Trash piled 9 yards high is converted to heat and electricity at a waste-to-energy incinerator in Oslo.
Amanda Froelich posted in TrueActivist this September 27, 2013
Posts Tagged ‘Norway’
What do you know of Norway? Ranked #1 on many indicators
Norway: a “Northern miracle” through the eyes of statistics
Note: Currently, Norway is #1 in collecting Olympic medals of all kinds in South Korea winter game
Is extracting crude oil and gas good or evil? Norway managed to avoid this “resource curse”
On the one hand, Norway doesn’t have anything special to constantly attract the world media:
· It is the most Northern European country: 1/3rd of the country’s territory is situated within the Polar circle
· The least populated European country (4.9M people).
· 2/3rds of the territory are covered with mountains and lakes. That is why most Norwegians travel by plane.
· In the 1950s Norway was considered the poorest European country
On the other hand, Norway is currently considered one of the most developed and successful countries of the world:
· It comes 2nd in terms of natural gas export (after Russia) and 6th in terms of oil export. It was the only country to retain the budget surplus in 2009 (9.9% of the GDP, mostly at the expense of its crude oil exports).
· The rate of saving is 25%-30%. In this aspect Norway has been sharing the 1st place with Japan and Finland since the end of WWII.
· It is the world’s 6th richest country in terms of GDP per capita ($59, 100). For comparison sake, the USA occupies the 10th place.
· For many years Norway has been called the world’s best country to live in (including the income level and the quality of education).
The Norwegians are not in a hurry to join the EU. They seem to be self-sufficient in welfare.
So it is not accidental that Norway is #1 in the rating of the most welfare countries (by Legatum, Oxford Analytica and Gallup World Poll Service).
There is a temptation to consider crude oil to be the main reason for Norway’s welfare. 10 years of high commodity prices and favorable economic situation… it seems to be not a “recourse curse” but a “resource blessing”.
Norway: a “northern heaven”
Of course, the global economic crisis affected Norway as well. However, as compared with many other countries, it came out of it relatively “unscratched”.
In 2009 the country’s economy declined 1.8% (for the 2nd time since WWII). The unemployment rate reached 3.5% (the record of the last couple of decades).
Many other developed countries cannot even dream about such results. The recession period was a brief one. Yet, the country’s economy seems to keep showing stable growth.
Norway remains one of the most successful countries in the world.
So it is interesting to know the reason for this Norwegian miracle as well as the factors that ensure the stability of its economy. These are some of them:
· Abundant natural recourses. Norway is quite rich in natural recourses – crude oil, natural gas, iron ore, copper, zinc, nickel, uranium, silver, gold, titanium, fish, timber, hydroelectricity (the country comes 1st in terms of the production of electricity per capita).
· Well-thought-out economic policy. The main peculiarity of the Norwegian economy is that it is mixed, i.e. it is the combination of the free market and governmental regulation including:
– Considerable public sector employing every third citizen.
– Strict bank regulation
– Control over the country’s key economic sectors: crude oil production, fishing and agriculture. For example the government owns 71% of the shares of Statoil, which is the largest national oil company, thanks to which they can control 60% of the entire Norwegian oil and gas markets.
– Well-developed industries, including shipbuilding, heavy engineering and others. But the way numerous waterfalls give Norway an opportunity to produce relatively cheap energy (99% of all the electricity is produced by hydroelectric power plants).
The gas and oil industry is still the basis of the Norwegian economy. However, Norway is one of the leaders in information technology (IT) and in terms of the production of pure energy (solar, wind and water energy).
Norway is among the most competitive economies of the world.
· Export-oriented economy. Taking into account the fact that Norway’s domestic market is tiny, its economy is oriented towards exporting products and resources (for example Norway consumes only 5% of the gas it produces).
Almost 90% of the produced paper and cellulose is exported as well.
Norway exports fish to almost 140 countries around the world. By the way 90% of the salmon imported by Russia comes from Norway.
Norway is the world’s leading exporter of ostriches. It is not accidental that the Norwegian merchant fleet is the 5th largest in the world.
· Norway’s small-scale and medium-scale businesses represent a considerable share of the country’s economy (99,6%). Over 70% of the working population is employed in the sector.
· Favorable business environment. Norway can boast Europe’s best business environment. For example anyone opening his/her own business in Norway can address the Norwegian Industrial and Regional Development Fund to get a free “development grant”.
As a businessman you don’t need to pay taxes until you gain your feet i.e. until your earn a certain amount of money.
It is easy to start a business. All you need is to send the necessary documents by mail and wait. By the way, it is very difficult to become bankrupt in Norway due to governmental support and affordable loans.
Norwegians spend least of all on licenses, registrations and customs formalities. The relations with tax service and other public institutions are absolutely transparent. The level of corruption is very low even though sometimes it seems that corruption and crude oil are inseparable.
· Taking into account Norway’s fundamental position (it is one of the world’s most solvent countries) and good perspectives as compared to most Euro countries, numerous experts say that Norway may become a new “safe heaven” for many of those who invest in Europe. At least the Norwegian T-bond yield is slightly higher than the German one.
· Tourism development. Even though the country is situated in the same latitude with Siberia and Alaska, Gulf Stream makes the Norwegian climate relatively mild. Moreover, according to the National Geographic Traveler, the Norwegian fjords currently present more interest for tourists than the Egyptian pyramids and the Great Wall of China:
Norway’s pristine environment, crystal lakes and rivers, blooming valleys and hundreds of ethnographic museums do make the country attractive for tourists from around the world (5-6M tourists a year). Norway is one of the best places for fishing and skiing.
Crude oil and natural gas.
Crude oil and natural gas industries provide 36% of the taxes and 51% of the export proceedings.
The oil wealth is distributed and used wisely. Here are the main distinctive features of the Norwegian energy policy:
In 1971 (or a couple of years after oil was found in the Norwegian part of the North Sea) the Norwegian parliament adopted a new energy policy based on the statement that the country’s natural resources (and crude oil in particular) should belong to the people.
They created a national oil-producing company. The Government Pension Fund of Norway was founded as well. This is the biggest pension fund in the world – $450B.
In reality it is not a pension fund but a fund created to separate sovereign wealth funds in order to ensure Norway’s high living standards when the oil reserves are exhausted (including the profit from oil exports… For example, Statoil gives 78% of its profit to the government).
It appears that the money gained from the Norwegian oil export is isolated from the country’s economy. The fund invests only in foreign securities from around the world (60% is invested in stocks, 40% is invested in bonds).
The country already owns 0.8% of the net amount of all the securities issued around the world.
Russia lent the idea of the Russian Stabilization Fund from Norway.
The Norwegian government spends almost no money for domestic needs (only 4-7% of the money is allocated for Norway’s budget spending). Of course not all the Norwegians like this “stinginess” because the country still has a lot of problems to solve.
The fund is under constant public control: oil companies are obliged to publish income, tax, bonus and investment reports, which are inspected by some international auditing firm.
Norway is mainly exporting oil products, which makes it possible to gain the max profit.
Before the crisis the investments in oil-and-gas sector were increased by 15%. This year the government is going to invest the record amount of $25B.
It appears that it would be ridiculous to regret being blessed with abundant reserves of natural resources. The thing is how effectively they are used and distributed.
Norway: a “social heaven”
Norway is referred to as a prosperous country. The average income is €4000, the average pension is €1500. Norway has managed to create almost a perfect social state with high social guarantees.
Thanks to the progressive tax scale, there are no poor people and almost no rich people. The government pays $5000 each time a child is born and then deposits a certain amount of money to his/her account every year.
The working day usually lasts from 8.00 till 15.00 (not more than 37hrs a week) as the Norwegians know that people need a good rest to work well. The unemployment benefit is paid for 2 years (2% of the previous income).
They also take care of their environment. The secondary and higher education is free. Students get scholarship. The medical service is also free. 9% of the budget is spent on healthcare.
If a Norwegian family spends €500 or more on medicine, the costs are compensated by the government. Norway is also a heaven for the old and retired.
In principle, this is a country of considerable social spending, so it should have been one of the first countries to fall prey to the global crisis. However, as we can see, it didn’t happen.
Skeptics say that Norway can afford spending big money on social benefits and guarantees (for example the population of Russian is 30 times as big as Norway’s one but the Russian oil deposits contain only twice as much crude oil as those located in Norway)
Norway spends only 1,9% of the national GDP on military outlays.
The peculiarities of the Norwegian mentality
The Norwegians are true patriots. They feel proud for their country, its nature and state system. They like to be useful to the society. That is why almost all of them are members of some clubs, parties and organizations.
The Norwegians are emotionally reserved, unhurried and sedate. That is why some foreigners say they can be boring. Most of them are honest and law-abiding. They are sporty and tolerant, self-respecting and self-sufficient.
The weak spots of the Norwegian economy.
In the light of all the above-mentioned the natural question arises: are there any problems in the Norwegian economy? In fact, there are some. Yet they are rather serious:
· Resource-based economy. Crude oil and natural gas extraction remains the basis of the country’s national economy. Norway is dependent on crude oil even more then Russia.
The peak of oil production was reached in 2000. The production volume has been declining ever since. This year the volume is expected to decline by 6%. The old oilfields of the North Sea are being gradually exhausted.
The gas and oil stocks are overvalued by 20%. The companies have to develop hard-to-reach gas and oil fields, which proves to be much costlier. Without oil export the country’s budget would be deficit-ridden. Some pessimists say that Norway’s oil deposits will be exhausted within a decade.
· Severe climate, short vegetation period, short and cold summer and low fertility of the soil restrain the development of agriculture. Only 3% of the land is suitable for cultivation. Despite the generous subsidies the farmers get from the government, 60% of the consumed food is exported.
· High taxes. Considerable budgetary spending and costly social security system cannot do without high taxes, which are nearly equal to 50% of the national GDP. The Norwegian taxation system is rather tough while the taxes are some of the highest in the world.
The average rate of the income tax is 28%. Most Norwegians spend over 1/3 of their monthly income on various taxes and duties. The taxes are progressive: those who earn over €4375 a month should pay an extra tax (9%), €7100 – 12%. The corporation tax is 28% (Gas and oil companies pay 50%). There are many other taxes and duties (gasoline tax, alcohol tax etc.). In return investors get high-quality service, modern infrastructure, transparency, stability and security.
· Lack of skilled personnel. Norway constantly lacks qualified labor power, especially managers. The thing is that skilled workers need high salaries. That is why many companies employ less skilled specialists to pay less.
· Catastrophic population ageing. The amount of the old and retired people in Norway is rapidly growing, which requires more social spending. The problem could be partially solved by attracting migrant laborers. But Norway’s emigration policy is very tough (one of the toughest in the world).
However, the number of emigrants grows every year. Over the last 10 years, 510.000 foreigners have received residence permits. The Norway authorities are afraid that the emigrants may exceed the critical amount.
So, does Norway really have chances to survive without crude oil? Yes, of course.
The country’s economy is quite diversified. Moreover, the Norwegian authorities know about their “Achilles’ heel” and are getting ready for the “post-hydrocarbon” period.
Note 1: Extracted from kazinkas, Forex Market reviews
Note 2: Recently, a deputy in the parliament applied for the Palestinian BDS movement against Israel for Nobel Peace Prize.
Advertisements
Running Out of Garbage? Want to ship some more to Norway?
OSLO, Capital of Norway, is a city that imports garbage. Some comes from England, Ireland and from neighboring Sweden. It even has designs on the American market.
JOHN TAGLIABUE posted this April 29, 2013 on nyt
A trash incinerator. Roughly half of Oslo and most of its schools are heated by burning garbage.
“I’d like to take some from the United States,” said Pal Mikkelsen, in his office at a huge plant on the edge of town that turns garbage into heat and electricity. “Sea transport is cheap.”
Oslo, a recycling-friendly place where roughly half the city and most of its schools are heated by burning garbage — household trash, industrial waste, even toxic and dangerous waste from hospitals and drug arrests — has a problem: it has literally run out of garbage to burn.
The problem is not unique to Oslo, a city of 1.4 million people.
Across Northern Europe, where the practice of burning garbage to generate heat and electricity has exploded in recent decades, demand for trash far outstrips supply.
“Northern Europe has a huge generating capacity,” said Mr. Mikkelsen, 50, a mechanical engineer who for the last year has been the managing director of Oslo’s waste-to-energy agency.
Yet the fastidious population of Northern Europe produces only about 150 million tons of waste a year, he said, far too little to supply incinerating plants that can handle more than 700 million tons. “And the Swedes continue to build” more plants, he said, a look of exasperation on his face, “as do Austria and Germany.”
Stockholm, to the east, has become such a competitor that it has even managed to persuade some Norwegian municipalities to deliver their waste there.
By ship and by truck, countless tons of garbage make their way from regions that have an excess to others that have the capacity to burn it and produce energy.
“There’s a European waste market — it’s a commodity,” said Hege Rooth Olbergsveen, the senior adviser to Oslo’s waste recovery program. “It’s a growing market.”
Most people approve of the idea. “Yes, absolutely,” said Terje Worren, 36, a software consultant, who admitted to heating his house with oil and his water with electricity. “It utilizes waste in a good away.”
The English like it, too, though they are not big players in the garbage-for-energy industry. The Yorkshire-based company that handles garbage collection for cities like Leeds, in the north of England, now ships as much as 1,000 tons a month of garbage — or, since the bad stuff has been sorted out, “refuse-derived fuel” — to countries in Northern Europe, including Norway, according to Donna Cox, a Leeds city spokeswoman.
A British tax on landfill makes it cheaper to send it to places like Oslo. “It helps us in reducing the escalating costs of the landfill tax,” Ms. Cox wrote in an e-mail.
For some, it might seem bizarre that Oslo would resort to importing garbage to produce energy.
Norway ranks among the world’s 10 largest exporters of oil and gas, and has abundant coal reserves and a network of more than 1,100 hydroelectric plants in its water-rich mountains. Yet Mr. Mikkelsen said garbage burning was “a game of renewable energy, to reduce the use of fossil fuels.”
Of course, other areas of Europe are producing abundant amounts of garbage, including southern Italy, where cities like Naples paid towns in Germany and the Netherlands to accept garbage, helping to defuse a Neapolitan garbage crisis.
Yet though Oslo considered the Italian garbage, it preferred to stick with what it said was the cleaner and safer English waste. “It’s a sensitive question,” Mr. Mikkelsen said.
Garbage may be, well, garbage in some parts of the world, but in Oslo it is very high-tech.
Households separate their garbage, putting food waste in green plastic bags, plastics in blue bags and glass elsewhere. The bags are handed out free at groceries and other stores.
The larger of Mr. Mikkelsen’s two waste-to-energy plants uses computerized sensors to separate the color-coded garbage bags that race across conveyor belts and into incinerators.
The building’s curved exterior, with lighting that is visible from a long distance to motorists driving by, competes architecturally with Oslo’s striking new opera house.
Still, not everybody is comfortable with this garbage addiction. “From an environmental point of view, it’s a huge problem,” said Lars Haltbrekken, the chairman of Norway’s oldest environmental group, an affiliate of the Friends of the Earth. “There is pressure to produce more and more waste, as long as there is this overcapacity.”
In a hierarchy of environmental goals, Mr. Haltbrekken said, producing less garbage should take first place, while generating energy from garbage should be at the bottom. “The problem is that our lowest priority conflicts with our highest one,” he said.
“So now we import waste from Leeds and other places, and we also had discussions with Naples,” he added. “We said, ‘O.K., so we’re helping the Neapolitans,’ but that’s not a long-term strategy.”
Maybe not, city planners say, but for now it is a necessity. “Recycling and energy recovery have to go hand in hand,” said Ms. Rooth Olbergsveen, of the city’s waste recovery agency. Recycling has made strides, she said, and the separation of organic garbage, like food waste, has begun enabling Oslo to produce biogas, which is now powering some buses in downtown Oslo.
Mr. Haltbrekken acknowledged that he does not benefit from garbage-generated energy. His home near the center of town, built about 1890, is heated by burning wood pellets, and his water is heated electrically. In general, he said, Friends of the Earth supports the city’s environmental goals.
Yet he added, “In the short-term, it’s better to burn the garbage in Oslo than to leave it in Leeds or Bristol.”
But “in the long term,” he said, “no.”
A version of this article appeared in print on April 30, 2013, on page A9 of the New York edition with the headline: A City That Turns Garbage Into Energy Copes With a Shortage.
Sweden Out of Garbage
Imagine a world where pollution is a non-issue, cities are pristine, healthy environments to live in, and little to no entanglements from discarded trash injures wildlife or clogs the oceans.
In Sweden, this is almost a reality, yet it’s causing a paradoxical predicament for the recycle-happy country that relies on waste to heat and provide electricity to hundreds of thousands of homes.
The Scandinavian nation of more than 9.5 million citizens has run out of garbage; while this is a positive – almost enviable – predicament for a country to be facing, Sweden now has to search for rubbish outside of its borders to generate its waste-to-energy incineration program.
It’s namely Norway officials who are now shipping in 80,000 tons of refuse annually to fuel the country with outside waste.
The population’s remarkable pertinacious recycling habits are inspiration for other garbage-bloated countries where the idea of empty landfills is scarce. In fact, only 4% of all waste in Sweden is land-filled, a big win for the future of sustainable living.
By using its 2 million tons of waste as energy and scrapping for more outside of its borders, this country is shown in international comparisons to be the global leader in recovering energy in waste. Go Sweden.
Public Radio International has the whole story.
This (albeit short-term) solution is even highly beneficial for the Scandinavian country; Norway pays Sweden to take its excess waste, Sweden burns it for heat and electricity, and the ashes remaining from the incineration process, filled with highly polluting dioxins, are returned back to Norway and land filled.
Catarina Ostland, senior advisor for the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, suggests that Norway may not be the perfect partner for the trash import-export scheme, however. “I hope that instead we will get the waste from Italy or from Romania or Bulgaria, or the Baltic countries because they landfill a lot in these countries” she tells PRI. “They don’t have any incineration plants or recycling plants, so they need to find a solution for their waste”.
There’s definitely something to be said about being ‘green’. Regardless of its sourcing, hopefully Sweden’s impeccable job of reducing its carbon footprint may serve as an example to other areas of the world that have more than enough trash to utilize and put to sustainable use.
Tags: adonis49, Amanda Froelich, biogas, Catarina Ostland, European waste market, Friends of the Earth, heated by burning garbage, Hege Rooth Olbergsveen, imports garbage, JOHN TAGLIABUE, Lars Haltbrekken, Norway, Oslo, Pal Mikkelsen, priority conflicts, Public Radio International, Recycling, refuse-derived fuel, trash incinerator
“No mas” for Nobel Peace prizes (January 15, 2009)
The Norwegian Nobel committee, for awarding “Peace Prizes” for personalities who contributed greatly to communicating the spirit of peace and actively working toward instituting peace around the world and in their communities, has been politicizing their policies which contributed to lavishing totally undeserving war criminals and criminals against humanity.
The latest of awardees is Israel president Simon Perez who said lately: “Israel can protect its babies against Gaza babies” and who participated in the decision making to perpetrate genocide on the Palestinian civilians in Gaza. Many deserving Nobel Peace Prize awardees signed a petition saying that they feel ashamed that Peres was awarded such an honorable prize.
The Norwegian committee has awarded this prize to Kissinger, the US Secretary of State under Nixon who prosecuted the Viet Nam war until it was a losing case; Kissinger is the one who planned and prosecuted the Lebanese civil war in conjunction with Sadat of Egypt.
Mind you that Sadat shared this honorable prize with Menahim Begin, the Zionist terrorists since 1920 and who became Prime Minister and invaded Lebanon in 1982 and entered the Capital Beirut.
Mind you that Arafat also shared this honorable prize with General Rabin, the Zionist Prime Minister who pre-empted the war in 1967 against Egypt and Syria and led terrorist activities against the Palestinians. Arafat cooperated with Sadat to set Lebanon afire for over 15 years.
What is it with Norway that it feels compelled to politicize the Nobel Peace Prize? What! Do I have to wage a pre-emptive war and then work out a flimsy peace negotiation in order to be awarded a peace prize? Do I have to be a Zionist zealot in order to increase my odds for being considered a worthy peace recipient?
What next? Are Bush Junior, Cheney, Olmert, Ehud Barak, Natanahu, Mubarak, and Condo potential candidates for Nobel Peace prizes? What next? Would Hilary Clinton and Barak Obama be the next candidates if they succeed to eliminate Hamas over the death of 1,000 babies and 5,000 injured Palestinians in Gaza? Would Mahmoud Abbass be awarded a Peace Nobel as a consolation prize? Would the Wahhabi Saudi monarch, the leader of the darkest and terrorist religious sect, be considered a serious candidate if he offered one billion dollars for the prize?
It is not enough to feel ashamed! It is the responsibly of the Norwegian government or its Parliament to strip the names of those who won these prizes and then proven to be undeserving from the list of this Hall of Fame or we will label this list the Hall of Shame!
“No mas” for Nobel Peace prizes
Posted on: January 15, 2009
“No mas” for Nobel Peace prizes (January 15, 2009)
The Norwegian Nobel committee, for awarding “Peace Prizes” for personalities who contributed greatly to communicating the spirit of peace and actively working toward instituting peace around the world and in their communities, has been politicizing their policies which contributed to lavishing totally undeserving war criminals and criminals against humanity.
The latest of awardees is Israel president Simon Perez who said lately: “Israel can protect its babies against Gaza babies” and who participated in the decision making to perpetrate genocide on the Palestinian civilians in Gaza. Many deserving Nobel Peace Prize awardees signed a petition saying that they feel ashamed that Peres was awarded such an honorable prize.
The Norwegian committee has awarded this prize to Kissinger, the US Secretary of State under Nixon who prosecuted the Viet Nam war until it was a losing case; Kissinger is the one who planned and prosecuted the Lebanese civil war in conjunction with Sadat of Egypt.
Mind you that Sadat shared this honorable prize with Menahim Begin, the Zionist terrorists since 1920 and who became Prime Minister and invaded Lebanon in 1982 and entered the Capital Beirut.
Mind you that Arafat also shared this honorable prize with General Rabin, the Zionist Prime Minister who pre-empted the war in 1967 against Egypt and Syria and led terrorist activities against the Palestinians. Arafat cooperated with Sadat to set Lebanon afire for over 15 years.
What is it with Norway that it feels compelled to politicize the Nobel Peace Prize? What! Do I have to wage a pre-emptive war and then work out a flimsy peace negotiation in order to be awarded a peace prize? Do I have to be a Zionist zealot in order to increase my odds for being considered a worthy peace recipient?
What next? Are Bush Junior, Cheney, Olmert, Ehud Barak, Natanahu, Mubarak, and Condo potential candidates for Nobel Peace prizes? What next? Would Hilary Clinton and Barak Obama be the next candidates if they succeed to eliminate Hamas over the death of 1,000 babies and 5,000 injured Palestinians in Gaza? Would Mahmoud Abbass be awarded a Peace Nobel as a consolation prize? Would the Wahhabi Saudi monarch, the leader of the darkest and terrorist religious sect, be considered a serious candidate if he offered one billion dollars for the prize?
It is not enough to feel ashamed! It is the responsibly of the Norwegian government or its Parliament to strip the names of those who won these prizes and then proven to be undeserving from the list of this Hall of Fame or we will label this list the Hall of Shame!
