1.

    With reference to one country’s overall electrical energy strategy, assess the extent to
which reducing environmental impacts is an important factor. [20]

Reducing enviromental impacts is an important factors in many countries’ energy strategy, however
other impacts such as economic and social ones may also come into play. An example of a country
with the main goal being reducing environmental impact is Norway. Norway wants to become more
sustainable and rely more on renewable energy, clearly showcasing its environmental concerns.

Norway already relies heavily on hydroelectricity, showing its dependency on renewable resources
with 99% of electricity being produced by HEP. The importance of environmental impacts can even
be seen here as many of Norway high level lakes are natural and so there was little environmental
impact in the construction of dams.

It is also visible that Norway takes into consideration environmental impacts as they aim to reduce
dependence on HEP by using other renewables instead. Many HEP sites have already been
exploited, and with rising demand new sources of energy need to be found. However, with
enviromental impacts in mind, Norway has explored renewable sources such as solar and wind to
meet rising demand. $3 billion has been invested into wind power and further research into solar
panels has increased the percentage of the suns rays utilized by more than 30%. The government is
even investing into biofuel research to replace use of petroleum fuels in transport.

Although it is clear Norway is very enviromentally aware, it is inevitable that other factors also fuels
Norways goal of sustainability. For example, economic factors would encourage Nora, to conserve
energy now in order to dope with rising demand for energy. This will allow for the future of Norway
to be economically stable with no possible energy crisis having negative e ects on the countries
economy. Norway has made e orts in conserving energy by increasing energy tax, increasing
incentive to use less. The government also encourages energy e ciency through advertising, as
well as up to 900 companies receiving information and nancial support for lowering energy
consumption. Although this could also be fuels by environmental impacts such as Norway being
aware that conserving energy will also conserve the environment, but clearly economic factors are
also coming into play here too.

Norway may also want to maintain its vast exports of oil and gas for economic reasons. Only 39%
of total energy in Norway comes for fossil fuels and so they can bene t greatly from the exports of
them to other countries. By Norway investing and focusing on renewables they can bene t
economically from fossil fuel exports.

Social factors may also come into play for Norway. Norway has very long and dark winters and so
energy conservation is vital to sustain a living standard for Norwegians. This includes the high
demand for heating and lighting. By investing in areas such as wind Norway also won’t be at risk of
solar energy becoming insu cient during winter. This displays how social impacts have also played
a role in Norways energy started y of sustainability.

In conclusion, reducing environmental impacts is key in Norway’s energy strategy with clear goals to
exploit renewable resources over fossil fuels. However, it is inevitable that the economic bene ts of
sustainable energy would play a role in this as well. In addition social factors and living standards
also may have encouraged the need for sustainable energy in a country like Norway. Nevertheless,
Norway has still focused primarily on renewable resources and even HEP construction had little to
no impact due to Norway’s natural geography. Norway has also not chosen to primarily use its fossil
fuels stores, and so it is clear reducing enviromental impacts has always been vital in setting
Norway energy strategy.

2.    Evaluate the success of one named electricity scheme in meeting changes in demand for
power. [20]

pop size term

impact not
many people
were using
there

The Ulla Forre hydropower complex is an example of a electricity scheme in Norway. Changes in
demand may occur for a number of reasons, ranging from seasonal demands to long term changes
in the need/want for energy. Ulla Forre is an example of a HEP which successfully can deal with
changes in demand.

To begin with, Norway may experience seasonal changes in demand due to the long, cold and dark
winter. This increase the need for heating and lighting, and so in winter months there is a higher
demand for energy. Ulla Forre is able to deal with these seasonal changes as it it a hydropower
station, meaning it relies on water to function. Although this change is seasonal, Norway does not
experience any dry season and so there is never any water shortages and Norway receives up to
2000mm per year. Therefore, the scheme is able to cope with seasonal changes in demand for
energy because this does not e ect the availability of water, and vast amounts are available to
increase production as well.

Variations in demand can also be easily met or responded to by Ulla Forre because it includes 3
power stations which are linked. The Saurdal station is a pumped storage HEP station and so can
pump water back up to lake Blasjo if necessary (for example when there is more water needed to
meet increases in energy demands). This once more displays how Ulla Forre can cope successfully
with changes in demand because of its operational structure and its provision of 2057 megawatts
powers three major cities -Oslo, Bergen and Stravanger.

In addition to this, while Ulla Forre copes with changes in demand, in doing so it keeps
environmental impacts at a minimum. The main reservoir used for the power station is Blasjo, which
is naturally formed out of several smaller lakes, and so this part of the power station did not causes
habit is damage or loss. It also is a renewable energy source and so no emissions from Ulla Forre
add to the greenhouse e ect because hydropower does not emit greenhouses gases. It’s
construction also didn’t interrupt salmon migration, showing how the scheme once more had little
environmental impact . The fact that Ulla Forre can cope with changes in demand while having had
little environmental e ects in its construction and running only reinforces the idea of its success.

The construction of the scheme and running of the scheme also has little social e ect as it was
constructed in an area where very few people lived. This means relocation of people was kept at a
minimum and disruption to the lives of Norwegians was very low, adding to the schemes success.
Furthermore, the scheme would have increased employee t by providing jobs in both its
construction and running, and so has good economic e ects for Norway as well, enhancing this
idea of its success.

However, Ulla Forre has to cater for a country with one of the highest energy consumptions in the
world at 6.2 tonnes of oil (while the world average is 3.8), and although there has been an increase
in the amount of energy obtained from renewables since 2005 by >10% it is clear that the country
still does have some dependency in fossil fuels as well. While Ulla Forre is part of the major
movement away from this, increases in demand may result in a fall back to the use of fossil fuels
which are very vast in Norway, putting into question whether or not Ulla Forre can successfully
manage changes or signi cant increases in demand.

While Ulla Forre does keep environmental e ects at a minimum, keeping in line with Norways goals
of becoming green, the damming of narrow valleys to make lower lying lakes such as Suldalsvatn
reservoir would have had drastic environmental impacts. Flooding could have lead to loss of habitat
and many other issues as well. The fact that this construction had such e ects may lower its stance
of being so successful.

In addition to this, while Ulla Forre is seen to be able to cope with short term changes in demand, in
the long term if demand was to signi cantly fall, Ulla Forre may not be able to function sustainably.
While operating costs are low, with increased movement towards energy conservation, the vast size
and expense of such a scheme running may not be realistic. Therefore, a possible fall in demand
could cause a fall in operations at the scheme.

In conclusion, while Ulla Forre does have its aws and areas where perhaps large scale changes in
demand couldn’t be met, it has been designed to cope with changes of a more manageable scale. It
has successfully provided energy for Southern Norway and does continue to do so even with
variations in demand (perhaps seasonal or kick started by other reasons). Therefore Ulla Forre is
seen as a successful scheme in Norway.