The power that heats stoves in Norway and the power that heats stoves in Sweden come from the same grid.

Graphic presentation of power trade in the Nordic region

Norwegian power statistics are dull. We use almost exclusively hydropower, and generally consume all this power ourselves. However, statistics can sometimes make for interesting reading. Statistics concerning the production, consumption and trade in power between the Nordic countries reveal relatively large differences from one country to the next.  For example, Norway relies almost exclusively hydropower, while Sweden and Finland operate a more varied power production mix, calling on nuclear power, fossil fuels, hydropower and renewable energy.

The vulnerability of hydropower “Some people think it is a problem that Norway has largely based its power production on hydropower. The reason for this is that it makes us very vulnerable to the unpredictability of the weather in contrast to our national neighbours, who use a broader mix in their power production.   However, if the hydropower infrastructure in Norway had originally been constructed with sufficient reservoirs, with the capacity to hold sufficient volumes of water, the problem of vulnerability would never have arisen,” says Torodd Jensen, Head of the Resources Division of the Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE).

This division maps out the resources in the energy system and follows the development in energy consumption, preparing updated overviews of production, consumption and reservoir replenishment in the hydropower system.“We are linked by cables to neighbouring countries, and we are an integrated part of the thermal power system in Europe. 

This provides security for our power supply, even though our own power production is dependent on the weather,” explains Torodd Jensen. In his opinion, the best solution for Norway would have involved a hydroelectric infrastructure with greater storage capacity, combined with wind power production, to cover normal annual consumption – a solution that would have been particularly climate-friendly.“It is just as relevant and just as important to remember that hydropower is a clean energy resource, and one that we have every natural opportunity to exploit in Norway,” he states.

Oil, coal and gas-fired power – stable but polluting
Much can be said about the heavily polluting oil and coal-fired power solutions, but it cannot be denied that they are stable.

“Coal, oil and gas have to be drawn from a stockpile and transported to the thermal power plants. This means that they are weather-independent fuels of which the plants can build up stocks. Coal is actually the leading resource for power production worldwide and will continue to be so for many years to come,” predicts Torodd Jensen. Coal is dug from mines before being cleaned and divided up according to quality. It is then pulverised and burned in furnaces that convert the heat into energy, in a similar way as in a steam engine.“At the moment, coal, oil and gas-fired power plants generate a lot of pollution, but a huge amount of research is being done in this area to make the power plants more efficient. This will improve the utilisation of the raw fuel – and reduce the environmental impact of the power plants,” says Torodd Jensen. 

To the horror of environmentally aware Norwegian power consumers, Torodd Jensen explains that when Norway, at regular intervals, is willing to buy power from Denmark at prices our neighbour considers acceptable, the Danes fire up their old and severely polluting oil-powered plants and send the power northwards. The last time this happened was in 2003. 

Peat and bio-energy 
“Peat is used as fuel for thermal power plants in Finland and Sweden. It is burned in the same way as coal and pellets. The EU considers peat a non-renewable fuel as it takes centuries for new peat to form,” Torodd explains.

“Bio-energy also appears in the form of wood. In addition to electricity, bio-energy is thus the most common source of heat in Norwegian homes. In power production, bio-energy functions in the same way as coal,” says Torodd Jensen.

Sun, wind, waves and refuse
Sun, wind, waves and several types of refuse are all defined as sources of renewable energy. Another trait they share is that none of them yet makes a significant contribution to total energy production in the Nordic region. However, they all have the potential to do so.

“Sun generates heaps of power – just think of all the cabins in Norway that have solar panels. It is interesting to note that Norway is one of the largest manufacturers of solar cells in the world, even though they are not in widespread use here. The reason they are made here is that the production process is extremely power-intensive,” explains Torodd Jensen.Recently, it has also become more common to use solar energy to heat water that is to be used to heat something else.
Worldwide, there are many large power plants based on solar energy because many countries have good systems of financial support to get them started.

“Wave power is both weather-dependent and lagging far behind other sources of renewable energy in the field of development. It will take a while before this power source appears on a large scale,” predicts Torodd Jensen, who has a lot more faith in wind power.

“Norway has all the natural conditions to benefit greatly from wind power. The only real drawback is that some people think wind turbines are ugly. So it is exciting to watch the projects being carried out in Denmark and Great Britain in which wind farms are positioned offshore and out of sight,” he says.

Nuclear power cuts both ways
“Generally speaking, nuclear power is generated for use in the country that generates it. Power plants of this kind have to be run with great stability and maintain high uptime,” states Torodd Jensen, who shrugs his shoulders at the arguments for nuclear power on the basis that it is ‘CO2-neutral and does not produce greenhouse gas emissions’.

“Nuclear power produces extremely hazardous waste products. In fact, actually running a nuclear power plant is not without risks. The reason why Sweden and Finland base much of their energy production on bio-fuels and nuclear power is that these sources generate stable, predictable and inexpensive power. Moreover, these countries do not have the same natural conditions as us for focusing on hydropower,” he concludes.

Are we exporting or importing power? 
“Even though Norway exported a fair amount of power last year, it is more usual for us to import more than we export. In a normal year, we operate with a power deficit of 5–7 TWh – a deficit that is growing every year. But of course, Norway is adding new sources of power production – wind, hydropower and gas – at the same time as parts of our energy-intensive industry are being discontinued, so we may perhaps start to export power again,” says Torodd Jensen.What do you think will be the new big source of power in Norway?“

I think the new big source of power in Norway is energy efficiency. Energy-efficient homes and industries are the way to go. There is much to be gained in this area. Other factors will be additional hydropower, environment-friendly gas power and wind power from offshore sites. This will gradually bring Norway closer to our national neighbours as regards variation in the energy mix,” forecasts Torodd Jensen, Head of Division at NVE.