issues of its location affected its success.
Paragraph 1 – Remote mountainous location and transmission problems
Located in Rogaland/Vestland, far from southern demand centers.
Long-distance grid links lead to energy loss and higher prices in the south.
Paragraph 2 – Climate and water availability
Seasonal snowmelt in the mountains feeds Blåsjø reservoir.
Climate change affects snow/rain patterns → dry winters = reduced output.
Paragraph 3 – Environmental sensitivity and regulatory restrictions
Located in fragile alpine ecosystems.
Environmental laws restrict flow rates and further development.
Paragraph 4 – Location enables pumped storage innovation
High-altitude terrain supports gravity-fed pumped storage (Saurdal plant).
Optimises energy efficiency and grid stability.
Paragraph 5 – Difficult access impacts infrastructure maintenance
Harsh winters and remote terrain delay upgrades and limit technician access.
Repairs are harder during peak demand seasons.
Conclusion – Judgement:
Ulla-Førre’s location is both a strength and a weakness—ideal for hydro potential and storage, but challenges arise from remoteness, regulation, and seasonal water variability.
