281

Politics

Energy deal edges ever closer

admin
February 7th, 2012


This article is more than 12 years old.

The Konservative party is trying to forge a compromise between the government and opposition party Venstre to ensure broad political support for the green energy plan

A deal on the future of the nation’s energy came a step closer this week after opposition party Venstre (V) stated that they are finally willing to meet the government to discuss the decisive issue of the planÂ’s cost.

The governmentÂ’s initial plan from November had a price tag of 5.6 billion kroner but they have since cut it down to 3.9 billion in order to keep Venstre onboard.

Venstre was still unhappy with the price, however, and demanded that the total cost of the plan, including the cost of a coming NOx air pollution tax, should not exceed 3.6 billion kroner.

This development created an unusual impasse between the government and opposition – Danish governments traditionally try and secure a broad cross-party consensus before trying to pass energy plans.

While Jyllands-Posten newspaper reported that there were indications that V was willing to return to the table, the opposition party declined to comment on this information.

But should V decide to return to the talks, it could be down to the mediation of fellow opposition party Konservative (K). The governmentÂ’s energy plan has an ambitious view to completely end DenmarkÂ’s reliance on fossil fuels and as a result the government wants oil-fired heaters to be completely phased out.

V has been particularly critical of this decision, arguing it will be too expensive for ordinary households to switch over, but K support the plan and have attempted to forge a compromise.

“It’s important that we switch over from oil-fired heaters to sustainable energy,” K energy spokesperson Mike Legarth told Jyllands-Posten. “That’s why new oil-fired heaters should not be installed after 2017, though exemptions should be granted to those with special needs.”

About 200,000 oil-fired heaters cannot be replaced by district heating or natural gas heaters by 2030, the date by which point the government wants them completely phased out. Switching over to the only other alternatives, geothermal heating or wood-chip heaters, will cost each household up to 150,000 kroner, a cost V is not willing to accept.

The compromise suggested by K is to compensate those who will be hit by switch-over costs.

The party has their eye on a 500 million kroner pool of money which will be available in 2013 and 2014, which is currently used to give home owners a tax deduction on home improvements. Next year, the money is being reassigned to subsidise improving energy efficiency in homes and K is demanding the money is targeted towards rural Denmark.

“When the pool of money is reassigned, we are demanding that houses in remote areas, which are poorly isolated and need new radiators, are prioritised,” Legarth said. “A portion of the money should also be earmarked for home owners who are the worst off economically so that they can have financial assistance for swapping out their oil heater. It should be a compensation for future costs.”

Legarth added that he didnÂ’t think it was necessary to compensate those who are better off financially.

“What is important to us is that we use the money to help those who would ordinarily slip through the net because they cannot afford to make the green switch-over. That’s a fair priority.”

The compromise might not be sufficient, however, and V has maintained its opposition to the plan.

“We don’t want to force people to get rid of their oil-fired heaters,” V energy spokesperson Lars Christian Lilleholt told Jyllands-Posten. “We want to make sure that 200,000 oil consumers aren’t forced to spend 150,000 kroner on a geothermal heater which will also make their houses harder to sell.”

Speaking to Politiken newspaper, however, Lilleholt did admit that V was close to returning to the negotiations.

“We have always said that we want a broad agreement on the energy deal, but that the governmentÂ’s plan was too expensive,” he said. “Which is why we are happy that the government has shaved off almost two billion kroner, which means we are close to discussing the content of an energy plan.”


Share

Most popular

Subscribe to our newsletter

Sign up to receive The Daily Post

















Latest Podcast

A survey carried out by Megafon for TV2 has found that 71 percent of parents have handed over children to daycare in spite of them being sick.

Moreover, 21 percent of those surveyed admitted to medicating their kids with paracetamol, such as Panodil, before sending them to school.

The FOLA parents’ organisation is shocked by the findings.

“I think it is absolutely crazy. It simply cannot be that a child goes to school sick and plays with lots of other children. Then we are faced with the fact that they will infect the whole institution,” said FOLA chair Signe Nielsen.

Pill pushers
At the Børnehuset daycare institution in Silkeborg a meeting was called where parents were implored not to bring their sick children to school.

At Børnehuset there are fears that parents prefer to pack their kids off with a pill without informing teachers.

“We occasionally have children who that they have had a pill for breakfast,” said headteacher Susanne Bødker. “You might think that it is a Panodil more than a vitamin pill, if it is a child who has just been sick, for example.”

Parents sick and tired
Parents, when confronted, often cite pressure at work as a reason for not being able to stay at home with their children.

Many declare that they simply cannot take another day off, as they are afraid of being fired.

Allan Randrup Thomsen, a professor of virology at KU, has heavily criticised the parents’ actions, describing the current situation as a “vicious circle”.

“It promotes the spread of viruses, and it adds momentum to a cycle where parents are pressured by high levels of sick-leave. If they then choose to send the children to daycare while they are still recovering, they keep the epidemic going in daycares, and this in turn puts a greater burden on the parents.”