Basic HTML Version
CenSES annual report 2011
11
ments, which was articulated through a series of
white papers that came every other year during
the 1980s.
- The deregulation of the electricity market
- The shift from ENØK to Enova as the body with
repsonsibility of transforming the energy
production and use early in the 2000s.
- The deregulation of the energy supply in 1990
- The development of the CCS compromise
- Stricter building regulations
- The climate agreement (klimaforliket) and the
priority of R&D on sustainable energy
- Green certificates
- The decision to expand the electricity grid from
approx. 2010
- Taxes and fees (CO2) and arrangement for quotas
Some theses
Based on what we know about policy instruments
so far, we believe we may formulate some theses:
- Norwegian energy policy has been based on an
exaggerated belief on economic/financial instru-
ments, first and foremost taxes and fees.
- Norwegian energy policy has emphasized R&D as
an important instrument, but seemingly without
formulating clear ideas about what is needed to
be able to use the results from this research.
- Norwegian energy policy is dominated by hydro
power as a kind of golden standard. This may
have been an impediment to focus more on new
renewable energy sources.
- There is a policy deficiency with regard to the
developement of new renewable energy in
Norway. The energy law was supposed to make
interventions from politicians unnecessary, and
the possibilities for governing the regulation of
energy supply disappeared (with Statnett being
an exception, but that possibility has only recent-
ly been made use of ).
- The building industry has to a little degree re-
sponded to financial instruments. Here, the
change in building codes has been most effi-
cient.
ENØK policy in practice. Photo: Marianne Ryghaug