Photos by Ólafur Már Sigurðsson

Tourism, it need hardly be pointed out, is big business in Iceland, an industry which in the years following the crash has ballooned, with more than double the country’s population visiting last year. But while making it into the New York Times would normally be good news for Iceland’s economy, a recent entry about Iceland’s highlands on the publication’s “52 Places to Visit in 2014” list was less than ideal from a publicity standpoint.

The paragraph-long blurb did mention the area’s unique landscape, but its key takeaway was that the “famously raw natural beauty” of the highlands—and more specifically, the Þjórsárver wetlands located in the interior—may not be enjoyable by anyone, let alone tourists, for much longer. As reads the article’s subtitle: “Natural wonders are in danger. Go see them before it’s too late.”

The suggested threat facing the integrity of Þjórsárver? Not impending volcanic eruptions or natural deterioration. Rather, the article stated that the Icelandic government recently “announced plans to revoke those protections” which had been safeguarding the wetlands, and additionally, that “a law intending to further repeal conservation efforts has been put forward.”

The “52 Places” article was widely quoted within the Icelandic media. Within days of its publication, the Ministry for the Environment and Natural Resources issued a brief statement in Icelandic bearing the title “Incorrect Reporting by the New York Times.” It claimed that the New York Times article was “full of misrepresentations” and was “paradoxical and wrong.” The author of the article, contributing travel writer Danielle Pergament, was not contacted in regard to any “misrepresentations,” and neither was the New York Times—although the latter was invited to send a reporter to an open Environment and Communications Committee meeting on Þjórsárver a few days after the article’s publication.

So what exactly caused all the kerfuffle? Did The New York Times get it all wrong?

A Contentious History

Before we address the “incorrect reporting” alleged by the Ministry of the Environment, it will be useful to step back and explain a little of the context surrounding the Þjórsárver Wetlands and the battles which have been waged over this area since the 1960s.

Located in Iceland’s interior, the Þjórsárver wetlands stretch 120 square kilometres from the Hofsjökull glacier in the northern highlands to surrounding volcanic deserts and are characterized by remarkable biodiversity. A description on the World Wildlife Fund website points not only to the variance of the landscape itself—“tundra meadows intersected with numerous glacial and spring-fed streams, a large number of pools, ponds, lakes and marshes, and rare permafrost mounds”—but also to the area’s unique plant and birdlife, including one of the largest breeding colonies of Pink-footed Geese in the world.

Þjórsárver is fed by Iceland’s longest river, Þjórsá, which also sources much of the country’s electricity. Since the early 1960s, Landsvirkjun, the National Power Company of Iceland, has proposed several plans for creating a reservoir on Þjórsá that would facilitate increased energy production and enlarge energy reserves. Such reserves would not only be useful for existing industries, such as aluminium smelting, but—following the proposed creation of a submarine cable to Europe—could also be sold as part of foreign energy contracts as early as 2020.

Through the years, Landsvirkjun’s proposals have been met with frequent opposition, which in 1981 led to a nature preserve being created in the Þjórsárver wetlands. However, a provision was made within these protections, allowing Landsvirkjun to create a future reservoir, provided that the company could prove that the wetlands would not be irrevocably harmed, and that the Environment Agency of Iceland approved the reservoir plans.

By the late ‘90s, there was another flurry of activity: in 1997, the Iceland Nature Conservation Association (INCA) was founded with the “primary objective” of “establish[ing] a national park in the highlands.” Two years later, the government began work on an extensive “Master Plan for Hydro and Geothermal Energy Resources.” Divided into two phases that spanned from 1999 -2010, the Master Plan was intended to evaluate close to 60 hydro and geothermal development options, assessing them for environmental impact, employment and regional development possibilities, efficiency, and profitability.

Over the course of the Master Plan’s two phases, it was decided that the nature preserve established in the Þjórsárver Wetlands was to be expanded and designated as a “protected area.” The new boundaries were to be signed into regulation based on the Nature Conservation Act in June 2013 (the resolution was passed by parliament that year according to the Master Plan), until the Minister of the Environment, Sigurður Ingi Jóhannsson, elected to postpone making them official in order to consider a new reservoir proposal from Landsvirkjun.

Based on this new proposal, Sigurður Ingi has drawn up new boundaries for the protected area, which would expand the original nature reservoir, but cover less area than the original boundaries created by the Environment Agency of Iceland. The new suggested boundaries do not extend as far down the Þjórsá river, and therefore would allow Landsvirkjun to build their Norðlingalda Reservoir. Conservationists who oppose this point out that the three-tiered Dynkur waterfall will be destroyed if Landsvirkjun’s reservoir plans go through.

Parsing Facts

This brings us back the alleged “misrepresentations” in the New York Times write-up. Best to go through the Ministry of the Environment’s statement and address their qualms one by one:

“The article in question is full of misrepresentations about Þjórsárver preserve and the government’s intentions regarding its protection and utilisation. For instance, it states that Þjórsárver covers 40% of Iceland, while in fact, it only covers .5% of the country today.”

The first version of the article, since corrected, read as though the Þjórsárver wetlands constituted 40% of Iceland. In reality, it is the highlands that constitute 40% of Iceland’s landmass, and Þjórsárver is only part of this area. Following a call from Árni Finnsson, the chair of INCA who was quoted in the piece, this error was corrected.

“There are no plans to lift the protections currently in place. On the contrary, the Environment and Natural Resources Minister aims to expand the protected area and if that plan goes through, it’ll be an expansion of about 1,500 square kilometers, or about 1.5 % of the total area of Iceland.”

It is true that Minister of the Environment Sigurður Ingi Jóhannsson has not suggested that the current protections—namely, the preserve that was established in the ‘80s—be altered. Nevertheless, it is also misleading to suggest that he personally “aims to expand the protected area,” as the expansion plans were basically mandated by the findings of the Master Plan. Moreover, he elected not to approve the Environment Agency’s expanded boundaries, but rather to propose new boundaries which would create a smaller protected area than was intended.

So no, Sigurður Ingi is not cutting back on “current protections,” but that’s only because he refused to approve the protections that were supposed to be in place already.

“Therefore, it is clear that there will be a substantial expansion of the protected area under discussion. The New York Times asserting that protections on Þjórsárver will be lifted in order to enable hydroelectric power development is both paradoxical and wrong.”

What we’re seeing the Ministry of the Environment do here is a neat little bit of semantic parsing. The NYT article states that after spending decades protecting the wetlands, “the government announced plans to revoke protections, allowing for the construction of hydropower plants.” This is a carefully qualified statement, and might accurately refer to any of several ministerial initiatives, from Sigurður Ingi’s redrawing of the Þjórsárver protected area boundaries, to his recent proposal to repeal the law on nature conservation (60/2013). This law was approved by Alþingi and was set to go into effect on April 1, 2014. It included specific protections for natural phenomena, such as lava formations and wetlands. In November, Sigurður Ingi introduced a bill to repeal the nature conservation law, although this has yet to be voted on by parliament.

So, no, the New York Times article was not “paradoxical and wrong.” It was, unfortunately, quite correct.

A Land Beyond

Although debates over Þjórsárver and development proposals in the Icelandic highlands have been well covered and discussed in detail by the Icelandic media, conservation issues around this area have not, thus far, made many headlines internationally. So it is noteworthy that an outlet such as The New York Times chose to highlight these issues on a more prominent stage, especially given that Iceland’s breathtaking landscapes are often a driving force supporting its tourism industry. As Árni Finnsson wonders, “Who goes to Iceland to see power plants and power lines?”

While an over-saturation of tourists in fragile natural environments can pose its own, very real, threat to nature reserves and natural sites like Þjórsárver, tourism can still have a positive influence on conservation issues, such as, Árni recalls, when a greater interest in whale watching led to more effective challenges to Icelandic whaling. “It takes many millions to recover a loss of reputation,” says Árni Finnsson, speaking about Iceland’s image as a country whose nature is its biggest selling point. “It’s a huge resource, but it is so easy to destroy it.”

It was, in fact, specifically the threat of development that made this particular site stand out to Danielle Pergament. “I think people—over here [in the US] anyway—are well aware of the natural beauty in Iceland. But not many people know that the wetlands are under threat, that there is a chance that the famous landscape may be developed. I was shocked to learn about it myself. That is why I wanted to write about it.”

The question remains, however, if the attention drawn to Þjórsárver’s tenuous position will actually generate much new support. After all, in declining to publicly “correct” the New York Times, the Ministry effectively contained the debate to an Icelandic-speaking audience here in Iceland. And anyway, even if thousands of tourists become suddenly impassioned by the cause of the Icelandic wetlands, the area may remain inaccessible to many of them. “The Þjórsárver wetlands are like an El Dorado, a land beyond,” says Árni Finnsson. “They aren’t really suitable for tourism, or not for many tourists, at least. Maybe a few very keen, very well-trained hikers.”

At the end of the day, then, if the choice is made to protect Þjórsárver, it will have to be for less tangible reasons than the possible dollars generated by tourists, or international pressure. It has to come from within.

But first, let’s get the facts straight.

Originally published in Grapevine.is Feb. 10.

Read more:

Minister Of Environment Would Support Sacrificing Waterfalls For Reservoir

Proceeding With Caution (Svandís Svavarsdóttir, member of the Left Green Party, on the balance beween the nature’s value for the energy industry or tourism and its categorial value)

Peaceful Environmental Protest Following Arrest

Bjork will play a concert in protest at the Icelandic government’s proposed changes to conservation laws.

The Icelandic singer tops the bill at the event, which will take place on March 18 at the Harpa Concert Hall in Reykjavik, Iceland. Artists appearing include Lykke Li, Patti Smith, Mammút (pictured below), Highlands, Of Monsters And Men, Samaris and Retro Stefson.

The concert is organised in conjunction with the Iceland Nature Conservation Association (INCA), Landvernd, the Icelandic Environment Association and director Darren Aronofsky, whose film Noah was shot on location in Iceland in 2012 and will premiere at Sambíóin Egilshöll Cinema on the same afternoon.

Collectively operating under the name Stopp!, the group aims to encourage the Icelandic authorities to protect Iceland’s natural environment and impose controls on the damming of glacial rivers and harnessing of geothermal energy, in light of new legislation, reports RUV.

This project was introduced at a press conference at Harpa on the 3^rd of March 2014. Björk and Darren Aronofsky participated in the press conference.

The artists will donate their time and the net income will go to INCA and Landvernd.

The following statement lists the group’s demands:

Stop – Guard the Garden!

All over the world too much of priceless nature has been sacrificed for development, often falsely labeled as sustainable. Rain forests have been cut, waterfalls dammed, land eroded, lakes and oceans polluted, earth’s climate altered and the oceans are now rapidly getting more and more acidic.

In Iceland, the Karahnjukar Power Plant has become the symbol for the destruction which threatens human existence on this earth.

It is our duty to protect Icelandic nature and leave it to future generations, undamaged. The Icelandic highlands, Europe’s largest remaining wilderness – where nature is still largely untouched by man, is not just a refuge and treasure which we inherited and will inherit. The highlands belong to the world as a whole. Nowhere else can we find another Lake Myvatn, Thjorsarver Wetlands, Sprengisandur, Skaftafell or Lake Langisjor.

We demand that Thjorsarver Wetlands, the wilderness west of Thjorsa River and the waterfalls downstream will be protected for all future to come. We strongly protest plans by the Minister for the Environment and Resources to change the demarcation line for the extended nature reserve in the Thjorsarver Wetlands. By doing so, the minister creates a space for a new dam at the outskirts of the area. The way in which the minister interprets the law in order to justify that all nature and/or potential power plants are at stake in each and every new phase of the Master Plan for Conservation and Utilization of Nature Areas is an attack on Icelandic nature and not likely to stand in a court of law. [We have engaged a law firm and we are threatening lawsuit if the Minister goes ahead with his plan]

We now have a unique opportunity to turn the highlands into a national park by bill of law to be adopted by the parliament. Thereby the highlands as a whole will be subject to one administrative unit and clearly defined geographically. Thus all plans for power lines, road construction and/or other man made structures which will fragment valuable landscapes of the highlands will belong to history.

We strongly caution against any plans to construct a geothermal power plant at or near Lake Myvatn. The Bjarnarflag Power Plant is not worth the risk. Lake Myvatn is absolutely unique in this world. Hence, we have a great responsibility for its protection.

We demand that the nature of Reykjanes Peninsula will be protected by establishing a volcanic national park and that all power lines will be put underground.

We find it urgent that the government will secure funds for conservation by hiring land wardens and will protect valuable nature areas against the ever growing pressure of mass tourism.

In particular we protest against the attack on nature conservationists, where unprecedented (sic. S.I. editor) and brutal conduct by the police as well as charges pressed against those who want to protect the Galgahraun Lava, was cruel and unnecessary. We remind that the right of the public to protest nature damage everywhere, worldwide, is a basic premise for the success of securing future human existence on this earth.

We demand that the proposed bill of law repealing the new nature protection laws be withdrawn and that the new laws should take effect, as stipulated, on April 1.

By Julia Vol

Links:
http://grapevine.is/Home/ReadArticle/Minister-Of-Environment-Wont-Sign-O…
http://heartoficeland.org/
http://grapevine.is/Home/ReadArticle/Environmental-Minister-To-Change-Pr…
http://grapevine.is/Home/ReadArticle/Minister-Of-Environment-Would-Suppo…
http://thepalebluedot.me/2013/10/21/passion-for-lava/
http://grapevine.is/Home/ReadArticle/Ministers-Dad-And-Uncles-Profit-Fro…
http://visir.is/myndband-af-handtoku-omars-ragnarssonar/article/20131310…
http://grapevine.is/News/ReadArticle/Charges-Filed-Against-Galgahraun-Pr…
http://grapevine.is/Author/ReadArticle/27-Increase-In-Tourism-This-Year
http://grapevine.is/Author/ReadArticle/Travellers-Take-Their-Toll-On-Tou…
http://grapevine.is/Home/ReadArticle/Hotels-Motels-Holiday-Inns
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/01/10/travel/2014-places-to-go.html
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/jun/19/iceland-fin-whale-hun…
http://grapevine.is/Home/ReadArticle/City-Hall-Wants-Answers-On-Whale-Wa…
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jan/08/icelandic-whale-beer-…
http://grapevine.is/Features/ReadArticle/A-Look-In-The–Rearview-Mirror-

First published in Grapevine. Based on a 2010 article entitled “Í landi hinna klikkuðu karlmanna.” (“In the Land of the Mad Men”). Translated in part by Haukur S. Magnússon.

After the election, we see the old parties of economic mass destruction are coming back to power. Giving enormous promises of easy money to be wrestled from evil vulture funds, debt relief and tax reduction, The Progressive Party doubled in size after a few years of hardship. There is a jolly good feeling between the two young new leaders of a brave new Iceland, and when a radio host called them up and offered to play them a request, they asked for Duran Duran’s ‘Wild Boys.’ I Googled the lyrics, not quite remembering the lines, and got a nice chill down my back:

Wild boys fallen far from glory
Reckless and so hungered
On the razors edge you trail
Because there’s murder by the roadside
In a sore afraid new world

They tried to break us,
Looks like they’ll try again

Sounds quite grim. This, coupled with the new government’s announcement that it would be effectively dismantling the Ministry for the Environment and Natural Resources and that there will be no Minister for the Environment, gave me a strange flashback feeling. I decided to revisit the state of mind that we used to call normal in 2006. When the economic policy, the energy policy, the expansion of our towns, the mortgages on our homes—almost all aspects of our daily life had become totally mad. This is not my own diagnosis; if you search the homepage of the IMF for the phrase “Collective Madness,” you’ll find this:

“’Iceland, in the decade and a half leading up to the crisis, was an example of collective madness,’ said Willem Buiter, chief economist at Citigroup, a remark that elicited spontaneous applause from the more than 300 participants, many of them Icelandic policymakers, academics, and members of the public.”

In our daily lives, we usually sense what is normal and what is over the top. Sometimes the discourse will blind us; PR and propaganda can create a kind of newspeak. It can be a good exercise to try to talk about things in a foreign language, to view them in a new light. As an Icelander, you could for instance try to tell someone from another country that Iceland’s government sold one state bank and received payment in the form of a loan from another state bank—and vice versa. That the state banks were thereby handed to men that were closely connected to the then-reigning political parties. The manager of one of the parties became head of one of the banks’ board of directors, while the other party’s former Minister of Trade belonged to the group that was given the other bank. That man had access to every bit of inside information about the bank’s standing.

In the meantime, this former Minister of Trade became Central Bank Manager. He went to the US and made Alcoa an offer that the company could not refuse. He had thus set in motion the largest-scale construction project in Icelandic history, greatly increasing economic activity in Iceland—a grand boon for the bank he just finished selling to himself.

If you tell this story in a foreign language, people shake their heads. They gape in disbelief. They use words like “corruption” and “mafia.” They exclaim, full of disbelief and even disappointment, “no, not in Scandinavia!”

THE ACCEPTED INSANITY

It is insane to expand a banking system by tenfold in eight years. We know that now. It isn’t technically possible to grow all the knowledge and experience needed to build up and manage such a contraption in such a short time. Not even by shoving an entire generation through business school. It is impossible.

But the megalomania was not just confined to the banking sector. Energy production in Iceland was doubled from 2002–2007, when the huge Kárahnjúkar dam was built in the eastern part of the highlands—to serve one single Alcoa smelting plant. The energy it produces, about 650MW annually, is enough to power a city of one million people. Doubling the energy production in a developed country over a five-year period is not only unheard of, but it would also be considered ridiculous in all of our neighbouring nations. Most industrialised states increase their energy production by around 2–3% annually. Doubling it would be unthinkable. It has been proven again and again that gargantuan investments generally destroy more than they create.

In Iceland, however, the goal was to double the nation’s energy production AGAIN by building aluminium smelters in Helguvík, Húsavík and enlarging the Straumsvík smelter by more than threefold. The period of insanity was to be succeeded by a total and complete madness. This was to be funded by 4–5 billion dollar 100% loans to Icelandic energy companies from foreign banks. Nearly 20,000 dollars for every single Icelander—every loan directly connected to aluminium prices and secret energy prices. The media reported this as your everyday act of government job-creation. It was regarded extremist to ask critical questions. Many regarded it unthinkable for the survival of the nation NOT to do this.

Now we know that we did not only sacrifice our nature for the economy, we sacrificed nature and the economy. Again, we do not have to seek out the websites of activists or environmental groups for this information. We just go to the IMF reports:

“Executive Directors observed that the Icelandic economy is at a difficult turning point. The long economic expansion, initiated by aluminium sector investments, sustained by a boom in private consumption, and fuelled by ready access to external financing, contributed to a build-up of macroeconomic imbalances and financial vulnerabilities.”

COCAINE IN THE HOT WATER?

The madness made itself clear in the business of geothermal energy, making itself known in the form of financial troubles and enormous debt of the energy companies. The geothermal field had enjoyed an even and stable development since it got started in the early twentieth century. During the great depression, the City of Reykjavík created the world’s largest geothermal heating system by pumping hot ground water into the homes in the city. Later they started producing a small amount of electricity by harnessing steam through turbines. But one day it seemed as if someone drilled into a cocaine vein. Out of the twenty high temperature geothermal areas in Iceland, plans suddenly emerged to harness sixteen right away, all for the sake of the aluminium industry. The energy companies applied for permits to do research drilling in most of the remaining ones. In an instant, the field went from a very slow, conservative development to becoming a geothermal wild west.

In the south, a major development of all the geothermal areas from the Reykjanes Peninsula to Þingvellir was planned—a chain of power plants in pristine and delicate areas—to serve a Century Aluminium smelter in Helguvík. But the geothermal plants would not have sufficed—the remaining power would be squeezed from hydro electricity in the Þjórsá river—potentially threatening the greatest stock of North Atlantic Salmon in Iceland—and up in the highlands—threatening the Pink-footed Geese of Þjórsárver.

So what was referred to as “moderate development” when the parties of The Wild Boys were last in charge of our energy sector? Their plans went like this: A new Alcoa smelter in the east, a new Alcoa smelter in Húsavík, a new Rio Tinto Straumsvík smelter beside the old one, an expansion of the Century smelter in Hvalfjörður and a new Century smelter in Helguvík. Amounting to a total of 1.4 million tons of aluminium. Each one of them needing energy that could serve one million people in their daily lives. Each one of them demanding sacrifice of great natural wonders, wild rivers and pristine geothermal areas.

How did they fare? The Alcoa Smelter in the East has been built, with the destruction of two glacial rivers, Lagarfljót and 50 km2 of highland beauty. The expansion of the Rio Tinto smelter was stopped and the Húsavík smelter did not go through, however, a skeleton of the Helguvík smelter is currently rising—with no power in sight.

The Alcoa smelter in the north would have required all the harnessable power in the northern part of Iceland, only excluding Jökulsá á Fjöllum. Close to Mývatn, we have the Krafla geothermal area. After a long and often struggling forty-year development period, the available power from the area reached about 60 MW. Now, the goal was suddenly to quadruple the area’s energy production—expanding it by 150 MW in just a few years, and harnessing the beautiful Þeistareykir area to its utmost capacity—up to 200 MW. They also had their eyes set on Bjarnarflag and Gjástykki, delicate areas that should be regarded as national heritage sites. All this was to serve a new Alcoa factory they wanted to build close to Húsavík, the famous whale watching and fishing village in North Iceland. Having done all that, however, the energy production would still not reach the 600 MW that Alcoa really needed—the harnessing of two more glacial rivers would have been necessary: Skjálfandafljót with the waterfall Aldeyjarfoss and the glacial rivers running from Hofsjökull.

The interesting thing is not how crazy this seems in hindsight, how extreme, how mad this reality was — but that outsiders did not see this plan as collective madness. The scheme was praised in international media as being a progressive plan for “clean” energy, and we still have members of parliament that regret that this did not happen. And the fact that our labour unions and politicians have referred to this when they say that “nothing is happening” in terms of business and job creation in Iceland. Or that they refer to this when they say “we have still only harnessed X% of our energy.” They are talking about this as a normal feasible future state of Iceland.

Why are people so crazy? Is it or was it a good idea to indebt the nation by a total of 5 billion dollars to place two Alcoa smelting plants in the same constituency? To surround the Faxaflói bay, where 70% of Iceland’s population resides, with three smelters? The answer is simple: The mad men still think so. One of the new Independence Party MPs, Brynjar Níelsson, has no regrets for the death of the river Lagarfljót in service of Alcoa. He said it was apparent that protectionists loved a few fish more than they did people.

But you can still ask like a fool: Did Iceland really have enough accumulated knowledge and manpower to multiply all our energy companies in the space of ten years? Was there never a doubt in the geologist’s mind when he found himself in a magical place such as the Torfajökull area above Landmannalaugar, Kerlingarfjöll or the steam areas around Reykjavík? Did they really want to do drill, pipe and harness EVERYTHING, right away? And do it all for the sake of a single industry—the aluminium industry. Did it have to be the role of a marginalised group of a few activists to use their spare time to criticise this?

OF “REYKJAVÍK” KNOWLEDGE

I was once at a meeting in Húsavík, where I screened my film, ‘Dreamland.’ At that meeting, the local geothermal plant manager claimed he could easily harness 1,000 MW out of geothermal areas north of Mývatn. I asked if it wasn’t correct that scientists are concerned about overexploitation of the country’s geothermal areas. The scientists’ criticisms were quickly blown off the table as “Reykjavík knowledge,” and in that instant every alarm bell went off.

Now we understand that power is not as plenty as the hype promised, and now most Icelanders understand that energy production on the banks of Lake Mývatn in Bjarnarflag might just jeopardise the ecosystem in that wonderful lake. But you wonder if the people developing our most delicate areas possess good enough judgement to work close to natural wonders. It seems like they are ready to take the risk, to see what happens.

I found an interview with the aforementioned plant manager from 2002. At that time, he had drilled a big hole for 170 million ISK because a Russian company potentially wanted to build an aluminium oxide factory and a giant aluminium plant in Húsavík.

If one sets aside minor ethical facts, such as the Russian aluminium industry being run by the mafia at that time, one is still left to ponder the fact that almost no industry in the world produces as much and as toxic waste as aluminium oxide production (or alumina, as it is called). Those that followed the horrible events when a red slush toxic lake in Hungary broke should know what comes with an alumina refinery. But this local hard-working man had spent more than one and a half million dollars looking into the feasibility of such a plant in Húsavík. Things have been so good here that people think they are untouchable.

Even though the companies engage in malevolent practices in other countries, they would never do that here. Sure.

THE HOLY LOCAL

It seems that for some reason the most unbelievable hogwash gets promulgated without any critical thought. We enter a boom after boom and never learn from mistakes. We can look further back in history to see how madness is mixed up with ambition, how extreme and unrealistic views of the future are presented and taken seriously.

In an edition of Morgunblaðið from March 1987, one can read a prediction of the impending evolution of local fur farming until 1996. At that time, thirty fur farms were operated in Iceland. Morgunblaðið cites a report that predicts Iceland will foster 600 mink farms by 1996. They assume a twenty-fold growth in ten years, as if nothing were more natural. A month later, this optimistic story ran: “The mink stock will double this year.” Only three years later, in April of 1990, we find this dramatic headline in a copy of Morgunblaðið: “Fur farming: The industry is on its last legs. Many farmers on the edge of despair.”

In this country everything is considered normal if a “local” wants it. Nothing in Iceland is as crazy as the holy local is when he wants a smelter or an oil refinery, no matter how large or out of proportion. He has the sacred right to that, especially if he uses “job creation” as an argument. Numbers that would be considered sizeable in large nation’s economic statistics, energy resources and infrastructure that are earmarked by the world’s superpowers as being “strategically important” are subject to “the will of the locals.” The nation’s energy resources and nature are in the hands of a smattering of district councils that have no staff and no expertise while the majority of Icelanders that reside in the capital area seem by default “local” to nowhere.

So, the locals of the east destroyed their highlands, the locals of the south want to dam the wonders of the Skaftá area, the lower part of the Þjórsá river and the locals of the southwest are ready to harness almost every single geothermal area. And this seems to be a global problem—rural communities losing their youth and talents to the cities of the world are willing to sell off their forests, their mountains, their rivers and valleys for some hope of development and a future.

It is strange to see that one of the major driving forces behind this development resides within our labour leaders, who have been demanding extreme leverage and risk on behalf of public energy companies. If there should be a hesitation in the risk taking, the responsible parties are “dragging their feet.” The labour unions’ “stability agreement” with the former government entails that “every obstacle be removed” that somehow hinders the proposed Helguvík aluminium plant. It is exactly this kind of thinking that lead to almost 200 foreign workers being left disabled and unemployable as a result of working on building the Kárahnjúkar dam. Conditions of workers were severely compromised to make the dam construction process cheap enough. Every obstacle was removed to provide Alcoa with energy prices that save them 200 million USD annually. That amounts to the combined yearly wages of more than 10,000 teachers.

The noble cause of creating jobs becomes quite grim if it involves harming the work capacity of so many. The PR people talk about a ‘multiplication effect’ of every job in a smelter—but wouldn’t it be polite to subtract the disabled workers? People will go so far to satisfy their prince charming that they behave like the ugly stepsister in the fairy tale, cutting their toes off to fit the glass shoe.

HOUSE OF CARDS

The Helguvík aluminium smelter close to Keflavík Airport is a symbol of how poorly run Iceland can be; the Helguvík aluminium smelter is already being built, even though nobody knows where we can scramble together its required 600 MW of energy. The Helguvík smelter is a symbol of how weak the nation’s administration can be, of how shattered professionalism and long-term thinking can become, and how the media all but encourages unlawful activities in their headlines, if job creation is at stake. They started to build the smelter without access to power sources, and without the necessary power lines planned or agreed upon by landowners.

Why start building, then? Because in 2006, the Wild Boys were in power, showing their ambition and “competence” by signing long term sales agreements for cheap energy before the energy sites had been researched, planned or developed. Now Reykjavík Energy and HS Orka are bound by agreements that neither company wants to fulfil due to foreseeable losses from selling the energy below its production costs.

The sharks were very aware that they were taking advantage of a country with mad politicians in a rare period in our history. When they were willing to sell almost everything, anything, anywhere to anyone. In a remarkable investor report called: “Harnessing unlimited power and profit from the world’s most progressive energy program,” an analyst made this great comment:

“It works out great for Iceland, too. It is very cheap for Iceland to deliver power to Century. The Icelandic power companies will make extraordinary profits on that power if aluminium prices stay strong. And if aluminium prices weaken, Iceland is not biting the hand that feeds it.”

This is how politicians build an elaborate house of cards that combine risk, debt and commitment that collapses if only one of the cards falls. Thus, the hands of future city governments have been tied and an insane construction binge in important areas has been commenced, all to benefit one company that’s lacking most of the needed permits.

Could anyone recount the details of the Century Aluminium Helguvík Smelter project at an international conference without being booed off the stage as a fraud? At an aluminium conference, however, such a man would actually bring more lust than an exotic dancer.

Despite being in the hands of extreme capitalists, the labour movement has not called for professionalism or long-term thinking in energy affairs. It simply demands that “every obstacle be removed.” Get the trucks rolling immediately.

In 2006 we were in the middle of a revolution, but the Wild Boys did not call themselves “The Aluminium Revolutionary Front”—they defined themselves as the norm, even though their scale was insane. If they were criticised, they started thinking of themselves as persecuted. Warlords are always persecuted moderates when they’re merely conquering neighbouring nations in the name of peace.

THE CORE OF THE PROBLEM

Throughout the years, polls have shown that a large part of Icelandic males aged 40–70 have been in favour of the collective insanity seen in the energy policy of 2006. The biggest problem seems to be with male voters of The Independence Party, where a vast majority has even considered the most extreme energy policy as the sole basis for the continued survival of Icelanders. That explains the great emotional attachment they have to dams and smelters. To secure their survival, the majority of them wants to cut back on our environmental regulations, and they have no standards whatsoever on the ethical background of the corporations coming to Iceland.

Therein lies Iceland’s most serious political ill. If everything were normal, our males would be conservative, moderate, aversive to risk, frugal, orderly and even a bit boring. This is an important group of people in every society. It contains a lot of average household fathers; it contains pillars of society, company directors, influentials, MPs and even journalists and editors. These are men that have the power to define what is normal and what is abnormal and/or excessive.

OF RESPONSIBLE PUNKS AND SURREALISTS

It is harmful for communities when a critical mass of their important males starts adhering to revolutionary and completely reckless ideas, adopting a blind belief in them. This group is not fit for governing anything while the situation lasts, and it is therefore no coincidence that the city of Reykjavík is now governed by the punkers and surrealists of the Best Party. A moderate mixture of surrealism and punk rock is a down to Earth, conservative and responsible policy when compared to the delusions and anarchy of the crazed men. They have proved very moderate and responsible, and have now moved the policy of Reykjavík Energy, Reykjavík’s energy company, into a more sustainable and modest direction. And the Left Green Social Democrat government did the same with Landsvirkjun, the national energy company.

Those that are worst off in this group of mad men share a mutual admiration for Einar Benediktsson (1863-1945). The Icelandic National Myth is perhaps best embodied in the figure Einar Ben, our poet of progress. His most recent biography gives a good picture of the kind of man he was and the impulses that motivated his actions:

What drives Einar Benediktsson on to undertake this long journey […] is his unshakeable belief in his own abilities to be of use to his impoverished fatherland in countries abroad. His dream is to furnish the money that will transform Iceland into a modern country, with towns, factories, railways, roads, harbours and large-scale farms. He carries nothing with him except his belief in himself…

Einar Benediktsson had great dreams for the future of Iceland, replete with hydroelectric dams, factories and railways. While his generation on both sides of the Atlantic saw their dreams become a reality, and sometimes a nightmare, Einar was to be disappointed in all his great hopes and ambitions. Henry Ford was born a year before Einar Benediktsson, and Sam Eyde, the founder of Norway’s Norsk Hydro was born three years after him. But Iceland failed to industrialize in the way Einar envisaged. Whether Iceland was fortunate or unfortunate to have missed out on the Industrial Revolution is something we can argue over. But the failure of Einar’s dreams left an unfilled space in the Icelandic soul. Iceland’s wealth came from fishing, but Einar’s ideas still hovered in the air, leaving a sense of a task left unfulfilled—the unfinished Icelandic dream. The Americans could move on from Ford to Gates. The Icelanders were still lacking a Ford.

One of the first bubbles in Iceland happened when businesspeople travelled the country buying rights to harness waterfalls in the beginning of the 20th century. Einar Ben had the Norwegian engineer Sætersemoen draw up a row of power plants spanning the entirety of Þjórsá. The drawings of the proposed power plants look magnificent and enticing and would without doubt be considered among Iceland’s most beautiful buildings had they been constructed. But how realistic were the plans? They had planned for harnessing Þjórsá to produce 600–800 MW—in 1918, nota bene. This does not include the rest of the water rights these men had secured for themselves, including Dettifoss and Gullfoss. In comparison one could note that today, one hundred years later, the City of Reykjavík uses 200 MW—on Christmas Eve, with every electric appliance running at full steam.

What did Einar plan on doing with all this energy in 1918? Aluminium production was barely on the horizon as a feasible industry, and televisions and freezers were but distant dreams. What were they planning to do with all the power? Produce fertiliser? The Gufunes fertiliser plant used around 20 MW when it was running at its peak. Who was to use all the energy and pay for the series of power plants? The answer is likely simple: No one. No one in the world could have found use for this energy.

Of course Einar could easily have harnessed a small stream to light up a small village, maybe even a cowshed or two. But there is no glory in that. The act would not appease the deranged men’s need for conquest and magnitude. There’s much more spunk, gusto and vigour in lining all of Þjórsá with power plants, even if the energy produced is way beyond what the nation can use one hundred years later. To this day, a lot of people think that Iceland’s government at that time was backwards, afraid of foreigners and somehow prevented the founding of a great and profitable company and “foreign investment.” But it’s enough to look at the numbers to see that the whole thing was a sham.

It’s so weird to think that, ever since, a certain group of Icelandic males have harboured a strange sort of national grief. It’s as if Einar’s unrealistic ideas have been haunting later generations of Icelanders. Not as fantasy, but as real, attainable goals or lost opportunities: “The dreams of our turn of the century poets have finally come true.” Remarked former PM Geir Haarde as he signed a deal with Alcoa in 2002. Yes, finally, the nation was dragged into a century old illusion.

THE MAD MEN VS. THE WISE GIRLS

The mob seems tolerate nothing worse than young, educated women who that use words like “professional” or “process.” Even if aluminium production in Iceland has been tripled over the last ten years, a lot of the crazy guys think that Iceland’s economic problems stem first and foremost from a lack of aluminium smelters.

Supporters of a new Century Aluminium smelter in Helguvík spent millions in advertisements campaigning against departing Minister for the Environment Svandís Svavarsdóttir, who delayed the building process with demands of a sober overview of the energy demand and environmental impact. The blogosphere went wild when Left-Green MP Kolbrún Halldórsdóttir spoke up against deep-sea oil drilling in Icelandic waters. One sensed a lynch mob in the making as former-Minister for the Environment Þórunn Sveinbjarnardóttir met with locals in Húsavík advocating for a full environmental impact assessment for a new Alcoa smelter—the audience was only lacking the pitchforks. The decline of The Independence Party is very evident in the fact that Katrín Fjeldsted lost her seat in parliament. She is a well-educated, intelligent and logical doctor and the only party MP who questioned the insanity. Every obstacle shall be pushed out of the way.

Icelanders harvest 1% of the world’s fish. We receive more tourists per capita than most nations. Iceland has harnessed five times the amount of energy that the nation needs to function, and we currently operate three aluminium smelters. But we have ALREADY harnessed five times more energy than our neighbouring countries. We are already an energy superpower—if everything were normal, such an investment should yield a fair bit of profit to the nation, if we don’t blow the proceeds and resources in another round of debt. But the discourse is so crazy. People act as if “NOTHING IS PERMITTED” when the energy production is already five times more than the nation can consume. Of the energy we produce, 90% already goes to smelters.

We already have everything a modern society needs. We just need to tend to what we have already built, to reap some profit from the power plants we have already constructed and take better care of what we’re currently fishing. People get insecure when interest groups moan: “Who will support us in the future?!?” as if Iceland is a country without foundations. The fear that is purposely spread is resulting in Iceland acting like a man that demands radiotherapy, chemotherapy and surgery to fix his headache. The truth is that the treatment will never cure him—but it might kill him. He will in the best-case scenario grow addicted to the drugs.

THEY TRIED TO BREAK US…

We are a small community and we need peace and room to work. That Björk should need to take time off work to fight the insanity is just a small example of the disturbance that thousands of Icelanders suffer every day because of this crazy nonsense. Living here will become unbearable if something like the reckless policy from 2006 goes full speed again. It is maddening that we cannot seem to leave our most beautiful areas alone. We are a small community where co-dependency is the norm and people are polite.

The new leaders are young and nice guys; Sigmundur Davíð loves old buildings and has good ideas for city planning. But behind them is a crowd of mad men, “fallen far from glory, reckless and so hungered.” Were four years from power enough to sober up the mentality in terms of the energy policy? What will come out of the “rethinking” of the Energy Master Plan? Will we be strapped up into another rollercoaster, just to take another ride of boom and bust? “They tried to break us. Will they try again?”

Since the publication of the long-awaited Energy Master Plan’s second phase in July last year, a good part of the discussion regarding the plan has been centred around the Þjórsá river, especially as the two concerned ministers — Minister of Environment Svandís Svavarsdóttir and Minister of Industry Katrín Júlíusdóttir — presented their proposition for a parliamentary resolution for the Master Plan, wherein the three Þjórsá dams were included. Following a three months long public commentary process — including 225 commentaries by individuals, organizations and companies, of which more than 70 had specifically to do with Þjórsá — the above-mentioned ministers have been working on amending their proposal in order for it to go through parliamentary discussion before the end of parliament sessions this spring.

The Energy Master Plan, which is supposed to lay the foundation for a long-term settlement upon the future exploitation and protection of Iceland natural resources, is split into three categories, of which two are quite clear, titled “exploitation” and “protection”, but the third one, titled “in waiting”, has pretty much been the bone of contention. On the one hand those in favour of extreme energy extraction believe that too many exploitable areas are being kept in waiting, while on the other hand environmentalists think that many of the areas categorized as in waiting should rather be moved straight into the protection category.

As frequently highlighted by Saving Iceland, the Þjórsá conflict splits the government, manifested in the Left Green’s focus on nature conservation versus the social democratic People’s Alliance’s (Samfylkingin) focus on so-called job creation. According to the above-mentioned news an additional inside split has occurred within the latter party, wherein a part wants to follow the Left Green line while others would rather give the go ahead for the three dams in lower Þjórsá.

During a radio interview this morning, Össur Skarphéðinsson, Minister for Foreign Affairs and MP for the People’s Alliance, pointed out that according to laws regarding the Energy Master Plan, environmentalist organizations should be asked to comment on energy options, and more importantly, their comments should be taken into account when final decisions are made. Considering the high quantity of negative remarks about the Þjórsá dams, in addition to the fact that the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for one of the three dams, Urriðafoss dam, will expire next year, Skarphéðinsson claimed it sensible to move Þjórsá to the waiting category until further researches and a new EIA have been made.

However, by moving the project from exploitation to waiting, but not straight to protection, it is not unlikely that the final decision about the Þjórsá dams will be in the hands of a different government. Recent polls suggest that the current government will not stand after parliamentary elections next year and that the right wing conservative party, Sjálfstæðisflokkurinn (e. Independence Party), might end up as the biggest party. The Independence Party has repeatedly pushed for the damming of Þjórsá, most recently in December last year when 10 of the party’s MPs proposed a bill in parliament, suggesting an interim provision allowing the Minister of Industry, rather than Iceland’s Energy Authority, to grant the National Power Company (Landsvirkjun) permission to start building the three proposed dams.

Landsvirkjun has repeatedly stated that no contracts exist concerning the possible energy from lower Þjórsá and that the company will not enter any negotiations regarding Þjórsá until the Master Plan is ready, given that the river will be included in the exploitation category. However both environmentalists and heavy-industrialists believe that the Þjórsá dams are in fact crucial for the continued construction of Century Aluminum’s planned but currently on-hold aluminium smelter in Helguvík. Parliamentarians as well as local politicians in Reykjanesbær, the municipality of where Helguvík is located, have recently mentioned the delay of the Þjórsá dams as one of the main reasons for the standstill situation of the Helguvík project, whereas environmentalists have pointed out that at least the planned Urriðafoss dam is needed for the Helguvík smelter to operate.
_________________________________________

To read more in-depth and detailed articles regarding the Þjórsá conflict and the Energy Master Plan, follow the Þjórsá tag and the Energy Master Plan tag.

During a recent meeting of chairmen from all the member unions of the Icelandic Confederation of Labour (ASÍ), Hörður Arnarson, the director of the national energy company, Landsvirkjun, said that due to the current situation on international markets it would be enormously difficult for Norðurál to finance the 250 billion ISK smelter project. According to Vilhjálmur Birgisson, who attended the meeting, chairman of the Labor Union of Akranes (near to Grundartangi, where Century’s currently operating smelter is located),  Hörður spoke of the Helguvík project’s likelihood as very negligible. Another representative at the meeting, Kristján Gunnarsson, chairman of the Labour and Fishermen Union of Keflavík, stated that when asked about the possibility of Landsvirkjun selling energy to Norðurál, Hörður answered saying that no energy is really available for the project.

While it certainly is true that Landsvirkjun has, especially in the nearest past, had problems with financing, due to the international financial crisis as well as the Icelandic economy’s instability, the latter point – that no energy is actually available for Helguvík – is of more importance here. Environmentalists have, from the beginning of the Helguvík project, stated that the plans to harness energy for the smelter in geothermal areas on the Reykjanes peninsula, are not sufficient, for two reasons. Firstly, as the alleged size of the energy extraction is not sustainable and is more than likely to drain these unique natural areas for good. Secondly, because even if fully exploited, the geothermal areas would not produce enough energy for the smelter. Another energy source will be essential in order for the smelter to operate and even though Reykjavík Energy (OR) has promised Century some energy from a planned enlargement of their power plant in Hellisheiði, the aluminium producer still faces a serious lack of electricity for Helguvík.

It is here that Lower Þjórsá enters the picture. In November 2007 Landsvirkjun announced that the company would not supply any further energy to aluminium smelting in the South-West of Iceland, meaning Rio Tinto Alcan’s smelter Straumsvík, Century’s smelter in Grundartangi and the one planned in Helguvík. But many have doubted the truth behind this statement. In early June of 2008, when Saving Iceland activists gate-crashed Century Aluminum’s lack-of-permission-party in Helguvík, Saving Iceland highlighted the obvious lack of energy and asked if the planned damming of the river was meant for the smelter. Though Landsvirkjun has always denied those suggestions, several different signs have suggested the opposite.

Geologist Sigmundur Einarsson has  for the last couple of years repeatedly called attention to the inaccuracy concerning geothermal energy’s alleged sustainability and efficiency. In a new article about Reykjanes’ energy resources, Sigmundur once again points out the real energy figures and reveals that even if H.S. Orka is able to go ahead with its energy plans for Reykjanes – as mentioned above currently on hold due to an arbitration conflict between H.S. Orka and Century regarding energy prices – the Helguvík smelter will still lack between 310 and 390 MW. Sigmundur theorises that Century has from the beginning been aware of its slack energy situation, but used the cheap trick to simply start construction and thereby create expectations among the inhabitants of the Reykjanes peninsula. “Shallow-minded Icelandic politicians,” says Sigmundur, “were then supposed to bite the bait and sort out the energy by ordering Landsvirkjun to dam Lower Þjórsá (c.a. 200 MW) and sell it to Norðurál [Century] for a price accepted by the aluminium company.”

Not only does this theory full confirm Saving Iceland’s and other environmentalists’ repeated warnings not to let Century start construction of the Helguvík smelter, but now it also seems that at least a few high ranking officials have come to the same conclusion. Following Alcoa’s recent announcement about the company’s withdrawal from its years long planned Húsavík smelter, both Katrín Júlíusdóttir, minister of industry, and Hörður Arnarson, Landsvirkjun’s director, stated that Alcoa and other interested parties had created unrealistic expectations way ahead the establishing of the project’s key foundations. Thus it should not take them long to put two and two together, realizing that the same story applies to Helguvík – something that neither of them has been willing to seriously address until now.

To officially state the dead end of Century’s Helguvík dreams, Landsvirkjun would have to confirm that the planned Þjórsá dams are not meant for the smelter but for quite a while the company has been unwilling to openly discuss the Þjórsá project. The Þjórsá conflict actually splits the sitting government: While favored by the social-democrats of Samfylking, of which the minister of industry is a member, it is opposed by the Left Greens (VG). When asked about Þjórsá, Landsvirkjun now cites the Master Plan for the exploitation and protection of Iceland’s natural resources, currently in making, of which conclusions the company will wait for before any further comments. In a draft for a parliamentary solution regarding the Master Plan, the three planned Þjórsá dams are given a green light for construction. But this might change due to strong local opposition to the dams as well as the comments of a considerable number of people who protested against the project during a three months long open reviewing process, which was a part of the Master Plan’s making.

Albeit not necessary being the project’s one and only fundamental foundation, the protection of Lower Þjórsá would almost certainly mark the end of Century’s fantasies of a smelter in Helguvík. Until then the myth might live a bit longer.
_______________________________________________________

For more information about Century Aluminum, its operations in Iceland and the Helguvík crisis, see:

Century Aluminum Energy Questions

From Siberia to Iceland: Century Aluminum, Glencore and the Incestuous World of Mining

Believes Aluminium Plant Is Poisoning Sheep

National Energy Authority Fears Overexploitation of Geothermal Areas in Reykjanes

The Energy Master Plan is a framework programme, meant to result in a long term agreement upon the exploitation and protection of Iceland’s glacial rivers and geothermal areas. Its making, which since 1999 has been in the hands of special steering committiees, established by the two above-mentioned ministries, reached a critical status in July this year when its second phase was finished and presented to the ministers who in mid August presented their proposition for a parliamentary resolution. Before it will be discussed in parliament the proposition will be open to comments and criticism from the public, as well as interested parties, energy and aluminium companies on the one hand, environmentalists on the other.

Twenty-Seven Energy Options Put on Hold

The proposition lists natural areas into three categories; protection, exploitation and hold. The last-mentioned includes areas that, according to the steering groups and ministers, have not undergone enough research for a decision to be made upon weather to protect or exploit them. Included in this category are, among other, the glacial rivers in fjord Skagafjörður as well as other rivers such as Skjálfandafljót, Hvítá, Hólmsá and Farið by lake Hagavatn in the south-west highlands. Also geothermal areas such as Trölladyngja and Austurengjar in Krýsuvík and certain areas around mount Hengill where the heavily indebted Reykjavík Energy (OR) already operates Hellisheiðarvirkjun, a sulphur polluting geothermal power plant. The 27 areas of the waiting category will be revised in five years, given that satisfactory studies have been made at that time.

Þjórsárver Wetlands to be Saved

Delightfully, the protection category features the uppermost part of river Þjórsá where Landsvirkjun wants to construct Norðlingaölduveita, a dam that would destroy the Ramsar listed Þjórsárver wetlands. River Jökulsá á Fjöllum, which has been seen as an energy potential for a new Alcoa aluminium smelter in Bakki, is also listed protected. The same applies for certain parts of river Tungná, in which Landsvirkjun is already building the Búðarháls dam that will provide energy for increased production in Rio Tinto Alcan’s aluminium smelter in Straumsvík.

The protection category also features geothermal areas such as the ones around Brennisteinsfjöll mountains on the Reykjanes peninsula, as well as Gjástykki, close to volcano Krafla and lake Mývatn. The same goes for the Grændalur valley and Bitra, which are located close to the small town of Hveragerði and have been particularily desirable in the eyes of energy companies. Bitra was saved by a local campaign in 2008 whereas Grændalur was recently threatened when Iceland’s National Energy Authority allowed a company called RARIK to operate test drilling in the valley, in complete contravention of previous rulings by the Ministries of Industry and of Environment.

Krýsuvík, Þeistareykir and Þjórsá to be Destroyed

The exploitation list features geothermal areas Þeystareykir, Bjarnarflag and Krafla in the north of Iceland, as well as Hágöngur in the mid-highlands west to glacier Vatnajökull. Also certain parts of the area around mount Hengill and finally geothermal spots in Reykjanes, Krýsuvík and Svartsengi, all three on the Reykjanes peninsula. Rivers Hvalá, Blanda and Köldukvísl are then all categorised as exploitable. And most critically the Energy Master Plan proposition allows for Landsvirkjun’s construction of three dams in the lower part of river Þjórsá.

Environmentalists Threefold Response

The most common response from environmentalist so far has been threefold. Firstly there generally satisfied by the protection of areas such as the Gjástykki, Jökulsá á Fjöllum and Grændalur, let alone the Þjórsárver wetlands. Shortly after the publication’s release, Iceland Nature Conservation Association (INCA) stated that, if approved by parliament, the Master Plan will mark the end of environmentalists’ forty years long struggle to save Þjórsárver from destruction. Though listed by the international Ramsar Convention on Wetlands due to its unique ecosystem, the wetlands have been on Landsvirkjun’s drawing table as a potential for construct a large reservoir, meant to produce energy for a planned expansion of Rio Tinto Alcan’s aluminium smelter in Hafnarfjörður, which was later thrown off in a local referendum. The plan has always been met with fierce opposition, no matter of Landsvirkjun’s repeated attempts to get it through by proposing a smaller dam and reservoir.

Secondly environmentalists are critical of the fact how many invaluable areas, such river Skjálfandafljót, are kept on hold instead of simply been categorised protected. Thirdly there is a clear opposition to the planned exploitation of certain wonders of nature, one example being the geothermal areas on the Reykjanes peninsula. Ellert Grétarsson, a photographer who has documented these areas extensively (his photos are here aside), fears that the drilling in Krýsuvík – covering between five and eight thousand square meters of land – will simply kill the area. And as a matter, says Ellert, the whole Reykjanes peninsula will be riddled with energy construction. Hjörleifur Guttormsson, former Left Green MP and a genuine environmentalists, shares Ellert’s worries and has asked for an integral study of Reykjanes before any decisions are made.

Þjórsá, the Bone of Contention

As as mentioned before the biggest concern regards Þjórsá, which has for a long time been the bone of contention between the two clashing arrays fighting for or against nature conservation. The struggle over Þjórsá has been especially tough, actually to such an extent that the government can be reputed to stand or fall with that conflict in particular. Guðfríður Lilja Grétarsdóttir, MP for the Left Greens, demonstrated, during parliamentary debate last April, her full opposition to the construction of dams in Þjórsá. At that point, three Left Green MPs, who up until then had been increasingly critical of the government and its lack of left-leaning policies, had just recently departed from the party, leaving the government with only one person’s majority in parliament. And as most members of the social-democratic People’s Alliance (Samfylkingin), which makes up the government along with the Left Greens, have not shown a sign of objection to the damming of Þjórsá, it wouldn’t be surprising if the river will be up for a heavy debate in parliament.

In fact it is more than sure that Þjórsá will be among the main matters of argument in parliament. The right wing Independence Party, which was in in power from and is largely responsible for the neo-liberalisation and heavy-industrialisation of Iceland, has always been one of the driving motors behind Landsvirkjun’s plans to dam Þjórsá. When the Master Plan’s proposition was presented in August, Ragnheiður Elín Árnadóttir, a MP of the party, called for the immediate starting of construction in Þjórsá. She also said she grieved the long period of which the project has been stuck within bureaucracy, referring to the attempts of Svandís Svavarsdóttir, current Minister of Environment, to halt the construction of one of the three proposed dams by refusing to include the dam, Urriðafossvirkjun, in a land-use plans for the parishes of Flóahreppur and Skeiða- and Gnúpverjahreppur (rural districts along Þjórsá) made by them at the request of Landsvirkjun.

Three Dams: Threat to Society and Ecology

The conflict in parliament mirrors the actual conflict in the Þjórsá region where locals have for a long time fought over the river’s fate. There Landsvirkjun hasn’t only used bribes in its attempt to get its plans through local administration, but also threatened farmers whose lands are at stake will the dams be built, by stating that if the farmers do not negotiate with the Landsvirkjun, the company will attempt for a land expropriation. This conduct has created a complete split within the local community, clearly demonstrated in last March when young locals from the region published a statement, in which they demanded a permanent halt to all plans of damming Þjórsá – thereby an end to the social conflict associated.

As a matter of fact two members of the Master Plan’s steering committee recently stated, when interviewed on state radio station RÚV, that due to the serious lack of studies regarding the social impacts of the planned Þjórsá dams, those plans should without any doubt have been put on hold. This is exactly what Guðmundur Hörður Guðmundsson, chairman of environmentalist organization Landvernd, said in last July following the publication of the Energy Master Plan’s second phase report.

Þjórsá’s position in the Master Plan proposition, yet shouldn’t be of any surprise. In the second phase report the three planned dams are not considered to be a great threat to the ecology of Þjórsá and its surroundings – contrary to the opinion of environmentalists who have voiced their worries concerning the dams’ impacts, for instance on the river’s salmon stock. Orri Vigfússon, chairman of the North Atlantic Salmon Fund (NASF), recently stated that “never before in the history of Iceland has there occurred such an attack on a sensitive area of wild salmon.” As is considered that the salmon’s spawning and breeding grounds are mosty located above waterfall Urriðafoss, where one of the three dams is planned to be built, Orri believes that the stock of salmon and salmon trout are likely to vanish.

Energy Companies Unsatisfied as Expected

As one could have imagined, Icelandic energy companies and other adherents of large-scale power production for heavy industry, are everything else than happy about the Master Plan’s proposition. Following its release Eiríkur Hjálmarsson, Public Relation manager of Reykjavík Energy, opposed the protection of Bitra on the ground that the company has already harmed the area with three examination boreholes, roads and electricity lines – but most importantly, spent 785 million ISK on the project. As reported earlier this year by Anna Andersen, journalist at the Reykjavík Grapevine, the foolhardy business operations of Reykavík Energy during the last decade or so – including large-scale geothermal projects associated with heavy industry – have brought the publicly owned company a debt of 233 billion ISK (2 billion USD or 1.4 billion Euros). Despite this financial collapse the company still advocates for the continuation of the agenda that brought it down.

Other energy companies have responded similarly, mostly complaining about the amount of areas listed as protected or on hold. Landsvikjun’s director Hörður Árnason has said that compared to the second phase report, the parliament proposition suggest that way too many energy options are put on hold. Another company, Suðurorka, owned by Alterra Power (former Magma Energy) and Íslensk Orkuvirkjun, had planned to construct a dam, called Búlandsvirkjun, in river Skaftá – a plan that the proposition puts on hold. The company argues that few energy options have been studied as thoroughly and while the studies might have been done – and might be thorough – not everybody agrees with the company on the impacts. Farmers in the area have opposed the project as some of their most important grasslands will be drowned under the dam’s reservoir.

Energy company RARIK will, due to the Master Plan, loose its grip on geothermal areas in Grændalur valley, as well as rivers in Skagafjörður and Hólmsá river – projects that the company claims to have invested in with 300 million ISK. Using the same monetary argument, HS Orka, also owned by Alterra Power, has been vocal about its 700 million ISK investment into their proposed, but now delayed if not entirely halted, geothermal plants in Trölladyngja. Finally representatives from Reykjahlíð, a small town that holds the good part of Gjástykki’s property rights, have stated that if the area will be protected, billions of ISK will be demanded as compensation.

The Predominant Strategy

Those arguments do in fact manifest the predominant strategy of those involved in the heavy industrialization of Iceland. Instead of waiting for all necessary contracts to been signed, all needed permissions to be granted, and all required energy to be ensured, the energy and aluminium companies have simply started major construction immediately when only one or a few permissions have been granted. And when criticised, not to mention when forced to stop, they have stated that because these projects have been announced and vast amounts of money put into them, they should be allowed to continue. If needed, they have also pointed out that because the natural areas at stake have already been harmed (by themselves), there is “no point” in preserving them.

One example would be Helguvík, where a framework for a proposed Century Aluminum smelter has already been built but hardly any construction has taken place there for two year. With every day that passes it becomes clear that not only has the company failed to ensure the energy needed to operate the smelter, but also that the energy simply doesn’t exist.

Geologist Sigmundur Einarsson has, for the last years, pointed this out and stated that the amount of energy needed for the Helguvík smelter cannot be found and harnessed on Reykjanes, like stated by the parties involved. For instance he believes that no more than 120 MWe can be harnessed in Krýsuvík, contrary to the official numbers of 480 MWe, and has repeatedly demanded answers from the authorities about where from the rest of the energy is supposed to come. Just as Saving Iceland’s questions about the whereabouts of energy for Alcoa’s planned smelter in Bakki, Sigmundur’s questions have never been answered, but he claims the Energy Master Plan proofs his theory.

Yet Another Three Kárahnjúkar Dams!

Environmentalists have reacted to the energy companies’ complaints and asked how on earth the companies can still pretended to be unsatisfied. As pointed out by Landvernd, these company’s are about be granted permission to harness energy equivalent of three Kárahnjúkar dams. From 2004 to 2009, Iceland’s energy production duplicated, largely with the construction of Kárahnjúkar dam, and is currently 16,900 gigawatt-hours. If the Energy Master Plan will be accepted as proposed, the energy companies will be able to duplicate the production again in few years, says Guðmundur Hörður, chairman of Landvernd, and continues:

The increase of public electricity usage is about 50 gigawatt-hours per year. The expansion entailed in the proposition would thus sustain that particular public increase for the next 265 years! If this will be the conclusion, the energy companies can be very satisfied. Still they send their agents onto the media, in order to cry and complain. That doesn’t give a good hint for a settlement.

Other environmentalists, Ómar Ragnarsson for instance, have mentioned that the whole discourse surrounding the Energy Master Plan portrays a false image. While the plan regards Iceland’s each and every hydro and geothermal area, potential for exploitation, the areas that have already been harnessed are kept outside of the discourse. Ómar says that it is simply false to state that “only twenty-two areas” have been categorised exploitable, as twenty-eight large power plants have already been built in Iceland. That means that out of the ninety-seven considered in the Master Plan, fifty have already been or will be utilised. In addition to the twenty-seven areas put on hold, another thirty-two have yet not been categorised by the steering committees, which makes the current proportion of protected areas even lower.

Ómar has also pointed out mismatches within the proposition. One example regards geothermal area Gjástykki that is listed as protected, as it is “a part of Krafla’s volcanic system, which has a protection value on a worldwide scale,” like stated in the proposition. But according to Ómar this will depend entirely on definitions. As an energy option, Vítismór, which is a part of Krafla’s volcanic system and is an inseparable part of the Gjástykki-Leirhnjúkur area, is currently listed as an addition to the Krafla power plant and would thus, regardless of its position within the Master Plan, be available for exploitation.

Limnology (or freshwater science) professor Gísli Már Gíslason upholds Ómar’s argument and has stated that half of Iceland’s “profitable hydro power” has already been utilised. One of those rivers is Jökulsá á Dal, harmed by the infamous Kárahnjúkar dam, which in order to be built required disallowing the protection of Kringilsárrani, an extremely important grassland for reindeer. This is not a unique incident as, for instance, the three dams in river Láxá are also manifestations of hydro power plants built in protected areas.

The Coming Struggle

Notably by the above-listed contradictions, which though demonstrate only a small part of the debate about the Energy Master Plan so far, the coming struggle about the fate of Iceland’s nature is going to be harsh and heavy. Armed with the rhetoric of economic crisis, unemployment etc., those in favour of heavy industry – in other words a big part of parliament, the energy companies, the Associations of Industry and Employers, the country’s biggest trade unions, and most recently Samál, a joint association of aluminium producers in Iceland – use literally every opportunity to push for the further development of industry, especially aluminium. In order for that development to occur, the country’s glacial rivers and geothermal areas have to be exploited on a mass scale.

Environmentalists, on the other hand, need to sharpen their knives and both ask and answer a great amount of questions. What, if any, are the actual benefits of heavy industry and its parallel large-scale energy production? And what are its impacts on Iceland’s society and ecosystems? No less importantly, what are its global impacts such as on the atmosphere or bauxite communities in India, Guinea, Hungary and Jamaica? How has it affected the economy and what are its contributions to the current economic situation? What are the impacts of the building of big dams and geothermal power-plants, fuelled by extremely high loans, bringing a temporary pump into the economy that inevitably leads to the demand for another shot? And what is the value of nature per se?

Only by answering all of these and many more questions, one can honestly try to answer the one fundamental question regarding the Energy Master Plan: What actual need is there for yet another three Kárahnjúkar dams, or in fact just a single more power plant?

A plan to build three dams in the river Þjórsá could wipe out salmon in the river. National power company Landsvirkjun insist they have measures on the table to keep the salmon alive. Vísir reports that an environmental assessment has already confirmed that should the three proposed dams be built, the salmon that use the river will disappear.

Plans to dam Þjórsá have not been without their controversy, as the project has been heatedly debated for years now. In fact, the notion that damming up the river would wipe out salmon from the river was known as far back as 2002. While Landsvirkjun says they would construct what effectively amounts to a sperm bank for salmon to fertilise eggs, the Ministry for the Environment has looked at the plan and concluded that nothing in the plan indicates that it would even work.

The three dams have been green-lit, though, so the options now on the table are to either find some other way to save the river’s salmon while construction goes underway, or to pull the plug on construction, either temporarily or permanently. Neither option will be inexpensive for the parties involved.

Report by Dr. Ranghildur Sigurðardóttir on the effects of a dam at Urriðafoss in Þjórsá. (in Icelandic)

Landsvirkjun, Iceland’s national energy company, intended to channel river Skaftá to river Tungnaá river through Langisjór, which would effectively become a reservoir. The Skaftá dam (Skaftárveita) would have added another 7 km2 to the lake-reservoir with the purpose of increasing the energy capacity of planned dams in rivers Þjórsá and Tungnaá. The three planned dams in Þjórsá have been met with fierce local and national opposition whereas the construction of Búðarháls dam in Tungná is already taking place, its energy meant for increased aluminium production in Rio Tinto’s Alcan smelter in Straumsvík. Effectively, the damming of Langisjór would lead to a sediment build-up and increased turbidity which would destroy the lake ecosystem.

The enlargement of Vatnajökull national park involves two areas, which in total match 420 km2. On the one hand is the area of lake Langisjór, one of the biggest pristine lakes on Iceland’s highlands, and mountains Tungnárfjöll, which wilderness and unique formations are linked to volcanic activity on large-scale eruptive fissures. Amongst those are tuff ridges Grænifjallagarður and Fögrufjöll, which maturated during a Pleistocene volcanic eruption, as well as the north-east part of volcanic canyon Eldgjá, which in 934 spouted an enormous lava eruption. On the other hand is the uppermost part of the Skaftáreldar lava, south-east of volcanic fissure Lakagígar, which formatted during the well known 8 month long Laki and Grímsvötn eruption in 1783-4. Including the Skaftárledar lava in the national park is meant to protect the extremely uncommon biotope of the area.

According to geophysicist Helgi Björnsson, Langisjór and its surroundings make an unique area on a global scale as nowhere else is such enormous volcanic activity to be found under a Pleistocene glacier. The natural monument consisting of Lakagígar, Eldhraun and the tuff ridges lying from Grænfjallagarður and north-east on Langisjór’s both sides, has an unique educational and scientific value, and is considered likely to get on the UNESCO World Heritage List. The Eldgjá lava from 934 and the Skaftáreldar lava from 1783-4 are the biggest of their kinds during the last several millennia. Would Landsvirkjun’s ideas of changing Langisjór into a reservoir been realized it is considered that Langisjór would have filled with mud, all the way south to Útfall, in 80 years, and in about 150-250 years the whole lake would probably have been half-filled with mud. Roads would have been counstructed in the area, which along with dams, reservoirs, dikes and other structures, would have completely changed the area’s countenance for futurity.

As a part of the plan to heavy-industrialize Iceland, the right-wing government of Sjálfstæðiflokkur and Framsóknarflokkur (in power from 1995 to 2007, Framsóknarflokkur then replaced by social democrats Samfylkingin) excluded Langisjór and its surrounding area from the Vatnajökull national park in order to able the way for Landsvirkjun’s plans. Early in 2002 the management of the much debated Energy Master Plan of Iceland, published a temporary report on the valuation and comparison of possible hydro power projects, especially done for the government to compare different options with the infamous Kárahnjúkar dam, which then was in its beginning stages. The report – in which it stated that the environmental impacts of Kárahnjúkar dam would be the highest of all, which still did not cease its construction – displayed Skaftárveita not only as the most economically valuable project but also as one of the least environmentally destructive.

Such statements have systematically been objected by environmentalists, who now, by the officially declared protection of Langisjór, have seen one of their biggest victories realized.

A slide-show of photos from the area surrounding Langisjór can be viewed here.

Like explained on the project’s official website the process was “split into two phases. The first phase, 1999–2003, evaluated and ranked 20 large-scale hydro-power options, mostly located in the highlands, and the same number of geothermal options in 8 high-temperature areas.” The second phase was supposed to “rank all the options to produce the final result,” including “an evaluation of whether some areas should be conserved completely, without any energy-harnessing activities.” Proposed power projects were said to be “evaluated and categorised on the basis of efficiency, economic profitability, and how they will benefit the economy as a whole,” while the “the impact on the environment, nature, and wildlife” was also supposed to be evaluated, “as well as the impact on the landscape, cultural heritage and ancient monuments, grazing and other traditional land use, outdoor activities fishing, and hunting.”

TORFAJÖKULL AND KERLINGAFJÖLL PROTECTED – HELLISHEIÐI, REYKJANES AND KRAFLA AMONG “EXPLOIT-FRIENDLY” AREAS

The second phase’s report, as said before, was published in the beginning of July 2011, two years later than expected when the process started. On top of the protection list are two geothermal areas, around Torfajökull glacier and Kerlingafjöll mountains, which both have been viewed as preferable exploitation areas by the energy industry and its representatives in committees concerning the Master Plan. Other areas scoring high on the protection list are geothermal area Vonarskarð and rivers Skaftá and Hólmsá, south-west of Vatnajökull glacier, the latest-mentioned being a part of Landsvirkjun’s recently announced plan to build 14 new power-plants in the next 15 years. These areas are, according to the report’s authors, the highest ranking natural treasures that were taken into account in the making of the report.

On the other hand the geothermal areas on Hellisheiði by mountain Hengill, the Reykjanes peninsula and volcano Krafla, as well as river Tungnaá, are listed on the top of exploitation areas. Geothermal energy production has been going on Hellisheiði since 2006 (where Saving Iceland’s 2008 action camp was located ), resulting in highly increased sulphur pollution in the Reykavík capital area. There is a vast local opposition against the plant and the planned enlargement of it, its most recent manifestation being when residents of Hveragerði, living close by one of Reykjavík Energy’s boreholes, called the police to complain about constant noise coming from the borehole. Further construction is currently taking place in Hellisheiði as well as in Tungaá river where Landsvirkjun is building its Búðarháls dam that will produce energy for increased aluminium production in Rio Tinto Alcan’s smelter in Straumsvík, Hafnarfjörður. Already existing plans to increase geothermal energy production on the Reykjanes peninsula, for a planned Norðurál/Century Aluminum smelter in Helguvík, have resulted in worries of overexploitation – not only by environmentalists but also, and most recently, by Iceland’s National Energy Authority.

ÞJÓRSÁ RIVER NOT CONSIDERED NATURALLY VALUABLE

What mostly grabs one’s attention is the fact that Þjórsá river is llisted quite high on the report’s exploitation list, meaning that according to the authors, Landsvirkjun’s three planned dams in the river would not have any serious impacts on the environment surrounding the river. Thus the planned dams by Holt and Hvammur are number 15 and 16 on the list, while the damming of Urriðafoss waterfall – the most critical of all three – is located number 28, which is still above the list’s middle. This conclution completely contradicts environmentalists nation-wide and many local residents around the river, opposing all three dams. In an article e.g. published on Saving Iceland’s website, natural scientist and author Guðmundur Páll Ólafsson, criticised the rhetoric of those in favour of the dams:

When a glacial river is harnessed to generate electricity, this important function, and the binding of the greenhouse gas CO2, is diminished. What they generate is not green energy as the advocates of hydro-power plants and heavy industry maintain, but black energy. Dams and reservoirs hinder the function of glacial sediment in the oceans, and hence hydro-electric power plants that harness glacial rivers are far more harmful than has hitherto been believed.

The planned Þjórsá dams have also been highly criticised from a social perspective, most recently by a group of young locals who challenged Iceland’s government “to state officially that no dams will be built in the lower Þjórsá river, against the peoples wishes.” This happened shortly after a Supreme Court ruling stating that the decision of Environmental Minister Svandís Svavarsdóttir, to reject the construction of a dam in Urriðafoss waterfall in Þjórsá river, was illegal. The ruling was only a one small factor in the long and complicated farce concerning the Þjórsá issue – a farce including Landsvirkjun’s attempts to bribe local residents and the company’s threats of using expropriation in order to gain access to lands owned by people opposed to the dams. Following the publication of the Master Plan’s second phase report, Guðmundur Hörður Guðmundsson, chairman of environmentalist organization Landvernd, expressed the organization’s disagreement with Þjórsá’s position on the exploitation list, stating that a much better and more detailed research has to be done on the planned dams’ social impacts.

Interviewed by newspaper Fréttablaðið, natural scientist Guðmundur Páll Ólafsson voiced a very negative view towards the report, saying that the whole process of it marks the energy company’s coming retrieval. “My criticism is mostly based on the premises that the exploitation options are always at the forefront, but not to protect the Icelandic nature and Icelandic natural treasures from the outburst of the present,” Guðmundur said and added that the latter is much more important than to exploit certain areas. He also criticised the Minstry of Industry and the National Energy Authority for allowing Landsvirkjun to walk all over the second phase’s protective section.

THE COMING RETRIEVAL

Only a few days prior to the report’s publication Landsvirkjun announced the company’s future policy formulation, parallel to the publication of another report that was made for Landsvirkjun by a consulting service named GAMMA. The reports states that according to the results of the Energy Master Plan’s first phase, Landsvirkjun can duplicate its energy production in the next 15 years, promising between 9.000 and 11.000 thousand related jobs. If things go like planned, at least 3.000 people would be employed by energy-intensive heavy industry companies in 2025, while the so-called – and often doubted – derivative jobs would be a little more than 4.000, meaning that c.a. 4% of the Icelandic nation would work directly or implicitly for heavy industry. To make a good story better the director of Landsvirkjun, Hörður Arnarson, compared Landsvirkjun with the Norwegian oil industry, saying that if the company is allowed to follow its published strategy, only its dividend payment and tax payment could become 14% of the state treasury. Hence Landsvirkjun would be able to live up to the cost of Iceland’s police, courts, culture, sports, colleges and universities.

Aforementioned Guðmundur Hörður Guðmundsson, chairman of Landvernd, called Landsvirkjun’s strategy “the mapping of the next economical bubble,” pointing out that the financial amounts mentioned in the report are much higher than the amounts of the Kárahnjúkar dam project, which contributed fiercely to Iceland’s economic collapse in 2008. “How will the situation be here when all this construction will be finished?” he asked when interviewed by a left-leaning news-website Smugan, adding that Landsvirkjun is not the only energy company planning large-scale constructions. The editor of that same website, Þóra Kristín Ásgeirsdóttir, called the report “Landsvirkjun’s political manifesto” and asked when a time would come where expensive professionals would be hired to write a report about the immeasurable value of unspoiled nature instead of yet another report on the greatness of large-scale exploitation. In an open letter to Katrín Júlíusdóttir, Minister of Industry, Guðmundur Páll Ólafsson said that “in fact nothing has changed in the Minstry of Industry since the collapse […] except that the scurrility is more than before.”

ENVIRONMENTAL MINISTER PROMISES EMPTY-LOOKING CHANGES

As reported by Saving Iceland before, environmentalists are highly critical of the making of the Master Plan, especially in relation to a committee, nominated to sort the areas in question into three different categories: protection, hold and utilization. The committee did not include a single representative from environmentalist organizations whereas representatives from the energy and tourism industries, as well as the Ministries of Environment and Industry, had seats IN it. Minister of Environment and a Left Green MP, Svandís Svavarsdóttir, has now backed up the criticism, stating that there is, and has always been, an enormous advantage difference between environmentalists on the one hand and those in favour of extreme exploitation on the other. Interviewed by State TV station RÚV, Svandís said that within both the Ministries of Environment and Industry there is a will to strengthen environmentalists’ position, though no plans have been made how to actually execute that will.

Once again promises given about changes concerning the protection of Iceland’s nature seem to lack all real meaning.

One of the association’s primary criticisms is directed towards the fact that a particular committee, nominated to sort the areas in question into three different categories: protection, hold and utilization – did not include a single representative from environmentalist organizations. Whereas representatives from the energy and tourism industries, as well as the ministries of environment and industry, had seats on the committee. The viewpoint of nature conservation has thus no spokesperson in the working progress, states a press release from INCA.

On the website of the Framework Programme (translated as the ‘Icelandic Master Plan for Hydro and Geothermal Energy Resources’) it is stated that “Iceland has been blessed with extensive resources of renewable hydro and geothermal energy” , of which “only a portion […] has as yet been harnessed”. The further development of energy production in Iceland, according to the website, “will be a challenging task, as user interests, other than those concerned solely with energy, will have to be taken into account.” And it continues:

Policy decisions on land use can have a significant, profound, and prolonged impact on nature, regional development, tourism and outdoor activities, employment, and on society at large. Carefully thought-out decision making will minimise the risk of mistakes and shortsighted undertakings, and enhance co-operation among all partners affected by the decisions taken.

This process was initiated by the Government of Iceland in 1999, with the aim of developing a Master Plan for Hydro and Geothermal Energy Resources. The process has been formulated on a scientific and impartial basis – not dominated by narrow and biased interests – and is open to democratic public involvement and scrutiny.

By eliminating the environmentalist perspective from the above-mentioned committee, the framework programme is obviously not an example of “co-operation among all partners affected by the decisions taken.” Likewise, the manifested aim to “minimise the risk of mistakes and short sighted undertakings” is clearly not being practised.

The Icelandic Nature Conservation Association points out the fact that though the current government has now operated for two years it still remains a mystery what kind of a “settlement” the government wants to seek in harmony with the Framework Programme’s results. Like Saving Iceland has pointed out, Landsvirkjun (Iceland’s National Energy Company), adopting Orwellian Newspeak, plans to force a “national consensus” in favour of  the construction of 14 new power-plants in the next 15 years – mainly to meet the aluminium industry’s demands for increased energy for aluminium smelters in Iceland.

In their statement, INCA also highlights that the energy industry’s representatives in the aforementioned committee still push hard on preventing the enlargement of the RAMSAR listed Þjórsárver wetlands reserve, in order to be able to build the infamous Norðlingaölduveita hydro-utility. The same agents also work hard on getting access to the geothermal areas around the Torfajökull glacier and Kerlingarfjöll mountains, by fighting against these areas being categorized as protected. All of these areas were found highly valuable by a professional group consisting of biologists, botanists, geophysicists, aquatic ecologists, geochemists, archaeologists and geologists, to name a few of them, who were employed to evaluate the impacts of particular exploitation options on landscape, earth formation, vegetation, animal life and archaeological relics. According to these results INCA demands that these areas will immediately be categorized as protected, as well as other areas like river Jökulsá á Fjöllum, the glacial rivers in Skagafjörður and the areas around Skaftá and Tungnaá rivers and Langisjór lake, which were also found highly valuable by the group of professionals.

Since the work on the framework programme started more than a decade ago, energy production in Iceland has more than doubled. Despite the controversy of this development, manifested in an increased public opposition towards heavy industry and large-scale energy production, the plan is still to duplicate the current production – the plans of private and municipal owned energy companies not included.

Incidentally, in spite of promising to do so, the Icelandic government has still not ratified the Aarhus Convention Agreement which according to Kofi A. Annan, former Secretary-General of the United Nations:

… is by far the most impressive elaboration of principle 10 of the Rio Declaration, which stresses the need for citizen’s participation in environmental issues and for access to information on the environment held by public authorities. As such it is the most ambitious venture in the area of ‘ environmental democracy’ so far undertaken under the auspices of the United Nations.

It seems democracy does not come easy to Icelandic governments.

Map of the Intended Energy Master Plan for Iceland Phase 1 as publicised by the Ministry of Industry in 2003.

Both of the above photos are from the geothermal area around Kerlingarfjöll mountains, south west of Hofsjökull glacier.

Landsvirkjun’s new plan was presented at the company’s annual general meeting, which took place on April 15th. According to the company’s director, Hörður Árnason, the planned power plants are to be built in several rivers, including Þjórsá, Tungnaá and Hólmsá, as well as geothermal areas in the north of Iceland. The construction of Búðarháls Dam in Tungnaá has already started and Landsvirkjun plans to start energy production there in 2013, whereas all the other options are still being looked at in the making of a framework programme concerning the use and protection of Iceland natural resources.

These plans are presented as a way to increase Landsvirkjun’s profitability as the the company is heavily indebted after the Kárahnjúkar disaster, especially in comparison with other European energy companies. This means that even more loans are needed for the construction of the new power plants, which later will have to be paid up by the same method. In other words: A vicious circle.

Saving Iceland and other environmentalists have repeatedly warned against large-scale energy projects as a counterweight to the current economic crisis, e.g. in an article in Icelandic newspaper Morgunblaðið in October 2008 where Jaap Krater, ecological economist and one of Saving Iceland’s spokespersons said:

How did the [Alcoa] Fjardaal smelter contribute to Iceland’s economic crisis? The two billion dollars for the construction of the country’s largest dam [Kárahnjúkar] had to be borrowed by the state. That led to a more than significant increase in the current account deficit, which is now felt in increased inflation and depreciation of the currency. The economic cost now needs to be coughed up.

And he then continued:

Note that any schemes that demand new power plants associated with a significant amount of borrowed capital will have this effect, whether an expensive dam or power plant is meant for aluminium, a silicon refinery, data centre or some other purpose.

During a recent presentation of Landsvirkjun’s plans, held in the University of Iceland, the company’s representatives highlighted their interest in three possible energy purchasers; data centers, the European energy market (through a marine cable) and above all the aluminium industry. Like repeatedly reported by Saving Iceland all proposed aluminium projects in Iceland are on hold at the moment, because of either financial or energy-related uncertainties but due to massive mismatch in media coverage it is hard to get a clear picture of the situation.

At the same time as Landsvirkjun proudly presents its plans for a “new Kárahnjúkar dam”, the company, along with the minister of industry, states that the Icelandic nation has to settle up on a joint energy policy. There was never a joint reconciliation upon the Kárahnjúkar Dam, in fact it split the Icelandic nation in two conflicting arrays, which reveals Landsvirkjun’s democratic jargon as nothing but clear Orwellian Newspeak. It is known to both the company and Iceland’s authorities that Icelanders will never reach an agreement about such large-scale energy production, especially when it is aimed to be sold to aluminium companies.

Since the current government was formed – first as a minority government after the protests that lead to the government collapse in January 2009; then as a majority government following parliamentary elections in the spring same year – a certain leftist core of the Left Greens has repeatedly weakened its position, claiming that it lacks real left policies concerning the banks, the situation of Iceland’s homes and the International Monetary Fund to name a few examples. Two MP’s from this core recently decided to leave the party group due to these reason and last week the third one followed. A rumor says that these three are about to start a new political party, presumably more to the left.

Environmental issues also play a big role in the instability of the government, which is made of the Left Greens and Samfylkingin, a social-democratic party that was also in government with the conservatives from 2007 until its toppling in January 2009. Samfylkingin has played friendly with the aluminium industry and addressed what its members claim to be the need for at least one more aluminium smelter to “rebuild” Iceland’s economy. This one smelter has up until now been supposed to be built in Helguvík, on the country’s south west corner, but that project has been on hold for years due to energy dilemma (read about it here).

During the parliament discussion on Wednesday, the above-mention Left Green MP Grétarsdóttir, stated her full opposition towards Landsvirkjun’s plans to build three dams in lower Þjórsá river – a statement that clearly can be understood as a threat: The government stands and falls with the outcome of the Þjórsá conflict (read about the conflict and its connection with Helguvík here). Bjarni Benediktsson, the head of Sjálfstæðisflokkurinn, said that this clearly shows that not only is the government’s position very weak but is also based on one MP’s opinions on the dams. This must be a worry to all players of the economy, said Benediktsson.

Due to the fact that the Ministry of Environment has now certified the land-use plan of Flóahreppur and Skeiða- og Gnúpverjahreppur municipalities, allowing for the construction of three dams by Urriðafoss, Hvammur and Holt, the environmentalist organization Sól á Suðurlandi (Sun in the South) challenges the government to state officially that no dams will be built in the lower Þjórsá river, against the peoples wishes.

Sól á Suðurlandi wants the plans for dams in Þjórsá to be finally discounted, to end the split and uncertainty that have predominated our societies for many years. It is important to decide in a profound way that these constructions will not take place. Thereby a reconciliation would be made in our societies and both grassy farmsteads and wild nature spared.

It is worth pointing out that Landsvirkjun [national energy company] has still not attained contracts with all the landowners that will undergo disruption it the construction takes place. The lands of these people might be taken with expropriation, following with appropriate economical and emotional damage. Sól á Suðurlandi declares full solidarity and support with the landowners that still have not negotiated with Landsvirkjun. Furthermore, the organization understands the situation of landowners who have already negotiated, as many of them were met with hard conditions by Landsvirkjun. We condemn Landsvirkjun’s methods of work, as the company deliberately prevented solidarity amongst landowners by the use of collusion. Sól á Suðurlandi also declares its worries about the powers of developers in the making of land-use plans in such small municipalities, and asks for clear laws about how the costs will be paid in the future.

If dams will be built in lower Þjórsá our societies will undergo serious disruption during the time of construction. The economy of many of the locals will be left in confusion, either temporarily or for the future. The flowering development of agriculture and tourism will be endangered, not to mention that it is unclear if the construction will create any jobs at all. Beyond this disruption are the uncounted effects of dams in lower Þjórsá on the natural conditions and biosphere around the river.

Due to these social, economical and ecological factors, Sól á Suðurlandi asks the government to publish a conclusive statement where dams in lower Þjórsá are rejected.
____________________________________________________________________________

To read the most recent update on the situation around the Þjórsá dams, click here.

Together with speakers from Sól á Suðurlandi commedians Saga Garðarsdóttir and Ugla Egilsdotttir will perform and finally there will be live music from Mukkalo.

The event will take place on the upper floor of café Glætan,  19 Laugavegi, 17.00 hrs., Wednesday March 2.

In early 2010 Svavarsdóttir rejected land-use plans, made by the parishes of Flóahreppur and Skeiða- and Gnúpverjahreppur (rural districts along Þjórsá) at the request of Landsvirkjun, which had also paid for the preparations to the changes in the plans. A contract about Landsvirkjun’s financial involvement in the land-use plan was signed in July 2007, and included e.g. that the company would pay for the making of the plan. In addition, Landsvirkjun was to pay for road and water supply construction in the area, as well as improved mobile phone connections – all constructions that the state is already legally bound to take care of.

Landowners by Þjórsá relegated the contract to the Ministry of Transport, which ruled it illegal since only the municipality could pay for the making of the plan. In September 2009, the National Broadcaster, RÚV, reported that the municipality would most likely repay the 6.5 million Icelandic krónur that Landsvirkjun had already paid the council.

Legal uncertainty about Landsvirkjun’s financial involvement
The Minister’s decision to reject a part of the plan was made on the grounds that according to Icelandic law, such plan changes are to be paid for by the communities themselves, and any third-party involvement in the costs is illegal. The rejection was sued by the council of Flóahreppur and ruled illegal by the District Court. The Minister appealed to the Supreme Court, which on last Thursday, February 10th, confirmed the District Court’s decision, stating that Landvirkjun’s involvement was not illegal.

At the time the contract was made, nothing in the Icelandic law said that an outside party could not become financially involved in such a project. Nevertheless the law said that land-use plans should be paid by municipalities or particular planning funds. In the beginning of 2011 a law amendment went through parliament, making it clear who is allowed to pay for plan making and who not.

Financial Minister Steingrímur J. Sigfússon, who is also the chairman of the Left Green party, said in parliament yesterday (February 14th) that the Court’s ruling is not a condemnation of the administration of the Ministry of Environment. Those who read the judgement see that an uncertainty had arisen about the legality of an outside party paying for a part of the plan making; two ministries came to the conclusion that it is not legal but the court came to another decision, said Sigfússon.

Rejection of the dam only
According to a recent announcement from the Ministry of Environment, the rejection had only to do with a particular part of the land-use plan, i.e. the Urriðafoss dam. The Ministry also claims that it was ready to validate all other parts of the plan when ready without the dam. But instead the council decided to start a whole new process and make a new land-use plan from the scratch – work that is still not finished.

Director of the local council lied about construction delay
Shortly after Supreme Court’s decision, Margrét Sigurðardóttir, the director of Flóahreppur council, lied when interviewed by the state-owned radio RUV, stating that Svavarsdóttir’s decisions had stopped all detailed land-use plan from taking place. People living in the region have proven this wrong and pointed out that all kinds of construction has taken place during the last year, some of it on behalf of the local council, e.g. school buildings, residential houses and stables.

Leftist news website Smugan spoke to local people who said Svavarsdóttir’s decision did even not delay the construction of the dams themselves, since landowners by Þjórsá have still not signed any contracts about the use of their lands. Therefore no dams can be built, regardless of the minister’s decisions. In 2008, Friðrik Sophusson, director of Landsvirkjun at that time, said that if meetings with local farmers would not go as expected – meetings that the farmers just announced would never take place – expropriations might be used.

According to Smugan, members from both of today’s government parties have promised farmers by Þjórsá that no expropriations will take place, which fits well to Þórunn Sveinbjardóttir’s (then Minister of Environment) reaction to Sophusson’s statement in 2008. Today, Landsvirkjun though still claims that the company will continue its preparations for three dams in lower Þjórsá but wait for the results of a framework programme – currently in the making, about the use and protection of natural resources – before final decisions are made. Prime Minister Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir recently said that the current government opposes the planned damming of Þjórsá.

Sól á Suðurlandi, a local organization fighting against the Þjórsá Dams, has now officially demanded detailed answers from the district council, about what exact plans, others than Urriðafoss dam, have been delayed because of the Minister’s rejection. The organization also says that the delay of the planned dams can be explained by many other different factors, e.g. the fact that Landsvirkjun  generally lacks access to money, manifested in the fact that the company still has not found enough money to fund Búðarháls Dam in Tungná river (north-east of Þjórsá). Nevertheless the company has received all necessary permissions for that projects, which is obviously completely different then the situation with Þjórsá.

Accusations back and fourth
Since the Supreme Court ruling, accusations have been thrown back and fro between the two opposing parties; environmentalists on the one hand and heavy industry proponents on the other. MP’s from the opposition have demanded that Svavarsdóttir resigns from her position and the Confederation of Icelandic Employers (SA) – one of the most dedicated pro-heavy industry lobbyist organizations in Iceland – said the Minister’s aim was only to “please narrow political interest in the Left Green party.”

Members of the Left Greens have responded to this critique in defence of Svavarsdóttir, saying that a Minister of Environment should always allow nature the benefit of doubt and people should be happy to finally have an Environment Minister of that actually does so. Svavarsdóttir herself has said that she has no reason to resign from her position, a statement supported by Prime Minister Sigurðardóttir.

In a weekly discussion show on state TV station RÚV, Mörður Árnason, MP from Samfylkingin (the social-democratic People’s Alliance) accused Landsvirkjun of bribery and referred to the above-mentioned promises Landsvirkjun gave the municipality before the contracts were made in 2007. Árnason’s statement has been highly criticized by the heavy industry lobby and particularly by Landvirkjun, which in a press release refused the accusations and said that the company had only worked closely with the municipality like it always does. However, the press release does not mention the different parts of Landsvirkjun’s financial involvement, apart from the payment for the plan making itself.

What is all this energy for?
During the whole media frenzy following the Supreme Court’s decision, neither Landvirkjun nor Flóahreppur council nor the parliament opposition have been asked the simple question: Why are three dams to be built in lower Þjórsá; Urriðafoss (130 MW), Hvammur (82 MW) and Holt (53 MW)?

In November 2007, Landsvirkjun announced that the company would not sell any more energy to companies planning to build aluminium smelters in the south-west part of Iceland, but rather to data centres, silicon factories and other such production, which is low-impact compared to aluminium production. But due to older contractual obligations the power company is bound to provide energy to Rio Tinto-Alcan’s planned expansion of its aluminium smelter in Straumsvík, Hafnarfjörður. Also there is an existing contract about energy for Verne Holding’s planned data centre in Reykjanes. Landsvirkjun obviously needs more power plants.

However, the data centre needs only 25 MW, which is about 10% of the planned energy production in Þjórsá, and Rio Tinto-Alcan needs about 75 MW, which leaves Landvirkjun with 165 MW from the Þjórsá Dams, not to mention the energy that is supposed to be produced with Búðarháls Dam in Tungnaá River (80 MW), making the total sum 245 MW. So what is all this energy for?

Like repeatedly mentioned by Saving Iceland and other environmentalists, both Norðurál (Century Aluminum) and Alcoa are faced with a lack of energy: Norðurál for its smelter in Helguvík, currently in the making, and Alcoa for its planned smelter in Bakki. Environmentalists have pointed out that at least eight power-plants are needed for the Helguvík smelter and while the majority of them will be geothermal plants, environmentalists have made a guess that Urriðafoss Dam will be the last of the eight needed. Similarly, Alcoa states that the Bakki smelter will be run only on geothermal energy, whereas environmentalists – especially Saving Iceland – have made it clear that hydro dams will have to be built if the smelter is supposed to run at all.

This leads inevitably to a simple question: Are the Þjórsá Dams planned for more aluminium smelters?

Sigmundur Einarsson, a geologist at the Icelandic Institute of Natural History, has written some articles on this matter (in Icelandic). He has tried, amongst a number of other environmental scientists,  to warn the Icelandic government about a new kind of collapse, an energy collapse due to following far too optimistic speculation of irresponsible people.

Einarsson’s first article was named: Iceland’s great energy sources. After the Icelandic economic collapse in 2008 politicians have constantly claimed that the future strength of the country lies in its wealth of power stored within rivers and geothermal areas. Einarsson has pointed out that all available geothermal power in Iceland would not be enough to power two big aluminium smelters proposed at Helguvík in SW Iceland and at Bakki in NE Iceland.

The only answer to Einarsson’s first article appeared in Century Aluminum´s homepage saying that about 1500 MW of energy is available from SW Iceland’s geothermal fields and rivers and that the Helguvík smelter needed only 625 MW. The company´s numbers on energy include all already harnessed geothermal fields along with highly optimistic numbers on areas not yet investigated.

Einarsson who has long experience working on geothermal activity in Iceland answered with more arguments titled Century Aluminum´s dreams of energy . The following table from his article includes every geothermal field in SW Iceland.

The following table shows the amount of technically exploitable power (TEP), already utilized power (AUP) and non-utilized power (NUP) in the geothermal fields of SW-Iceland. The numbers for TEP are Einarsson’s estimates and the numbers in brackets come from a paper by S. Björnsson, a geophysicist at the Icelandic Energy Authority.

Geothermal field             TEP (MW_e)            AUP (MW_e)            NUP (MW_e)

Reykjanes 100 (200)             100             0

Eldvörp/Svartsengi 100 (120)             75             25

Krýsuvík (Trölladyngja,             100 (480)             0            100

Sandfell, Seltún,

Austurengjar)

Brennisteinsfjöll (40)             –             –

Hengill (Hellisheiði,             600 (600)             333            267

Hverahlíð, Bitra, Nesjavellir)

Total            900 (1440)             508             392

Reykjanes geothermal field A 100 MW_e power station is already running in the area. The power company HS Orka has requested permission from the authorities (Icelandic Energy Authority) to the enlarge the station to 200 MW_e. The permission has not been granted since the power company has not been able to proof further exploitation to be sustainable (showing that Einarsson’s estimate for TEP might even be too high). In 2006 HS Orka signed a contract with Century Aluminum about 150 MW_e of energy for the Helguvík smelter, partly from this source. This delay is already under jurisdiction in Sweden, home country of  Magma Sweden, the owners of HS Orka.

Eldvörp/Svartsengi geothermal field Preparation for extended exploitation of the geothermal field has not started. The pressure within the reservoir has recently become steady after 28 years of constant draw down so increased exploitation is not likely to be allowed in the near future. Energy for the Helguvík smelter can not be expected from this source.

Krýsuvík geothermal fields This geothermal area which consists of 4 subfields has never bee harnessed. HS Orka has license for research in the total area but has only made agreement for future production with the landowners of the two smaller Trölladyngja and Sandfell subfields. Two deep drill holes in Trölladyngja subfield have proved negative and research has not started in the other three subfields. Scientific views on power potential of the total area are controversial, partly due to lack of data. Energy from these fields seems unlikely.

Brennisteinsfjöll geothermal field is quite small and lies in the mountains south of Reykjavík. This area is not likely to be harnessed in the future.

Hengill geothermal field with the subfields Hellisheiði, Hverahlíð, Bitra, Nesjavellir lies SE of Reykjavík. The area has been harnessed by the power company OR, owned by the Reykjavík municipality. This power company almost vent bankrupt after Icelands financial  collapse. The companies financial plans do not assume any new power stations in the next five years. So energy for the Helguvík smelter from this source can hardly be expected until at least 8 years from now. OR has secured energy for one 90 MW_e power station, but further plans have not been confirmed.

The above mentioned potential origins of power for the aluminium smelter are specified in the EIA report and nothing else.  Einarsson has in his articles repeatedly pointed out that it will never be possible to feed the smelter with energy from these geothermal areas. No answers have ever come from the authorities, neither local or governmental.

The third power company, Landsvirkjun, has prepared three water power stations in the river Thjórsá (Þjórsá) in South Iceland, producing about 230 MW. Landsvirkjun has repeatedly argued that the electricity from these power stations will not go to aluminium smelters. Other power potentials are not in sight in southern Iceland.

See also:

Threatened Areas

Development of Iceland’s geothermal energy potential for aluminium production – a critical analysis

Of course the governmental opposition parties and their usual gang of industrial lobbyists are furious over the ruling, and critisice it heavily, displaying reactions the environmental minister described as being similar to allergic reactions. Amongst other things they accuse her of hindering those who are trying to build up work in the energy and industry sectors and blocking the creation of new jobs in a country they claim is ravaged by unemployment (approximately 8,6% at last count).

The ruling as such is according to national law, but the critic against it in mainstream medias has mostly revolved around the fact that third-party involvement in land-use planning is a “grown custom” in Iceland, and therefore the minister is supposedly in breach of the rule of equality the authorities are sworn to. This could well be true, but shouldn’t the focus rather be on the fact that bribery and bullying your will through with money is, according to the opposition, a “grown custom” in the country. Didn’t people demand that a new government should abolish corruption in all layers of the community. It’s absurd to see this kind of backlash when someone tries taking corruption by the horns in light of the events after the crash of the national economy. If this ruling isn’t followed through that just goes to show that rich companies and individuals can still bribe and bully their way to permissions to plunder and ruin the pristine wilderness of the island for a few more dimes in their own pockets.

Landsvirkjun started designing the lower Þjórsá River dams eleven years ago, and six years ago the project got approved by the Planning Institute and the minister of environment at the time. The company has spent 3,7 billion ISKR on the planning process as of yet and is in discussions with foreign companies about eventual usages of the energy from the dams. Hörður Arnarson, the new president of Landsvirkjun after Friðrik Sophuson’s retirement from the company, claims the ruling of the minister will delay their negotiations with foreign investors because of the uncertanity that the ruling causes the project, but he sounds quite positive that it will not stop the project from going through. With so much money already being pumped into it, there’s not much hope for Landsvirkjun to back down from it without getting their investment back, which will mean the total destruction of Þjórsárver.

One of the companies relying on the energy from lower Þjórsá River is Rio Tinto Alcan, but they want to enlarge their smelter in Straumsvík and increase capacity, demandin over 1000Gwh pr. year on top of the almost 3.000Gwh they’re currently buying.

At the same opportunity, Sigurðardóttir announced her hopes for that Landsvirkjun (Iceland’s national energy company) could start construction of Búðarhálsvirkjun hydro-dam in Tungná river, early next spring. The energy from there is supposed to run increased aluminium production in Rio Tinto-Alcan’s smelter in Hafnarfjörður. Sigurðardóttir said that employment affairs must be the biggest issue for social democtrats in the upcoming regional elections that will take place in the spring of 2010. She raised her voice for the necessity of increased development with the help of “eco-friendly” energy sources.

Few weeks ago, Svandís Svavarsdóttir, the minster of environment (from Vinstri Græn, the left green party) decided to rejecte the decision of Iceland’s National Planning Agency, which stated that Suðvesturlínur would not have to go through a joint environmental impact assessment (EIA) with other projects that concern the construction of the Helguvík smelter. She did not decide that the projects would have to go through a joint EIA, but sent the case back to the Planning Agency, which shortly later announced the same decision as before. It is uncertain what Svavarsdóttir will do now, since it is obvious that with her words, prime minister Sigurðardóttir is putting pressure on Svavarsdóttir not to change the Planning Agency’s decission. Svavarsdóttir said she is surprised by the words of the prime minister since the issue has not been discussed in government.

INCA (Iceland’s Nature Conservation Agency) is preparing to sue the Planning Agency’s deceision. INCA and environmentalists ask where the energy for the Helguvík smelter is going to come from. Even from the beginning of the discussion about a smelter a 360 ton smelter in Helguvík – which now is supposed to be built in four 90 ton parts, the first one to be ready in 2012 – environmentalists and other aware people have pointed out the uncertainity concerning energy for the smelter. Century Aluminum keeps to its words, stating that the smelter will be run on geothermal energy only, which means that the geothermal areas in the whole Reykjanes peninsula will dry up. The expansion of Hellisheiði power plant – followed with even more destruction of the geothermal areas there – is then supposed to supply what is needed.

This will though not be enough. The Helguvík smelter therefor relies on the building of hydro-dams, most likely in the lower Thjórsá river in the south of Iceland, where Landsvirkjun plans to build three large dams. But still, this is not enough either. Recently, Ólafur G. Flóvenz, the director of Iceland’s Energy Researches, said that it will not be possible to harness enough energy for the Helguvík smelter in the upcoming years, at least according to what energy projects are on the table at the moment.

Adding to this, Alcoa still plans to build a smelter in Bakki, in the north of Iceland, run on geothermal energy only. That propaganda is of course complete nonsence, since the energy capacity simply is not enough. So in addition to destroying the geothermal areas around lake Myvatn and volcano Krafla, hydro-dams have to be built in one of the glacial rivers of the north – Skjalfandafljot being the most likely target.

It is not hard to understand what this means. If the construction of the Helguvík smelter goes on as planned, including the energy production required, we will see the complete destruction of the wilderness of southwest Iceland. The execution of the energy master plan of Iceland’s government, which now consists of political parties that were not in government when the plan was designed – is being continued as this is written.

In the area of the lower Thjórsá river, there is a fierce opposition to Landsvirkjun’s plans, even though the company has tried what ever they can to convince people to let go of their resistance against the projects – even threatening land expropriation. The same story is to tell in Hafnarfjörður, where Rio Tinto-Alcan’s plans for enlarging the smelter were voted down in a local referendum in the spring of 2007. But the city authorities, with the majority of the social democrats, have completely ignored the decission and officially supported the enlargment. Now, smelter supporters have collected enough signatures to demand another refendum about the same issue, which is likely to take place parallel to the regional elections next spring. This is how it is going to be: referendum after a referendum until enough people have been convinced to vote for the enlargement. And then, the possibility of voting the plans down is out of the picture. This is what democracy looks like!

Although we are witnessing increased environmental awareness, due to the heavy critique and direct resistance against the energy master plan, which has taken place in the last years – Landsvirkjun, the aluminium companies and the government have a strong support team, consisting of different associations who have waged a war against Iceland’s wilderness in the name of development and the reconstruction of the Icelandic economy. The Associations of Industry and Economy have for the last six month constantly pushed on the government to remove all possible hindrances from “necessary” energy projects that according to them, will bring life into the economy again. In the name of stability, these associations, among many other parties, demand the complete harnessing of all possible energy sources in the country. Their aggressive campaign against Iceland’s wilderness has to be replied to in at least as aggressive manners.

Now the plan is to push through an aluminium smelter in Helguvík with all its appropriate energy construction. Svandís Svavarsdóttir, the minister of environment, recently said that there is not enough energy on the Reykjanes penisula to fulfill the smelter’s energy needs. Others have pointed out that harnessing the geothermal areas there will be such a massive attack that the areas will most likely dry up in a short time. Katrín Júlíusdóttir, the minister of industry, has stated her positive opinion about Landsvirkjun producing energy for Helguvík – and the Þjórsá river comes immadeatly up to one’s mind. She also seems to be willing to renew the memorandum of understanding between the government and Alcoa, which according to the latter’s plans means that the whole geothermal areas in north-east Iceland have to be harnessed and dams built in one or more glacial rivers.

Recent studies about the economical impacts of heavy industry and the beneftits of energy realization to aluminium smelters, give the ideas that all the propaganda about the benefits of the Kárahnjúkar Dam were built on nothing. In a report about the economical impacts of heavy industry, economist Indriði H. Þorláksson says: “The country’s primary benefits of the operations of heavy industry plants owned by foreign parties, are the taxes they pay. It is supposed that the tax payments of an avarage aluminium smelter is around 1,2 billion ISK per year. That is only about 0,1% of the national production.” And a new report made by four economists by the request of the minister of finance, says that the selling of energy to heavy industry is simply not economically beneficial.

Other results – e.g. if the energy selling actually was beneficial – would most likely not impact most environmentalist’s opinions. But these results actuate the pleading of those who have claimed that the government and corporations connected to the heavy industrialization of Iceland are simply lying to people about the economical benefits of the constructions. It really should not have surprised anybody; the title of the Minsitry of Industry’s sale brochure, Lowest Energy Prices, says everything that has to be said about the realization of energy to heavy industry here in Iceland.

Further aluminium smelter construction in Iceland is an experiment to maintain life in an unsustainable economic system, which is based on the idea of constant production. Production that insists that raw materials like bauxite – aluminium’s main material – is constantly mined, transported from one continent to another, processed in many energy consuming steps until in the end, it becomes a product, ready for consumption.

Many of the aluminium adherents in Iceland have restorted to the theory of demand and supply, as an argument for continued and increased aluminium production: while people still buy aluminium, it has to be produced. The theory fits completely to the consumer society we live in, but its premise is that the demand is real and natural, but not made up. The consumer society is built on made-up “needs”, which people are taught to ask for. Capitalism’s constant production and the paralell aggressiveness towards the earth, would not add up if it would not be for these false needs. Therefor, it is absoloutly inevitable that environmentalists’ idealolgy bases on opposition to capitalism’s over-production and over-consumption.

The critique on aluminium production here in Iceland has unforunately often been built on a very shallow ideology. Instead of looking at the aluminium industry as only one part of the extra-ordinary complicated web of global capitalism – and one of its bases – it has been seen as a single phenomenon, which has to be replaced by something else. Words like “green industry” have therefor become leading in the mainstream environmenatlist discussion. But there exists a different critical way of looking at heavy industry and ecological destruction in general.

A critique on heavy industry, based on deep ecological thought, does not need to include any ideas about what comes instead of aluminium if this “instead” means a different kind of industry or other destructive operations. Instead there simply is unspoiled nature, which is enormously necessary for the planet we live on – not from a beauty perspective, but because of the fact that the nature is the premise of life. Deep ecology bases on the idea that the man is not more superior than the ecosystem’s other forms of life, but is rather only a part of the ecosystem and has therefor no rights to deplete it, expect in a completely sustainable way. Sustainability is a difficult consept, which governments and corporations have managed to steal and put into their rhetoric, and therefor been able to sustain lies and hoaxes about the real meaning of it. The fundamental idea of sustainability is that we return to the natural world as much as we take from it.

Protecting the nature, for nature’s sake has thus nothing to do with the economical situation. Claiming that radical ecological ideologies only fit in when enough money exists is a complete absurdity. It is not like the last years of “prosperity” here in Iceland were marked by very ecologically friendly ideas.