Treated as the Master Plan’s trash can, the unique geothermal areas on the Reykjanes peninsula get a particularly harsh deal. Out of the peninsula’s nineteen energy potential areas, only three are listed for protection while seven are set for exploitation in addition to the four that have already been harnessed. Five additional areas are kept pending, more likely than not to be set for exploitation later. Existing plans for energy production outline how the peninsula is set to be turned into a single and continuous industrial zone, and the power companies seem to be simply waiting for a further green light to exploit the area. All this in order to further feed the aluminium industry.

In this overview we take a look at nine of these nineteen areas — those from the west of Gráuhnúkar — of which only one is to be protected according to the Master Plan. We look at the plans on the drawing board, their current status, the key companies involved, the already existing power plants, the threatened areas, and at last but not least: possible targets for direct action. On the map below, these areas are marked from number one to nine. Obviously the map only shows the areas at stake and the reader has to use her or his imagination to fill in power lines and the rest of the necessary infrastructure. Most of the following photos are taken by Ellert Grétarsson — click here and here for more of his photos.

Unmasking the Geothermal Myth

In a world increasingly concerned about carbon emissions,” Jaap Krater and Miriam Rose state, “the clean image of hydroelectric and geothermal energy is appealing.” This has certainly been the case in Iceland, where the highly polluting aluminium industry has attempted to re-model their dirty image by powering their production with so-called ‘green energy’. However, this greenwashing has not entirely worked as the eastern highland’s Kárahnjúkar dams — fully built in 2007 to power an Alcoa aluminium smelter in Reyðarfjörður — have proven to be as ecologically and economically disastrous as environmentalists warned. As a result the aluminium companies have now mostly moved from hydro and instead are increasingly focussing on geothermal energy.

One of the companies is Norðurál, subsidiary of Century Aluminum, who claim that their planned 360 thousand ton aluminium smelter in Helguvík will be one the world’s most environmentally friendly smelters. Why so? Because according to the company, the 625 MW of electricity required to run a smelter of this size is supposed to come only from the peninsula’s geothermal energy sources. However, environmentalists and scientists consider the estimation of geothermal energy believed to be extractable from the peninsula to be highly over-estimated, and claim that additional hydro power plants would be needed to power the smelter. This would most likely come from the much-debated and now temporarily halted dams in the river of lower Þjórsá.

Last year, unable to access the necessary geothermal energy in north Iceland, aluminium company Alcoa was forced to withdraw their six years long plan to build a geothermal powered smelter at Bakki, Húsavík. We predict that if Century cannot force through the damming of lower Þjórsá a similar situation awaits Helguvík. But that has not stopped the project’s interested parties, who still state confidently that the smelter will be built, and powered with geothermal energy.

Regardless of the need for additional hydro power, the exploitation of the Reykjanes peninsula’s geothermal areas spells the end of this magnificent nature of the peninsula as we know it. Test drilling and boreholes, endless roads and power lines, power plants and other infrastructure; all this would turn the Reykjanes peninsula — this unique land of natural volcanic wonders, which many scientists and environmentalists believe to be one of the world’s best options for creating a giant volcano park with educational and tourism-related opportunities — into a large industrial zone.

But these are only the very visible impacts of the planned large-scale exploitation. Other environmental catastrophes are in fact inevitable with large scale geothermal industry, becoming increasingly visible to the public as the green reputation of geothermal energy slowly decreases.

Two of Saving Iceland’s spokespersons — ecological economist Jaap Krater and geologist Miriam Rose — have thoroughly analysed the development of Iceland’s geothermal potential in a chapter, written on behalf of Saving Iceland, and recently published in a book on the current energy crisis. While we strongly recommend the piece for further reading about the geothermal myths, a few of their points will be addressed here, with relevance to recent events in Iceland.

Firstly, geothermal gases are rich in a variety of harmful elements and chemical compounds such as sulphur dioxide, whose impacts are systematically underestimated according the Public Health Authority of Reykjavík. Since production began at the Hellisheiði geothermal power plant — often claimed to be the biggest of its kind in the world — in 2006, a 140 percent increase of sulphur pollution has been measured in the capital area of Reykjavík, only 30 kilometres away. Recent studies, conducted by the University of Iceland, suggest a direct link between increased sulphur pollution on the one hand, and increased use of medicine for asthma and heart disease ‘angina pectoris’ on the other hand. However, engineering firms such as Mannvit, authors of many of the Environmental Impacts Assessments for geothermal power-plants, have so far ignored these studies and instead based their assessments on so-called prediction models. (Read more about the sulphur pollution here and here.)

Secondly, at the end of last year it was revealed that for two years energy company Reykjavík Energy — who own and operate the Hellisheiði plant — had on occasions been pumping waste water containing hydrogen sulphide into drinking water aquifers. Sulphides are far from being the plants’ only damaging effluents entering our water system; Krater and Rose mention that “geothermal fluids contain high concentrations of heavy metals and other toxic elements, including radon, arsenic, mercury, ammonia, and boron.”

Thirdly, it is suggested that depletion of one geothermal reservoir can result in the drying up of surrounding hot spring areas. While large-scale exploitation in Iceland is probably too young to witness these effects, environmentalists and geologists have warned that exactly this will happen in the Reykjanes peninsula if the existing plans go ahead.

The Key Companies Involved

HS Orka

HS Orka is an energy company that owns and operates two geothermal power plants on the peninsula — Reykjanesvirkjun and Svartsengi — the majority of who’s energy goes to Norðurál’s aluminium smelter in Grundartangi, Hvalfjörður. HS Orka’s majority shareholder is Magma Energy Sweden A.B., a puppet company of the Canadian firm Magma Energy, which was established to get around laws that prevent non-Europeans from buying Icelandic companies. After Magma’s 66,6% share, the remaining 33,4% is owned by Icelandic pension funds.

Before privatisation HS Orka (then called Hitaveita Suðurnesja) was owned fifty-fifty by the Icelandic state and several municipalities on the country’s south-west coast, but in 2007 the state’s share was sold to a private company named Geysir Green Energy (GGE). Following laws passed in 2008, regarding the separation of private energy production from competitive operations, the company became two different firms — HS Veitur and HS Orka — of which the latter takes care of energy production and sales. Bit by bit, GGE bought up two thirds of HS Orka’s shares. In 2009, GGE sold extra 10% to Magma Energy, which at the same time bought 32% from another energy company, Reykjavík Energy, and the nearby municipality of Hafnarfjörður. At this point GGE owned 55% of HS Orka and Magma owned 43%.

Harsh criticism arose over these deals which were effectively privatisation of Iceland’s natural resources, including a campaign led by pop-singer Björk and Eva Joly, the recent French Green Party presidential candidate, who at that point served as the Icelandic center-left government’s special financial advisor, following the general elections in 2009. Asked if the company was considering majority stake in HS Orka, Magma’s CEO Ross Beaty replied with a straight “no”. He then emphasised that the company would not buy more than 50% of the shares, as had officially been accepted by Iceland’s government, calling this “a rather awkward business position but certainly something that we feel can be workable.”

However, in 2010 Geysir Green Energy sold all their shares to Magma, which now owned 98.5% of HS Orka. A year later Magma sold 25% to Jarðvarmi slhf, a company owned by fourteen Icelandic pension funds, which a little later bought additional 8.4%. At last, Magma bought the 1.5% still owned by four different municipalities. Thus Magma holds 66.6% of the shares today, while Jarðvarmi owns 33.4%. The land use rights held by Magma allow for 65 years exploitation with an option to extend this for another 65 years.

Alterra Power

Just as the name could not have been coloured with more controversy and scepticism, Magma Energy merged with Plutonic Power and became Alterra Power, a company traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange. The new company’s Executive Chairman Ross Beaty, said that the merger would “strengthen both companies and […] create a larger, more diversified renewable energy company.” He further stated: “Geothermal will remain a core focus of the new company, but hydro, wind and solar assets will be solid business platforms for future growth. In the renewable energy business, bigger is better and this combination will achieve that while enhancing returns to each company’s shareholders.”

Alterra Power already operates geothermal, hydro and wind power plants in Nevada and British Columbia, which together with the Iceland plants have the energy capacity of 570 MW. In the company’s own words, they have a “strong financial capacity to support [their] aggressive growth plans,” which include geothermal plants in Chile and Peru. Such Latin-American adventures are certainly not new to the company’s key people, as Ross Beaty founded and currently serves as Chairman of one of the world’s largest silver producers, Pan American Silver, with some of its mines in Peru.

For the last three decades in fact Beaty has founded and divested a series of mineral resource companies, but has now shifted his focus to the ever-enlarging economy of ‘green energy’. As he explained himself: “This time around I wanted to build something green, so I looked at geothermal and it was just perfect, it just fit”. When confronted with the possibility that he and his company were taking advantage of Iceland’s economic collapse — a theory supported by the words of John Perkins, the author of ‘Confessions of an Economic Hitman’ — he called such ideas “ignorance and complete nonsense.” Only a few months later, he nevertheless said to Hera Research Monthly, an online investment newsletter, that “going into Iceland was strictly something that could only have happened because Iceland had a calamitous financial meltdown in 2008.”

Norðurál

Norðurál is a subsidiary of North-American aluminium producer Century Aluminum, whose largest shareholder is commodity broker Glencore International, a company that controls almost 40% of the global aluminium market. Glencore is mostly known for its many tentacles of corruption and worldwide human rights and environmental violations — most recently manifested in the exposure of child-labour in the company’s copper mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo, as well as the dumping of acid into a river at another site in the same country.

Norðurál currently operates an aluminium smelter in Hvalfjörður, which was fully built in 1998 despite harsh opposition by the fjord’s inhabitants. The smelter has been enlarged in a few phases, seeing the production capacity going from the original 60 thousand tons per year, to the current 278 thousand tons. Since 2004, the company has invested 20 billion ISK into building another Iceland smelter, in Helguvík on the north-west tip of the Reykjanes peninsula. According to the project’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), the smelter is supposed to be powered solely by the peninsula’s geothermal energy — a claim that environmentalists and geologists have seriously questioned.

In April 2007, HS Orka signed a contract with Norðurál, promising the latter company 150 MW of energy for the Helguvík smelter’s first phase, supposed to be extracted by the planned expansion of the Reykjanesvirkjun geothermal power plant. Three years later, when no energy had been made available, the aluminium company filed charges against HS Orka for non-compliance. The conflict ended up in an arbitration court in Sweden, the registered home country of HS Orka’s owner, Magma Energy Sweden. Officially the conflict was presented to the public as a matter of energy prices but in late 2011 the court ruled that HS Orka is obliged to provide Norðurál the originally agreed-upon energy, suggesting that the conflict had to do with more than prices.

Already Existing Power Plants

Reykjanes

Reykjanesvirkjun is a 100 MW plant, owned by Alterra Power, whose energy partly powers Norðurál’s smelter in Hvalfjörður. It is located on 410 hectares of land located at the south-west tip of the peninsula. The company has plans for at least an 80 MW expansion of the plant, which is supposed to take place in two 50 and 30 MW phases, that according to HS Orka should both be completed in 2013.

However, following conditions set by Iceland’s National Energy Authority (NEA) last year, the expansion plans have become a bit more complicated. In order for it to happen, at least 30 out of the 50 MW included in the first phase have to come from another area than currently planned. Further extraction in the already exploited area would simply be unsustainable and decrease the area’s capacity. Geologist Sigmundur Einarsson actually believes that the field is already over-exploited. His claim is based on studies from 2009, by the very same NEA, which state that the area’s long-term sustainable production capacity is hardly more than 25 MW.

Svartsengi

The Svartsengi plant is operated by HS Orka and is located on 150 hectares of land owned partly by the municipality of Grindavík and partly privately. Next to it stands the Blue Lagoon, a tourist attraction created by the brine pollution from the power plant. The plant is a combined electricity and heat plant with a current electric power capacity of 75 MW, of which most goes to Norðurál’s smelter in Hvalfjörður.

The Threatened Areas

Eldvörp

The Master Plan gives a green light for the exploitation of Eldvörp, a 15 km long row of craters, located four km south-west of Svartsengi. Svartsengi and Eldvörp are thought to share a geothermal aquifer, which many claim to be fully exploited already. Thus even the smallest energy production would be unsustainable. Alterra Power still has plans to build a 50 MW power plant in Eldvörp, for which both research and utilization leaves have been granted. The planned plant is on land owned by the municipality of Grindavík, which apparently is about to finish the required land use plan enabling the project to take place.

The geothermal field is situated at the heart of the row of craters. There are only a few signs of geothermal activity on the actual surface, only fumaroles the lavafield and steam wisps when the weather is mild. One single borehole has already been constructed close to one of the craters at the centre of Eldvörp. It’s environmental impact is very limited compared with the impacts of the planned over-all drilling and the appendant pipelines, power lines, roads, powerhouse separator building. Such construction will have enormously destructive impacts on both natural and cultural relics in the area, including the row of craters and the Sundvörðuhraun lavafield.

Stóra-Sandvík

Stóra-Sandvík is a unique geothermal field in a coastal area close to the municipalities of Grindavík and Hafnir, as well as to the Reykjanesvirkjun plant, which in itself should be reason enough to move it from the exploitation category and instead to protection.

Krýsuvík

This geothermal area consists of four subfields — Sandfell, Trölladyngja, Sveifluháls and Austurengjar — which all connect to the same volcanic system, usually just named Krýsuvík. The geothermal activity is located at the margins of the system’s fissure swarms, while the Núpshliðarháls tuff ridge lies closer to its centre, with thousands of years old lava flats and eruptive fissures on both sides. Where the tuff has tightened due to geothermal transformations, small streams flow on to the lavafields and have thus created vegetated areas such as Höskuldsvellir, Selsvellir, Vigdísarvellir and Tjarnarvellir. As from the west of Hellisheiði, hardly any water runs on the surface of the whole Reykjanes mountain range, save the above-mentioned areas of Krýsuvík.

Interestingly, Krýsuvík is directly linked to what many consider to be the origins of environmentalism in Iceland. A geologist and environmentalist named Sigurður Þórarinsson, who had often voiced his concerns regarding Icelanders’ treatment of the country’s natural environment, had become seriously alarmed by what he witnessed by the Grænavatn maar in Krýsvík. It was, Sigurður said, used as a trash can for construction projects in the nearby area. At a meeting at the Icelandic Ecological Society in 1949, Sigurður suggested the creation of a legislation regarding nature conservation. Shortly afterwards, he was asked to take part in designing the legislation, which was passed in 1956 — the first in Iceland’s history. (Read about Sigurður Þórarinsson here.)

Out of the four Krýsuvík areas, the Energy Master Plan allows for the exploitation of Sandfell and Sveifluháls, while Trölladyngja and Austurengjar are supposed to be pending until the results of drilling in the two former areas are known. The National Energy Authority claims that these combined 89 km² of land should have the production capacity of 445 MW of energy for 50 years, and as such be Iceland’s third most powerful geothermal field after the Hengill and Törfajökull areas. However, independent scientists and environmentalists have seriously questioned these figures, believing the area’s maximum possible production capacity to be 120 MW for 50 years.

Sandfell

Sandfell area is a semi-unspoiled volcanic area of lavafields and tuff mountains, large vegetated flatlands, and beautifully formed craters. It is a uniquely colourful area, which will be permanently altered if HS Orka’s planned 50 MW power plant will be built. The company has already been granted permission for test drilling and one borehole has been test-drilled, but no results have yet been published.

Sveifluháls (Krýsuvík)

Sveifluháls is a 20 km broad and 150 to 200 meter high compounded and mostly non-vegetated tuff ridge. The 2-3 km long geothermal area of fumaroles, mud springs and muddy hot springs — usually referred to as simply ‘the Krýsuvík geothermal area’ — lies a little east of the Krýsuvík fissure swarm. Despite drilling done in the second half of the 20th century, the area is relatively unspoiled and could easily be brought back close to its natural state. Due to the tuff transformation, the area is especially rich in colour and contains unusual geothermal salt deposits and gypsum. The area is unique due to its many maars, for instance Arnarvatn and Grænavatn (pictured above), of which some show signs of Holocene volcanic activity. Sveifluháls is a popular stopover as well as an outside school-room for geology. It also contains historical relics of human residence, as far back as Iceland’s original settlement.

There are plans to operate a 50-100 MW power plant in the area — a construction that would include somewhere between 10 and 20 boreholes, road construction, pipelines and power lines to connect the plant to the national energy grid. HS Orka has a research leave in the area but has not been able to guarantee the utilization rights, which are owned by the municipality of Hafnarfjörður.

Austurengjar

The geothermal area of Austurengjar is about 1.5 km east of lake Grænavatn — a relatively flat and mostly unspoiled area of mud pots, hot springs and dolerite ridges, which slopes north to lake Kleifarvatn. As a result of earthquakes in 1924, the geyser activity increased dramatically and since then, Austurengjahver has been the area’s most powerful spring. This colourful geothermal area is special as it lies completely outside of Krýsuvík’s volcanic system and shows no signs of Holocene volcanic activity. The plans for a 50 MW power plant at Austurengjar, including 10 to 15 boreholes and a whole lot of power lines, would directly impact the whole area and change the face of lake Kleifarvatn, which is today a wild and unspoilt lake, surrounded by mountains.

Trölladyngja

Trölladyngja is one of the three mountains (the other two being Grænadyngja and Fífavallafjall) that together make up the north-east end of a 13 km long tuff ridge called Núpshlíðarháls, which lies within Krýsuvík’s volcanic system. The geothermal area is about three km long and seems to be partly connected to extension fractures in the system. South of the mountains, a small stream called Sogalækur has shovelled out a considerable amount of clay and thus formed a colourful canyon called Sogin. The stream deposited the clay into the lava below and formed the vegetated field Höskuldarvellir. HS Orka has for many years had plans to build a power plant in Trölladyngja and three holes have been drilled already, resulting in very limited success but a lot of disruption. The Trölladyngja area is partly included in the Natural Heritage Register.

Protected Area(s)

Brennisteinsfjöll

Only one out of the peninsula’s nine potential energy generating areas will be protected if the Master Plan goes through parliament unaltered. Brennisteinsfjöll are a row of mountains, considered an impenetrable part of the Krýsuvík area, and do in fact constitute the largest untouched wilderness around the capital area of Reykjavík. As highlighted by Krater and Rose: “Wilderness areas are becoming rare globally, with over 83 percent of the earth’s landmass directly affected by humans, and the Icelandic wilderness is one of the largest left in Europe.”

Possible Targets for Protests and Direct Actions

The Ministry of Environment
Skuggasund 1
150 Reykjavík

The Ministry of Industry
Arnarhváll by Lindargata
150 Reykjavík

HS Orka
Brekkustígur 36
260 Reykjanesbæ

Jarðvarmi slhf
Stórhöfða 31
110 Reykjavík

Norðurál Grundartangi ehf (smelter and offices)
Grundartangi
301 Akranes

Norðurál Helguvík ehf (only offices)
Stakksbraut 1
Garður
232 Reykjanesbæ

Helguvík Smelter
See location on map here.

Century Aluminum Company (Corporate Headquarters)
2511 Garden Road
Building A, Suite 200
Monterey,
CA 93940
USA

For a list of more offices and smelter click here.

Alterra Power Corp. (Corporate Offices)
600-888 Dunsmuir Street
Vancouver, BC
Canada V6C 3K4

For a list of more Alterra Power offices click here.

Glencore International

Registered Office
Queensway House
Hilgrove Street
St Helier
Jersey
JE1 1ES

Headquarters
Baarermattstrasse 3
P.O. Box 777
CH 6341 Baar
Switzerland

_______________________________________________________

Main Sources

Áhugahópur um verndun Jökulsánna í Skagafirði, Eldvötn – samtök um náttúruvernd í Skaftárhreppi, Félag um verndun hálendis Austurlands, Framtíðarlandið, Fuglavernd, Landvernd, Náttúruvaktin, Náttúruverndarsamtök Austurlands (NAUST), Náttúruverndarsamtök Íslands, Náttúruverndarsamtök Suðurlands, Náttúruverndarsamtök Suðvesturlands, Samtök um náttúruvernd á Norðurlandi (SUNN), Sól á Suðurlandi. Umsögn um drög að tillögu til þingsályktunar um áætlun um vernd og orkunýtingu landsvæða. 11. nóvember 2011. (Download PDF here.)

Krater and Miriam Rose on behalf of Saving Iceland, “Development of Iceland’s Geothermal Energy Potential for Aluminum Production — A Critical Analysis”. In: Abrahamsky, K. (ed.) Sparking a World-wide Energy Revolution: Social Struggles in the Transition to a Post-Petrol World. 2010, AK Press, Edinburgh. p. 319-333. (Download PDF here.)

Various information from Náttúrukortið (The Nature Map) on the website of environmentalist NGO Framtíðarlandið (The Future Land).

Sigmundur Einarsson, Hinar miklu orkulindir Íslands, Smugan.is, October 2009.

Sigmundur Einarsson, Er HS Orka í krísu í Krýsuvík?, Smugan.is, November 2009.

Sigmundur Einarsson, Ómerkilegur útúrsnúningur iðnaðarráðherra, Smugan.is, November 2011.

Sigmundur Einarsson, Er HS Orka á heljarþröm?, Smugan.is, December 2011.

Catharine Fulton, Blame Canada? Geothermal energy, Swedish shelf companies and the privatisation of Iceland, The Reykjavík Grapevine, October 2009.

Catharine Fulton, Magma Energy Lied to Us, The Reykjavík Grapevine, May 2010.

Volcano Park to Open in Iceland? Iceland Review, July 2007.

Various information from the websites of Alterra Power, HS Orka and Norðurál.

By Snorri Páll Jónsson Úlfhildarson, originally published in The Reykjavík Grapevine.

This simply means that until spring last year, the police literally had a carte blanche regarding whom to spy on and for whatever reasons they chose. Unbeknownst the public, the instructions allowed unrestricted espionage.

“Good things happen slowly,” Björn Bjarnason, Iceland’s former Minister of Justice, wrote on his blog in March of last year when his successor in office, Minister of the Interior Ögmundur Jónasson, called for a press conference to announce that the police would soon be granted proactive investigation powers.

While Ögmundur and other Left Green MPs often criticised Björn for his aggressive efforts to increase police powers during the latter’s six years in office, he is now advocating for increased police powers as part of The State’s crusade against purported organised crime, which is believed to be predominantly manifested in a number of motorcycle gangs, including the Hells Angels.

A bill that he proposed to parliament last month does not contain the infinite investigation powers that the police have openly asked for, but does nevertheless allow them to start investigating people who they believe are planning acts that would fall under the category of organised crime and are punishable by at least four years of imprisonment.

While the case is usually presented as the police’s struggle to gain greater justifiable investigative powers — in which they have supposedly not fully succeeded — the fact is that, from at least July 1999 to May 2011, the police had unrestricted authority to monitor whomever they wanted due to poorly defined regulations.

THE HEADLINE THAT NEVER WAS

“UNRESTRICTED SPYING WAS PERMITTED!” should have appeared as a headline all over the Icelandic media last year. Yet it was strangely absent, despite an official acknowledgement from the Minister of Interior that this was indeed the case that unrestricted spying on Icelandic citizens had been tolerated and allowed. The matter concerned Mark Kennedy, the British police spy whose seven-year long undercover operations were exposed and reported in the international media last year. Disguised as activist ‘Mark Stone,’ he travelled through Europe collecting intelligence about anarchists, environmentalist and animal rights activists. He was for instance stationed in Iceland’s eastern highlands in 2005, where environmentalist network Saving Iceland was protesting the construction of the Kárahnjúkar dams.

In most of the countries where Kennedy operated — short of Ireland and Germany — the authorities have remained silent about the matter. But a newly released report on police units providing intelligence in the UK, carried out by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC), clearly outlines the aim of the National Police Order Intelligence Unit (NPOIU), for which Kennedy worked: “the main objective of the NPOIU has been gathering intelligence” such as “knowledge about the infiltrated protest groups, their aims and links with other groups, their plans and methods, and the people involved in suspected serious crime.”

In other words, using proactive investigations to collect information so as to prevent possible action.

As Minister of Foreign Affairs Össur Skarphéðinsson remarked during a parliamentary discussion about Mark Kennedy last year, the Icelandic police did not have such powers in 2005 and still do not. That should have made any co-operation with the British spy illegal, just as any other proactive spying initiative would have been.

SO MANY MEN SO MANY MINDS

Following Kennedy’s exposé, Ögmundur called for an investigation of the Icelandic police authorities’ possible knowledge or collaboration with the British spy, which resulted in a report conducted by the National Police Commissioner’s National Security Unit (NSU). The report acknowledged that information regarding the protest camp at Kárahnjúkar, its organisers and participants, was passed to the Icelandic authorities. According to the report, this information then lead to a “collaboration with foreign police authorities concerning protest groups abroad and the intended protests under the banner of Saving Iceland.”

“This is the big news,” Ögmundur declared on his blog in May 2011, after the report was published. “Espionage was employed with the Icelandic authorities’ knowledge and will.” He emphasised this point in parliament last March, stating: “The infiltrator [Kennedy] was able to operate at Kárahnjúkar because of very unclear regulations regarding the police’s investigation methods. The legislation was far from strong enough, as well as there were rules in force that never appeared in front of the public.”

The rules he mentioned are instructions by the State Prosecutor from 1999. For some background: according to laws on criminal proceedings, the respective minister — Minister of Justice until 2010, Minister of the Interior since — should pass regulations regarding specific police protocols such as the use of informers and infiltrators. But these regulations did not exist until last May following a request by the National Security Unit. Instead they were substituted by those State Prosecutor’s instructions which, due to their less formal status (compared with laws and regulations) were not published in a conspicuous manner but rather filed away in drawers and cabinets, so to speak.

Although these instructions are hard too find, they still are accessible and, according to the document, their purpose was simply to “prevent criminal activities,” for instance with the use of an informer “who supplies the police with information about criminal activities or people linked with criminal activities.” Most notably, the document’s eleven pages are free of a single definition of what criminal activities the instructions concern, unlike the regulations created last spring, which are confined to “well-founded suspicion” of acts or plans of acts that are punishable by at least eight years of imprisonment.

This simply means that until spring last year, the police literally had a carte blanche regarding whom to spy on and for whatever reasons they chose. Unbeknownst the public, the instructions allowed unrestricted espionage. These powers are now partly lost due to Mark Kennedy’s exposé and the following the NSU investigation.

THE PERMISSIONS TO COME

While admitting that he had not even seen the bill submitted by Ögmundur last month, Snorri Magnússon, Chairperson of the Police Federation of Iceland, still maintained to newspaper Fréttablaðið that the proposed permissions were too limited. Snorri explained that the police want permissions similar to what their colleagues in Scandinavia work with which allow them, as he noted, to “lawfully monitor certain groups in society though they are not necessarily about to commit crimes today or tomorrow, and collect intelligence on them, which then might lead to official cases.”

This is not included in Ögmundur’s bill, which states that in order to justify the use of proactive investigation powers, the police has to know or suspect the planning of a violation of penal code article 175a, punishable with at least four years of imprisonment. Its execution has to be an operation of an “organised crime association” defined as a “companionship of three or more persons with the main objective to systematically commit criminal acts, directly or indirectly for profit.”

The bill has only been briefly debated in parliament and has yet to go through second and third discussion before undergoing voting. But judging on the discussion in parliament last month, it will receive majority support — only members of The Movement have seriously criticised the proactive investigation powers.

One of them, Margrét Tryggvadóttir, recently pointed out that the police seem to have quite a decent overview of the given crime groups, even claiming to know their exact number of members. Along with recent admissions that for the last couple of years the police has received judicial permissions for wire-tapping in more than 99% of requested instances, this got her to question the real need for increased powers. Author and film-maker Haukur Már Helgason echoed this criticism in a series of blog posts last year, nominating “the brand name Hell’s Angels” as “the biggest favour done to expansion-greedy police force.”

Nonetheless, the police and members of three parties who together make up two thirds of parliament are asking for more. In a parliamentary proposition submitted last year they ask the Minister of the Interior to prepare another bill, this time regarding the aforementioned Scandinavian investigation powers. The proposition is currently in the midst of parliamentary process and though Ögmundur might claim he does not like it, it is questionable if he could actually resist such a majority will. Additionally, recent polls suggest that the right wing conservative Independence Party will gain a majority in the coming 2013 parliamentary elections, in which case it is certain that the police will not have to wait too long for the “good things” to happen.

Despite what has been presented by official police statements and through most media coverage, this would certainly not be an indicative of a new period of increased investigation powers. It would be a step backwards into an already realised future.

German MP Andrej Hunko states that European police authorities are overtly and covertly planning increased surveillance of activists

Perhaps this is no longer common knowledge, but it still is a documented fact that the police authorities in the Western world operated in such a way throughout the whole of the 20th century.

“Though we have not yet managed to change the laws, we have managed to bring attention to the cause, which is very important.” So says Andrej Hunko who lately has been struggling against police spying on people involved with social movements in Europe. Hunko, who is a MP for the German left-wing party ‘Die Linke’, is concerned about the increased use of such espionage, especially as movements located on the political left wing are increasingly labelled as “leftist extremist and terrorists groups” that “have to” be monitored closely.

“I am concerned about this development. I am utterly opposed to the systematic criminalisation of international activists.” Among other things, Hunko, who is a member of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs of the European Parliament, points out that plans are now being made to co-ordinate the laws of the member-states of the European Union, so that police spies from one country will be able to operate in another country without the special permissions that have been required. Hunko believes that this will subvert the work of social movements in Europe. “All this is happening very quickly and without an informed discussion, neither among members of national parliaments nor among members of the European Parliament, not to mention the public in those countries.”

Espionage Permitted in Iceland

In the beginning of March, I met Hunko at his office in the German parliament. Having forgotten to bring my passport, I was at first denied entrance into the German parliament. A woman sitting at the reception shook her head with a strict expression and maintained that she could do nothing to help me. But as I stood bewildered in the building’s lobby, I was suddenly greeted by a tall, smiling man, whose gait was light, his hair long and gray. Before long the doors opened up and he invited me to come along. After passing through security guards and metal detectors we started our journey and Hunko spoke briefly about the parliament building — this huge wing that consumed the two of us as we walked up the stairs towards his office.

Those who have followed DV’s coverage about the case of Mark Kennedy, the British police spy and agent provocateur, do probably already recognize Andrej Hunko. He has continuously kept the Kennedy case in the spotlight in Europe and has demanded answers from both the German and the European Parliaments. As for a short revision, it can be mentioned that Mark Kennedy, who operated under the alias Mark Stone, infiltrated the Icelandic environmentalist movement Saving Iceland at Kárahnjúkar in 2005. There, Kennedy surveyed the group’s operations, recorded discussions, documented and gathered information, which he then passed on to the British police and possibly the Icelandic authorities as well.

An article published in DV in May last year under the title “Espionage Against Saving Iceland Permitted”, revealed that according to Icelandic laws, Kennedy was allowed to spy on Saving Iceland. This has never been refuted by the Icelandic police authorities and Hunko believes that just as the German police, the Icelandic police were aware of Kennedy’s activities.

Police-Saboteurs

During a telephone interview with DV about a year ago, Hunko stated his opinion that Kennedy’s case is a sign of the threat faced by European social movements. Now, a year later, he reiterated his concerns regarding that by using agent provocateurs like Kennedy, the police in Germany and other countries have in fact encouraged illegal actions within activist movements. In an open letter last year, Hunko appealed to the Icelandic authorities to investigate Kennedy’s operations in Iceland, wherein he mentioned that Kennedy did commit sabotage during protests in Germany and thereby broke the law. Though it has never been confirmed, it is possible that something similar happened in Iceland.

Such tactics are well known among agent provocateurs and are implemented so as to directly impact the development of protests, often to cause disturbances or to defame a particular cause. Agent provocateurs have increasingly become the topic of discussion within European and North American social movements, but such agents are rarely unveiled, as these are clear violations of the laws — something that most police authorities prefer not to be implicated with. However, Hunko points out that as Kennedy’s case has been confirmed and documented, studying it may help understanding the wider context. “It is, in fact, great that the Kennedy case merged to the surface, as now we have a confirmed example of the methods that are implemented. Nevertheless, I think we have a long way to go.”

“Travesty of Democracy”

“By planting agent provocateurs into social movements, where they directly influence the operations of these movements, the respective states have in fact started participating in the organization of political resistance. That way, they can affect the groups’ actions and defame them by violating the law, as happened in Kennedy’s case. Then we are witnessing a travesty of democracy, which in my opinion is a huge problem,” Hunko states, but he was already concerned about this development before Kennedy’s case entered public discussion last year. However, not until that particular case was exposed did international media start talking about police spying in a broader context.

Hunko explains how he had tried to bring the attention of German media to Kennedy’s case, but nothing happened until British newspaper The Guardian started reporting it. “So we needed the British media in order to reach the German media, which is a bit strange,” Hunko says and points out that in the beginning, the Kennedy case got people to seriously think about police spying within democratic societies. But today people have become indolent again. In the wake of the Kennedy scandal it was revealed that the police department that he worked for in the UK has now been disbanded. This is an example of how the wool is pulled over the eyes of the public, Hunko says, as another police department was simply established to take care of the same task.

Lack of Information

“Despite the high profile of Kennedy’ case, it is by no means the sole instance of such police espionage,” Hunko says and adds that similar examples have already surfaced in Germany. Kennedy himself has also admitted his knowledge of other spies operating in Europe. Hunko says that in the German parliament, clear rules regarding freedom of information have made it easy for him and his fellow party-members to obtain information about the case. Thus it was possible to expose the fact that the German police were fully aware of Mark Kennedy‘s presence in Germany.

“The problem, however, is that it is way more complicated to obtain such information in the European Parliament,“ Hunko says and adds that new regulations are now being created, regarding the co-operation of European police espionage departments. “I consider it one of my tasks to bring this information to the public.“

Hunko believes that the Icelandic police — just as the German police — were aware of Kennedy’s presence and intelligence-gathering in Iceland. The Icelandic police authorities have not denied this and in a report by the National Commissioner, published in May last year, it is stated that judging from “the available data”, it is not possible to make clear if Kennedy, when in Iceland, was or was not “in collaboration or with the will and knowledge of the Icelandic police.”

The report also emphasised that the police is, in fact, allowed to use spies and agent provocateurs during the investigations of criminal activities. But the report failed to fulfil its simple objective, that is to bring forward answers to questions by Iceland’s Minister of the Interior. “There is nothing in it, it is just some foam,” Birgitta Jónsdóttir, MP for Hreyfingin, said about the report. She openly asked for clear information about the Icelandic police’s possible knowledge of Kennedy’s presence in Iceland. But so far, no clear answers have appeared.

Ögmundur Wants Increased Investigation Powers

Following the report, Iceland’s Minister of the Interior, Ögmundur Jónasson, stated that law amendments were needed regarding these issues — that it was necessary to change the law in a way that it does not allow the planting of spies into groups of political dissidents. By admitting the importance of law amendments, he admitted that up until then, the police had been allowed to spy on and infiltrate political groups, due to loopholes in the body of laws. On 22 March this year, he emphasised this point in parliament, during a discussion on so-called increased police investigation powers.

It has been confirmed that when environmentalists protested against the construction of the Kárahnjúkar dams, a foreign infiltrator was planted into the group. It has been stated that this policeman violated laws and rules by his operations here and along Europe […] The infiltrator was able to operate at Kárahnjúkar because of how unclear the regulations were regarding the police’s investigation methods. The legislation was far from being strong enough and in addition to that, there were a few regulations in force that were never made available to the public. This has now been changed. About a year ago, new regulations were passed regarding the police’s special investigation methods and actions. These regulations prohibit any kind of proactive police investigations of grass-roots groups or political organizations. Thus it can be mentioned that today, an infiltrator would not be permitted to operate at Kárahnjúkar.

According to the above-stated, the minister believes that the new laws on pre-emptive investigation powers will prevent espionage of such kind. On the contrary, Hunko claims that as long as movements, located on the left-wing of politics, are still systematically labelled as “left-wing extremists and terrorist organizations”, the increased investigation powers will be used to spy on such groups, just as other “terrorist groups”. Thus it is only a matter of definition.

Well Known Methodology

When I mention how unbelievable this case has been, bringing to mind James Bond films from the 1970’s or something that took place in the Soviet Union, Hunko replies calmly: “There is nothing particularly Soviet about this. Western police authorities used spies and agent provocateurs throughout the whole 20th century, in order to infiltrate political movements that were believed to pose a threat to certain interests. What comes to mind at first is the Gladio Project, which was organized by NATO after the Second World War, with the aim of stopping the upswing of communism in Italy.”

The Gladio Project, which has been the subject of various books, was a secret army run by the CIA, the British secret service, the Pentagon and NATO. From the end of the Second World War and up until 1990, the army operated in Italy and its primary goal was to fight against the upswing of communism in West Europe by any means necessary. To that end, American and British soldiers collaborated closely with right-wing terrorists, as explained in a book by Daniele Ganser, ‘NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation GLADIO and Terrorism in Western Europe’.

“The best kept, and most damaging, political-military secret since World War II,” was one of the ways The Observer used to describe the Gladio project after its exposure in 1990, while The Times stated: “The story seems straight from the pages of a political thriller.” In the wake of the exposure of the Gladio project in Italy in 1990, it became clear that such armies had been active in most Western European countries during the Cold War.

“Perhaps this is no longer common knowledge, but it still is a documented fact that the police authorities in the Western world operated in such a way throughout the whole of the 20th century,” Hunko says before he takes leave of me to continue preparations of questions that he plans to bring forward in parliament.

In one of Saving Iceland’s articles from last year, in response to the publication of a proposition for a parliamentary resolution regarding the Energy Master Plan, we mentioned environmentalists “clear opposition to the planned exploitation of certain wonders of nature, one example being the geothermal areas on the Reykjanes peninsula.”

Ellert Grétarsson, a photographer who has documented these areas extensively, fears that the drilling in Krýsuvík – covering between five and eight thousand square meters of land – will simply kill the area. And as a matter of fact, Ellert says, the whole Reykjanes peninsula will be riddled with energy construction. Hjörleifur Guttormsson, former Left Green MP and a genuine environmentalists, shares Ellert’s worries and has asked for an integral study of Reykjanes before any decisions are made.

In order to highlight the uniqueness of those magnificent areas, the recently established Nature Conservation Association of South-West Iceland has now published a web book with photos of the Reykjanes peninsula’s threatened geothermal areas. The photos in the book, titled The Reykjanes Peninsula: The Energy Master Plan’s Trash Can, are by aforementioned Ellert Grétarsson, whose photos decorate many of the articles published here on Saving Iceland’s website. The book can be viewed here:

Read more about the Energy Master Plan by following the Master Plan tag.

Since the publication of the long-awaited Energy Master Plan’s second phase in July last year, a good part of the discussion regarding the plan has been centred around the Þjórsá river, especially as the two concerned ministers — Minister of Environment Svandís Svavarsdóttir and Minister of Industry Katrín Júlíusdóttir — presented their proposition for a parliamentary resolution for the Master Plan, wherein the three Þjórsá dams were included. Following a three months long public commentary process — including 225 commentaries by individuals, organizations and companies, of which more than 70 had specifically to do with Þjórsá — the above-mentioned ministers have been working on amending their proposal in order for it to go through parliamentary discussion before the end of parliament sessions this spring.

The Energy Master Plan, which is supposed to lay the foundation for a long-term settlement upon the future exploitation and protection of Iceland natural resources, is split into three categories, of which two are quite clear, titled “exploitation” and “protection”, but the third one, titled “in waiting”, has pretty much been the bone of contention. On the one hand those in favour of extreme energy extraction believe that too many exploitable areas are being kept in waiting, while on the other hand environmentalists think that many of the areas categorized as in waiting should rather be moved straight into the protection category.

As frequently highlighted by Saving Iceland, the Þjórsá conflict splits the government, manifested in the Left Green’s focus on nature conservation versus the social democratic People’s Alliance’s (Samfylkingin) focus on so-called job creation. According to the above-mentioned news an additional inside split has occurred within the latter party, wherein a part wants to follow the Left Green line while others would rather give the go ahead for the three dams in lower Þjórsá.

During a radio interview this morning, Össur Skarphéðinsson, Minister for Foreign Affairs and MP for the People’s Alliance, pointed out that according to laws regarding the Energy Master Plan, environmentalist organizations should be asked to comment on energy options, and more importantly, their comments should be taken into account when final decisions are made. Considering the high quantity of negative remarks about the Þjórsá dams, in addition to the fact that the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for one of the three dams, Urriðafoss dam, will expire next year, Skarphéðinsson claimed it sensible to move Þjórsá to the waiting category until further researches and a new EIA have been made.

However, by moving the project from exploitation to waiting, but not straight to protection, it is not unlikely that the final decision about the Þjórsá dams will be in the hands of a different government. Recent polls suggest that the current government will not stand after parliamentary elections next year and that the right wing conservative party, Sjálfstæðisflokkurinn (e. Independence Party), might end up as the biggest party. The Independence Party has repeatedly pushed for the damming of Þjórsá, most recently in December last year when 10 of the party’s MPs proposed a bill in parliament, suggesting an interim provision allowing the Minister of Industry, rather than Iceland’s Energy Authority, to grant the National Power Company (Landsvirkjun) permission to start building the three proposed dams.

Landsvirkjun has repeatedly stated that no contracts exist concerning the possible energy from lower Þjórsá and that the company will not enter any negotiations regarding Þjórsá until the Master Plan is ready, given that the river will be included in the exploitation category. However both environmentalists and heavy-industrialists believe that the Þjórsá dams are in fact crucial for the continued construction of Century Aluminum’s planned but currently on-hold aluminium smelter in Helguvík. Parliamentarians as well as local politicians in Reykjanesbær, the municipality of where Helguvík is located, have recently mentioned the delay of the Þjórsá dams as one of the main reasons for the standstill situation of the Helguvík project, whereas environmentalists have pointed out that at least the planned Urriðafoss dam is needed for the Helguvík smelter to operate.
_________________________________________

To read more in-depth and detailed articles regarding the Þjórsá conflict and the Energy Master Plan, follow the Þjórsá tag and the Energy Master Plan tag.

With aluminium known to be such a poisonous metal, a serious investigation into the effects of aluminium production on the health of smelter workers and nearby communities is surely badly needed.

Is aluminium really a silent killer?

By Liz Bestic, 05 Mar 2012

The Telegraph

Twenty-four years ago, one of the UK’s most notorious pollution disasters occurred. At a water treatment works on the edge of Bodmin Moor, 20 tonnes of aluminium sulphate leaked into the water supply serving the nearby town of Camelford.

“I’m glad that the women, who were used physically and emotionally by British undercover police, have decided to initiate a legal action against police. Thereby, the operations of these police officers lands once again on the German parliamentary agenda,”

Eight women have filed legal action against the Metropolitan Police. Five officers have been named that have infiltrated leftist movements since the 1980′s, and used deceit to create sexual relationships with these women. Among them is the former undercover officer Mark Kennedy, who worked for the German police in the states of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern und Baden-Wuerttemberg. The open statement of these women contradicts the claims of Kennedy, that he only had sexual relationships with two women.

Andrej Hunko further stated:

“The courageous step of these eight women must also have consequences in Germany.

According to media reports, Kennedy was operating in 22 countries. It follows then, that Kennedy likely also used such illegal tactics in these countries. In my opinion, the Kennedy operations went against the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 8, which protects the rights for private and family life, including the right to form relationships without unjustified interference by the state.

According to Mark Kennedy, it is unlikely that his commanding officers did not know about his sexual relationships. The women involved speak about an ‘institutionalised sexism within the police’.

Although the British Interior Minister announced a restructuring of the undercover operations earlier this year, it appears that only cosmetic changes have taken place. Further investigations have been delayed. The demands for an independent investigation commission has already been denied.

The German policing agencies responsible for the operations of Mark Kennedy must now release all information about his scandalous operation. The German National Criminal Police (BKA) must immediately open up the workings of this network: the police acted as a central point for these cross -border undercover exchanges, and took part in secret international working groups. A recently begun German-British initiative has attempted, at the EU level, to keep such undercover operations a large secret.

The British government must accept that in many countries, there is a need for strong investigations into this affair. Only then can there be the creation of a proper international, and especially independent investigation commission. Then the practices of these undercover officers could be exposed, whether they are in Iceland, Italy, France, Ireland, USA, Germany, or anywhere else”.

By Snorri Páll Jónsson Úlfhildarson.
Originally published in the Reykjavík Grapevine.

Criminal court cases, waged by The State against political dissidents for acts of protest and civil disobedience, can be understood in two ways. Firstly, the juridical system can be seen as a wholly legitimate platform for solving social conflicts. Such a process then results with a verdict delivered by Lady Justice’s independent agents—a ruling located somewhere on the scale between full punishment and absolute acquittal. According to this view, it is at this point only that a punishment possibly enters the picture. And only if deserved.

Secondly—and herein lies a fundamental difference—the original decision to press charges can be seen as a punishment in itself, regardless of the final verdict. With these two points of understanding in mind, two recent verdicts, which have not received much attention, are worth observing.

You Shall Not Run

Number one is the case against Haukur Hilmarsson and Jason Slade who in June 2008, while attempting to stop an airplane from departing, and thereby deporting Kenyan asylum seeker Paul Ramses to Italy, ran onto a closed-off area at the Leifur Eiríksson International Airport in Keflavík. To shorten a long and complicated story (covered in-length here) their political sprint snowballed into protests of all kinds, eventually bringing the asylum seeker back to Iceland, where he and his family were granted an asylum.

During the case’s most recent court proceedings—the third one, indeed, after already rolling through Reykjavík’s District Court and Iceland’s Supreme Court—the two accused attempted a moral defence, speaking solely about the act for which they were charged and which they justified with a reference to the asylum seeker’s desperate need and the large-scale impacts of their actions. But neither prosecutor nor judge were willing to speak of these things, focusing instead on fences and the possibility of destroying an airplane’s engine by being sucked into one such. Eventually the two were found guilty of violating air-safety regulations and air-traffic laws, and ruled to pay a fine, lower than what the State pays for executing the trial.

You Shall Not Stand

Number two is the case against Lárus Páll Birgisson who recently was sentenced for disobeying police orders and this is in fact his second sentencing in a year, due to exactly the same scenario: Lárus stands on a sidewalk in front of the U.S. embassy in Reykjavík, holding a sign bearing a message against war. Police arrives after a complaint from the embassy and order him to leave the sidewalk. Lárus rejects, citing his legally and constitutionally protected right to protest, and official data regarding the sidewalk’s public status. He is then arrested, charged and finally sentenced.

And what is it, so heavy and hazardous, that undermines his right to protest in public? “It is well-known,” says in the judge’s verdict, “that embassies worldwide have in recent years and decades been targets of perpetrators and hence it is not strange that their staff is on alert regarding traffic in the most nearest surroundings.” And not a single additional word. The justification starts and ends in one and the same sentence, referring to something “well-known”—a concept as blurry, insignificant and out-of-context as “public opinion” and “common sense”.

You Shall be Punished

On the surface, these sentences per se are of no heavy-weight importance for The State (actually minor enough, according to recent rules, not to be published officially, which might—possibly—explain the little-as-no attention). And while the sentenced ones would obviously have preferred different results, the relatively low fines are certainly not equivalent to physical imprisonment.

So, what is the use then? In fact, both cases perfectly embody the second above-mentioned way of understanding—that the punishment lies in the charges themselves but not the final verdict. Not only does it consume money, time and energy from those directly involved, but its social impacts are also dead serious.

To begin with, such verdicts give the police a further green light for giving illegal orders and arresting those who disobey in the name of their rights. Probably more importantly, they clearly determine the precedent that it is worth forcing political dissidents into long and costly court cases—in these two cases keeping people inside the court system for years and repeatedly charging the same man for the same completely harmless act—even when the final results amount to be mere small-talk. An ongoing and ever-hanging threat of sentences, fines and jail-time, is more than likely to keep people away from resisting oppression, meaning that the threat is a form of silencing, a form of oppression, itself.

For Mine is the State, the Power and the Justice

Regarding the first-mentioned way of understanding, it might be worth wondering if these court cases possibly manifest a resolution of social conflicts. In order to be so, the discussion in court would have had to be free from anything like “well-known” or “public-good” and instead deal with the tough tug between status-quo—such as airport rules and fences, or the police’s right to order and be obeyed—and people’s legal, ethical and natural rights to directly and spontaneously interfere with their up-front reality.

But as Haukur Hilmarsson said during his procedure, one of the most humiliating factors of being dragged through the courts is to have a dialogue based on The State’s premises. No matter how willing the defendant is to speak about his action and debate its over-all legitimacy, in such context Lady Justice just does not seem to weigh a challenging argument. The weighing-scale might be broken… or is this—punishing via prosecuting—maybe, after all, what solving social conflicts and doing justice is essentially about?

These news echo the many warnings made by the opponents of the cluster of five dams at Kárahnjúkar and nearby Eyjabakkar, who repeatedly stated that the project’s alleged profitability was nothing but an illusion, but were systematically silenced by Iceland’s authorities.

Now, as these facts finally become established in the media—this time straight from the horse’s mouth—similarly bad news has arrived regarding another big Icelandic energy company. Reykjavík Energy has failed to make a profit from their 2007 and 2008 investments, effectively making them lose money. At the same time, new research shows that the environmental impacts of the Kárahnjúkar dams are exactly as vast and serious as environmentalists and scientists feared.

And yet, more dams, geothermal power-plants and aluminium smelters are on the drawing table—presented as the only viable way out of the current economic crisis.

Dividend: Close to Zero

During the last half century, Landsvirkjun has paid its owner—the Icelandic nation—only 7,8 billion Icelandic Krónur (66 million USD at present value) as dividend, which according to Hörður Arnarson is way too low and in fact almost equivalent to zero. While it would be fair to expect around eleven percent dividend from the company’s own equity, it has been at an average of two percent since Landsvirkjun was founded. The income from the Kárahnjúkar plant has been about 6 percent of its book value, which again is too low, as according to normal standards the income should be 9 percent of the book value.

At present, Landvirkjun’s total earnings have been 73 million US dollars at most, whereas it should be closer to 180 million USD, considering the owner’s 1,6 billion USD equity. It was made clear by Arnarson that the price of energy purchased by large-scale energy consumers plays a major role herein—a price that obviously has been far below any rational logic and standards.

Same Old, Same Old

In 2003, British newspaper The Guardian published “Power Driven”, Susan De Muth’s exclusive report about the Kárahnjúkar power plant, which at that point was already under construction. Among many critiques made in the article, De Muth questioned Kárahnjúkar’s allegeded profitability. She wrote:

Thorsteinn Siglaugsson, a risk specialist, prepared a recent independent economic report on Karahnjukar for the Icelandic Nature Conservation Association. “Landsvirkjun’s figures do not comprise adequate cost and risk analysis,” he says, “nor realistic contingencies for overruns.” Had the state not guaranteed the loans for the project, Siglaugsson adds, it would never have attracted private finance. “Karahnjukar will never make a profit, and the Icelandic taxpayer may well end up subsidising Alcoa.”

Siglaugsson is just one of many who critically analysed the economics of the Kárahnjúkar project, concluding that its contribution to Iceland’s economy would be about none—or in fact negative. But just as many geologists who cautioned against the risks of locating the dams in a highly geologically seismic area were dismissed by Valgerður Sverrisdóttir, then Minister of Industry, as “politically motivated and not to be listened to”, so were the skeptical economists.

De Muth’s article caused a real stir in Iceland, manifest for instance in the fact that Landsvirkjun and Iceland’s Embassy in London contacted The Guardian in a complaint about “so much space […] used for promoting factual errors and misconceptions of the project and Icelandic society as a whole.” Friðrik Sophusson, Landsvirkjun’s director at that time—who in the article is quoted calling all of Kárahnjúkar’s opponents “romantics”—actually offered The Guardian to send another journalist over to Iceland in order to do “a proper report on issues in Iceland”, this time with his “assistance.” ALCOA also sent a barrage of objections to the Guardian. All the facts presented in the article were double checked by the Guardian’s legal team and confirmed to be accurate.

This volatile response from the authorities and corporates only strengthened the article’s points on the Icelandic tradition of suppressing criticism. This was confirmed in a letter to The Guardian by Icelandic environmentalist and commentator Lára Hanna Einarsdóttir, who suggested that “an Icelandic journalist would have lost [his or her] job if he or she had been so outspoken.”

The Coming Recession

And no wonder, as the article pinpointed serious flaws in the whole rhetoric surrounding the plans to heavily industrialize Iceland, plans that would be nothing without the construction of a series of mega hydro dams and geothermal power plants. Whereas these plans were presented as a path to an increased economical prosperity, De Muth quoted aforementioned economist Siglaugsson, who voiced his fear “that a boom during the construction period, with attendant high interest rates, will be followed by a recession.”

And as time told, this was indeed what happened. In an article published in the early days of Iceland’s current financial crisis, Jaap Krater, ecological economist and spokesperson of Saving Iceland, gave it a thorough explanation:

These mega-projects in a small economy have been compared to a ‘heroin addiction’. Short-term ‘shots’ lead to a long-term collapse. The choice is between a short-term infuse or long-term sustainable economic development. The ‘shot’ of Fjardaal [Alcoa's aluminium smelter in Iceland, powered by the Kárahnjúkar power plant] overheated the Icelandic economy.

Recognizing the dangers of overheating the economy—a point also made clear in Charles Ferguson’s recent documentary, Inside Job—leaves us with two options. As Krater pointed out:

There has been a lot of critique on the proposed plans to develop Iceland’s unique energy resources. Those in favour of it have generally argued that it is good for the economy. Anyone who gives it a moment of thought can conclude that that is a myth. Supposed economic benefits from new power plants and industrial plants need to be assessed and discussed critically and realistically. Iceland is coming down from a high. Will it have another shot, or go cold turkey?

Another Shot, Please

This spring, Landsvirkjun stated that if the company was to start its operations from scratch the aluminium industry would be its prime costumer. This particular paradox—as the aluminium industry is already its biggest energy purchaser—was just one of Landsvirkjun’s many. Another one is their suggestion that Icelanders should “settle upon” plans to build 14 new power plants in the next 15 years. And the third one is the company’s plans to sell more energy to aluminium companies—costumers who, in Landsvirkjun’s own words, do not pay a fair amount for what they get.

But Arnarson has said that the future looks better, referring for instance to the fact that the price for Kárahnjúkar’s energy is directly connected to world-wide aluminium prices, which Arnarson says are getting higher. Herein is the fourth paradox, as linking energy prices with aluminium prices has so far been disastrous for Iceland’s economy—most recently acknowledged in an official report regarding the profitability of selling energy to heavy industry. According to the report, commissioned by the Ministry of Finance and published last Friday, December 2nd, the total profitability has been an average 5% from 1990 until today, which is far below the profitability of other industries in Iceland, and much lower than the profitability of similar industries in Iceland’s neighbouring countries. The year 1990 is crucial here, as since then, Landsvirkjun’s energy prices to heavy industry have been directly linked to global aluminium prices.

It is worth quoting Jaap Krater again here, where he explains the dangers of interlinking these two prices, and describes how increased aluminium supply will lower the price of aluminium and decrease revenue for Iceland:

One might think that a few hundred thousand tons of aluminium more or less will not impact the global market. The reality is that it is not the sum of production that determines the price but rather the friction between supply and demand. A small amount of difference can have a significant effect in terms of pricing.

High Costs, Low Production

On top of this, recent calculations revealed in newspaper Fréttablaðið, show that Kárahnjúkar is Landsvirkjun’s proportionally most expensive construction. When the production of each of the company’s power plants is compared with the production of Landsvirkjun’s property as a whole, as a proportion of their construction costs, it becomes clear that Kárahnjúkar—with its 2.3 billion USD initial cost—is the most economically unviable plant.

Another Energy Company in Crisis

At the same time that Icelanders face Landsvirkjun’s confession to it’s virtually zero profitability, a damning report on another big energy company, Reykjavík Energy (OR), has been made public. It was originally published at the beginning of this year but wasn’t supposed to enter the public sphere, which it indeed didn’t until in late November. Reykjavík Energy’s biggest shareholder is the city of Reykjavík, meaning the inhabitants of Reykjavík.

As already documented thoroughly, the company—which operates several geothermal power plants, including Hellisheiðarvirkjun, largely built to fuel Century Aluminum’s production—is in pretty deep water. But the newly leaked report proves that it has sunk even deeper than generally considered. The report is a literal condemnation of the company, its board and its highest ranking managers, who get a grade F for their job. A good part of Reykjavík Energy’s investments from 2007 and 2008 are now considered as lost money.

The report also reveals that when energy contracts between OR and Norðurál (Century Aluminum) were made, for the latter’s planned fantasy-of-a-smelter in Helguvík, Reykjavík Energy’s directors completely ignored the very visible economic collapse confronting them.

Recently it has been reported that Reykjavík Energy owes 200 billion Icelandic ISK in foreign currency, which is two thirds of all foreign debts owed by Icelandic companies, whose income is not in foreign currency.

What we see here are two of Iceland’s largest energy companies, both of them public property, both having spent hugely excessive amounts of money—or more precisely, collected gigantic debts—struggling to continue to build power plants in order to feed the highly energy intensive aluminium industry with dirt cheap and allegedly “green” energy. As a result, they have ended up without profit and in a deep pool of debt.

And who is to pay for their gambling risks? As Thorsteinn Siglaugsson stated in 2003: the Icelandic taxpayer.

“No Impacts” Become Huge Impacts

To make bad news even worse, the irreversibly destructive ecological impacts of the Kárahnjúkar dams have, in the last months, become more and more visible. To quote “Power Driven” once again (as simply one of a good number of warnings on the dams’ environmental impacts):

The hydro-project will also divert Jokulsa a Dal at the main dam, hurtling the river through tunnels into the slow-moving Jokulsa i Fljotsdal, which feeds Iceland’s longest lake, Lagarfljot. The calm, silver surface of this tourist attraction will become muddy, turbulent and unnavigable.

This was written in 2003. Today, this is what is happening: because of the river’s glacial turbidity Lagarfljót has changed colour, which according to Guðni Guðbergsson, ichthyologist at the Institute of Freshwater Fisheries (IFF), means that light doesn’t reach as deep into the water as before (see photos aside and below). Photosynthesis, which is the fundamental basis for organic production, decreases due to limited light, its domino effects being the constant reduction of food for the fish. IFF’s researches show that near Egilsstaðir, where visibility in Lagarfljót was 60 cm before the dams were built, it is now only 17 cm. They also show that there are not only less fish in the river, but that the fish are much smaller than before.

In addition to this, residents by Lagarfljót have faced serious land erosion due to the river’s increased water content and strength.

This effect was warned of in an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the project by the Iceland National Planning Agency (INPA), purposely ignored and overruled by Siv Friðleifsdóttir, then Minister of Environment. Landsvirkjun had complained to the Ministry of the Environment, and the EIA ended up on Friðleifsdóttir’s table, who nevertheless issued a permit for the construction, stating that the dams would have no significant impact on Lagarfljót.

In response of the news on Lagarfljót’s current condition, Svandís Svavarsdóttir, Minister of the Environment, said during parliamentary discussion last September, that her Ministry’s over-all administration regarding the Kárahnjúkar decision-process will be examined in detail. She should demand a similar investigation into the decision making of the Ministry of Industry, whose Minister, Valgerður Sverissdóttir has, along with Landsvirkjun’s Friðrik Sophusson, openly admitted while joking on film with the US ambassador in Iceland, how they enjoyed “bending all the rules, just for Alcoa.”

All the Old Dogs

Despite all of this, Iceland’s energy companies, hand in hand with the aluminium industry, some of the biggest labour unions and industry-related associations—not to mention a majority of parliamentarians, including those of government-member social-democratic Samfylkingin—are still in heavy industry mode, campaigning for the construction of more dams, geothermal power plants and aluminium smelters. Ironically, but still deadly serious, smelter projects such as Century Alumium’s Helguvík, which is at a standstill, unable to guarantee both necessary energy and financing, continue to be presented as profitable solutions to the current crisis.

Met with little resistance in parliament, most of these plans are still considered to be on the drawing table, though most of them seem to be on hold when looked at closely. The latter is mostly thanks to grassroots activists, bloggers and commentators who have systematically reminded the public of the reality, while the bulk of journalists seem to be unable to stick to facts—being extraordinarily co-dependent with those in favour of further heavy-industrialization.

Under the banner of “solving the crisis”, “creating jobs”, and most recently “getting the wheels of work to spin again”, the heavy industry-favoured parties seem to simply refuse to listen to hard facts, even their very own. This attitude is probably best summed up in the recent words of Valgerður Sverrisdóttir, responsible as Minister of Industry, for the building of the dams at Kárahnjúkar, who in response to the news about the power plant’s close-to-zero profitability, said that she wouldn’t want to imagine how the current financial situation would be, if the dams hadn’t been built.

It is said that an old dog will not learn new tricks. And to be honest, ‘old dogs’ pretty accurately describes those making decisions on Iceland’s energy and industry affairs. In order to learn from mistakes and prevent even bigger catastrophes, it wouldn’t be unfair to ask for a new generation—would it?
_____________________________________________________

More photos of Lagarfljót’s turbid condition

These photos are from 2008, which suggests that the current condition is even worse.

International Rivers and Friends of the Earth International have teamed up to create a state-of-the-art Google Earth 3-D tour and video narrated by Nigerian activist Nnimmo Bassey, winner of the prestigious Right Livelihood Award. The production was launched on the first day of the COP 17 climate meeting in Durban. The video and tour allow viewers to explore why dams are not the right answer to climate change, by learning about topics such as reservoir emissions, dam safety, and adaptation while visiting real case studies in Africa, the Himalayas and the Amazon.

During a recent meeting of chairmen from all the member unions of the Icelandic Confederation of Labour (ASÍ), Hörður Arnarson, the director of the national energy company, Landsvirkjun, said that due to the current situation on international markets it would be enormously difficult for Norðurál to finance the 250 billion ISK smelter project. According to Vilhjálmur Birgisson, who attended the meeting, chairman of the Labor Union of Akranes (near to Grundartangi, where Century’s currently operating smelter is located),  Hörður spoke of the Helguvík project’s likelihood as very negligible. Another representative at the meeting, Kristján Gunnarsson, chairman of the Labour and Fishermen Union of Keflavík, stated that when asked about the possibility of Landsvirkjun selling energy to Norðurál, Hörður answered saying that no energy is really available for the project.

While it certainly is true that Landsvirkjun has, especially in the nearest past, had problems with financing, due to the international financial crisis as well as the Icelandic economy’s instability, the latter point – that no energy is actually available for Helguvík – is of more importance here. Environmentalists have, from the beginning of the Helguvík project, stated that the plans to harness energy for the smelter in geothermal areas on the Reykjanes peninsula, are not sufficient, for two reasons. Firstly, as the alleged size of the energy extraction is not sustainable and is more than likely to drain these unique natural areas for good. Secondly, because even if fully exploited, the geothermal areas would not produce enough energy for the smelter. Another energy source will be essential in order for the smelter to operate and even though Reykjavík Energy (OR) has promised Century some energy from a planned enlargement of their power plant in Hellisheiði, the aluminium producer still faces a serious lack of electricity for Helguvík.

It is here that Lower Þjórsá enters the picture. In November 2007 Landsvirkjun announced that the company would not supply any further energy to aluminium smelting in the South-West of Iceland, meaning Rio Tinto Alcan’s smelter Straumsvík, Century’s smelter in Grundartangi and the one planned in Helguvík. But many have doubted the truth behind this statement. In early June of 2008, when Saving Iceland activists gate-crashed Century Aluminum’s lack-of-permission-party in Helguvík, Saving Iceland highlighted the obvious lack of energy and asked if the planned damming of the river was meant for the smelter. Though Landsvirkjun has always denied those suggestions, several different signs have suggested the opposite.

Geologist Sigmundur Einarsson has  for the last couple of years repeatedly called attention to the inaccuracy concerning geothermal energy’s alleged sustainability and efficiency. In a new article about Reykjanes’ energy resources, Sigmundur once again points out the real energy figures and reveals that even if H.S. Orka is able to go ahead with its energy plans for Reykjanes – as mentioned above currently on hold due to an arbitration conflict between H.S. Orka and Century regarding energy prices – the Helguvík smelter will still lack between 310 and 390 MW. Sigmundur theorises that Century has from the beginning been aware of its slack energy situation, but used the cheap trick to simply start construction and thereby create expectations among the inhabitants of the Reykjanes peninsula. “Shallow-minded Icelandic politicians,” says Sigmundur, “were then supposed to bite the bait and sort out the energy by ordering Landsvirkjun to dam Lower Þjórsá (c.a. 200 MW) and sell it to Norðurál [Century] for a price accepted by the aluminium company.”

Not only does this theory full confirm Saving Iceland’s and other environmentalists’ repeated warnings not to let Century start construction of the Helguvík smelter, but now it also seems that at least a few high ranking officials have come to the same conclusion. Following Alcoa’s recent announcement about the company’s withdrawal from its years long planned Húsavík smelter, both Katrín Júlíusdóttir, minister of industry, and Hörður Arnarson, Landsvirkjun’s director, stated that Alcoa and other interested parties had created unrealistic expectations way ahead the establishing of the project’s key foundations. Thus it should not take them long to put two and two together, realizing that the same story applies to Helguvík – something that neither of them has been willing to seriously address until now.

To officially state the dead end of Century’s Helguvík dreams, Landsvirkjun would have to confirm that the planned Þjórsá dams are not meant for the smelter but for quite a while the company has been unwilling to openly discuss the Þjórsá project. The Þjórsá conflict actually splits the sitting government: While favored by the social-democrats of Samfylking, of which the minister of industry is a member, it is opposed by the Left Greens (VG). When asked about Þjórsá, Landsvirkjun now cites the Master Plan for the exploitation and protection of Iceland’s natural resources, currently in making, of which conclusions the company will wait for before any further comments. In a draft for a parliamentary solution regarding the Master Plan, the three planned Þjórsá dams are given a green light for construction. But this might change due to strong local opposition to the dams as well as the comments of a considerable number of people who protested against the project during a three months long open reviewing process, which was a part of the Master Plan’s making.

Albeit not necessary being the project’s one and only fundamental foundation, the protection of Lower Þjórsá would almost certainly mark the end of Century’s fantasies of a smelter in Helguvík. Until then the myth might live a bit longer.
_______________________________________________________

For more information about Century Aluminum, its operations in Iceland and the Helguvík crisis, see:

Century Aluminum Energy Questions

From Siberia to Iceland: Century Aluminum, Glencore and the Incestuous World of Mining

Believes Aluminium Plant Is Poisoning Sheep

National Energy Authority Fears Overexploitation of Geothermal Areas in Reykjanes

Words by Paul Fontaine. Photo by Alísa Kalyanova. Originally published in The Reykjavík Grapevine.

One of Iceland’s proudest assets is its energy grid. Geothermal energy, by 2010 figures, accounts for just over 26% of the country’s electricity, as well as 86% of its heating and hot water. Iceland’s geothermal energy technology has been shared with countries around the world, and has attracted the interests of foreign investors.

However, as comparatively cleaner for the environment geothermal power is not without its problems. One of these is the main elephant in the room: geothermal energy is not a renewable energy source. Boreholes that tap into the massive steam vents below the surface do not last forever. When Ross Beaty, CEO of Magma Energy (now a part of Alterra Power Corp.) made the specious claim that geothermal energy lasts for centuries, scientists such as Stefán Arnórsson and Sigmundur Einarsson were quick to point out that geothermal power in the Reykjanes area — where Magma sought to drill — only had enough power to last about 60 years at best. Although this point was seldom, if ever, brought up in any previous discussion about geothermal power in Iceland, more recent events have shown that geothermal energy is not just non-renewable; it can even pollute.

DON’T DRINK THE WATER

First of all, the steam that geothermal energy taps does release a number of harmful emissions. The International Geothermal Association released a report in 2002 showing that these emissions can include carbon dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, methane and ammonia. These emissions are linked to global warming, and can do extensive environmental damage. Even the water itself can be poisonous — the scientific journal Environmental Contamination Toxicology published a study in 1997 which showed that waste water can contain chemicals such as mercury, arsenic and boron.

In order to reduce the amount of pollutants that geothermal power produces, it is necessary to take a number of precautions, such as recycling the steam through a series of compressors and pumps. The waste water needs to be channelled deep back into the ground, to prevent it from poisoning drinking water tables. Both of these precautions were outlined in the 2007 scholarly article ‘Strategic GHG reduction through the use of ground source heat pump technology’. This last point has been the centrepiece of the controversy surrounding one such plant in Iceland, Hellisheiðarvirkjun.

The largest power plant in Iceland — and slated to be the largest in the world once it reaches its full capacity — it is located in the geologically active Hengill area of southwest Iceland, comprised primarily of a chain of three volcanoes. The up-side of this is that a tremendous amount of power can be generated here: the plant estimates 400 megawatts will be reached once the two additional turbines added earlier this month as in full swing. The down-side is: geological activity means earthquakes.

The sheer amount of geological activity in the area cannot be underemphasised. Hundreds of tremors were reported in the Hengill area on a single day last September, and concerns were immediately raised that these tremors — some of them measuring 3 or higher on the Richter scale — could do damage to the pipeline that pumps waste water back into the ground, below drinking water tables. Steinunn Jakobsdóttir of the National Weather Service told Stöð 2 news at the time that larger quakes could not be ruled out.

The plant itself had already been targeted by environmentalists as damaging to the environment, from a developmental standpoint, with Saving Iceland trying to bring attention to the plant’s overall effects on the landscape. The notion that poisonous waste water could be broken free from pipes, and spilled into drinking water, turned the dial up on the anxiety.

NOTHING CAN POSSIBLY GO WRONG!

These concerns were immediately addressed by Bjarni Bjarnason, director of Orkuveita Reykjavíkur (Reykjavík Energy), the power company that oversees the plant. He told RÚV earlier this month that he did not believe waste water pipes were in any danger of being damaged by earthquakes, and added: “We see no danger [of waste water poisoning ground water] so long as we pump it at least 800 metres into the earth.”

But research done on the drilling does not necessarily support Bjarni’s claim. An environmental assessment conducted on the plant in 2006 by the South Iceland Health Supervisory Authority arrived at the conclusion that they “put a great deal of emphasis on closing the construction of the waste water disposal system and the area used to dispose of the water,” meaning that the area itself for pumping waste water back into the ground was far from ideal. Research conducted by the nearby municipality of Ölfus in March of this year concluded that there were not enough controls in place to even be able to handle the regular amount of waste water being produced under normal circumstances.

Despite these warnings, construction steamed ahead, and any criticism of waste water polluting drinking water was dismissed as alarmist. That is, until it was discovered that that’s exactly what happened.

STRANGE BREW

Only weeks ago, it was discovered that Hellisheiðarvirkjun had been pumping waste water containing hydrogen sulphide into drinking water tables, on and off, for two years. The reason? Before a new waste water borehole was completed last September, another one at the Gráuhnjúkar area had been used instead. This borehole did not have the capacity to deal with the amount of waste water it had to contend with, and so it released it, through a valve intended only for emergencies, into the drinking water tables.

Residents of nearby Hveragerði were less than pleased with this news, and called a town meeting demanding an explanation. They have been assured by Orkuveita Reykjavíkur that with the new waste water borehole in place, this practice will not continue. They also emphasised that their scientists do not believe the pumping of waste water into the ground will increase the risk of earthquakes. No mentions were made, however, on how well these pipes could hold up in the event of a strong enough quake — and strong earthquakes are not exactly uncommon to the area.

WHERE DOES THIS LEAVE US?

If geothermal power — Iceland’s crown jewel of green energy — is neither sustainable nor non-polluting, does this mean we need to turn exclusively to hydropower, which comprises the remainder of the country’s power source? What about oil, which is believed to lie beneath the seabed in Drekasvæði, the northern corner of Icelandic fishing waters?

There might not actually be a dichotomy at all — other green resources may exist. While Iceland is far from ideal when it comes to solar energy, and wave power is still proving to be both expensive to build and maintain, anyone who has ever visited the country can attest that if there is one thing Iceland has plenty of, it’s wind.

A research group assembled by Landsvirkjun in 2010, working in conjunction with Icewind — a pan-Scandinavian team looking to develop wind power in the Nordic countries — has concluded that wind power is a very realistic option for Iceland. They believe that building wind turbines in the southwest would be the best option.

Úlfar Linnet, an energy expert at Landsvirkjun, told Fréttablaðið that the matter should be explored seriously. “The goal is to have Iceland in step with the other Nordic countries,” he said in part. “We’re starting at zero, as a windmill has never been raised in Iceland. But we’re making progress.”

In fact, just last July Icelander Haraldur Magnússon successfully raised a 30 KW windmill on top of Hafnarfjall mountain, which immediately went into operation. MP Mörður Árnason — who is also the chairperson of the National Energy Authority Research Fund — believes that while figures do not seem to indicate that wind power is a competitive option at the moment, that it would be hasty to dismiss the option altogether. Indeed, there are many vast, uninhabited and perpetually windy areas in Iceland, particularly in the Highlands, which would make ideal grounds for a wind farm.

Whether the Icelandic government devotes more time and energy into exploring wind power remains to be seen. In the meantime, Hellisheiðarvirkjun is inadvertently repeating the point that geothermal power is not as green as it seems, and that it may be time for Iceland to put its pride and joy to rest.
_________________________________________________________

For further information and analysis see:

Saving Iceland’s Increased Sulphur Pollution in Reykjavík Due to Geothermal Expansion in Hellisheiði.

Miriam Rose’s and Jaap Krater’s Development of Iceland’s Geothermal Energy for Aluminium Production – Download as PDF.

Anna Andersen’s Reykjavík Energy in Deep Water: The Untold Story of Geothermal Energy in Iceland.

A special report for Saving Iceland by Dónal O’Driscoll

Preface

Glencore are the majority shareholder of Century, the owner of one operational and one half-built smelter in Iceland, it’s key operations for aluminium smelting. But who are Glencore and what are the implications for Iceland? This comprehensive article profiles the world’s biggest commodity broker, who’s only comparable predecessor was Enron. The profile covers the reach and grip of Glencore’s domination of metal, grain, coal and bio-oils markets, allowing it to set prices which profit very few and are detrimental to many. It shows the tight web of connections between the major mining companies and Glencore through shared board history and shared ownership of assets, cataloguing key shareholders (and board members) who’s stakes make them larger shareholders than institutional investors in ownership of Glencore. These connections include Rusal’s co chair Nathaniel Rothschild, a financier with a $40m investment in Glencore, and a personal friend of Peter Mandelson (former EU trade commissioner and British politician) and George Osborne (UK Chancellor).

The article details the human rights and environmental abuses of Glencore at it’s many operations, including the 2009 killing of Mayan indigenous leader Adolfo Ich Chamán who spoke out about Century’s activities in Guatemala under CEO-ship of Peter Jones (still a Century board member). It claims that Glencore is higher than most in the running for most abusive and environmentally detrimental mining company, going where lesser devils fear to tread – trading with Congo, Central Asia and embargoed countries such as Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and apartheid South Africa. Glencore founder Marc Rich was involved in trading embargoed Iranian oil, and fled the United States in 1983 accused of insider dealing and tax dodging over Iranian deals, becoming one of the 10 fugitives most wanted by the FBI, until he was pardoned by Bill Clinton. Glencore is still run by two of his main men.

Introduction

From Kazakhstan to Australia, taking in the views of Zambia, war-stricken Congo and Angola, cutting across from Siberia to Iceland is a network of mining and metals companies with a catalogue of environmental and community abuse in their wake. In Iceland its  face is Century Aluminum, but behind them, at the heart of this web lies the secretive commodity broker Glencore International of Switzerland. Glencore is about to launch one of the biggest placement of shares, raising $10 Billion, making a lot of people very rich and valuing itself as a company worth $60Bn. In this article we start to throw a spotlight on just how Glencore makes its money and how Iceland is just one of many victims of a company built on ruthless exploitation.

On the surface, Glencore’s wealth comes from the buying and selling of the world’s commodities (see below for more detail), specialising in grain and metal markets. However, what is unusual for a commodity broker is that it invests heavily in the very companies whose produce it is trading. Its interests are global, from the breadbaskets of Russia, to zinc mines in Kazakhstan, copper and cobalt interests in Congo and Angola, and aluminium in Iceland.

It is the latter that ties Glencore into the Icelandic economy through its 44% ownership of Century, as well as membership of the board of directors. Century is the owner of the Grundartangi smelter and is behind the building of another plant at Helguvik, for which a number of controversial new geothermal and hydro power plants would need to be built. There is also a doubt if enough energy to run a smelter in Helguvík actually exists. Glencore controls 38% of the global trading market in aluminium. Of this, 50% of this comes from Century and UC Rusal, the Russian Aluminium giant (of which Glencore owns 8.8%).

The result is a private network of personal ties and business relationships so tight that what matters to Century also matters to Glencore. The Icelandic government may be doing deals with Century, but Glencore is always present in the background, bringing unsavoury alliances to this particular bed. There are a lot of unanswered questions over how and with whom Glencore chooses to invest. One only has to look at its principle partners and deals to see it does not shy away from exploitation of war torn countries or making alliances with men whose fortunes carry with them heavy taints of corruption. Despite all the exuberance in financial circles at the profits to be made by the Glencore share offering, a few more level-headed traders and journalist are wondering if there should be more caution, especially given how little is known about the inner workings of the company and just how manages to pull off so many exceptionally profitable deals.

It is also worth noting that the last time the world saw such a commodity broker dominate a market to this extent ended up going very sour – that commodity broker being Enron.

Who are Century Aluminum?

Century is a company that specialises in smelting aluminium. It was founded in 1995 when various interests controlled by Glencore were brought together. In 1996 it was spun off as a public company^.1 As well as its Icelandic sites, which it owns outright, it owns or has a share in aluminium plants at Ravenswood, West Virginia, at Hawesville (100%), Kentucky (80% owned with the rest owned by Glencore), and at Mt. Holly, South Carolina (50%, the other half owned by Alcoa Inc). In the past it has had interests in the Congo. As a global player it is the 10th largest producer.

Its ownership remains dominated by Glencore at 44%, with the majority of the other shareholders being held in relatively small amounts by US institutional investors (hedge funds etc.).² It is clear from Century’s website that Iceland is a major part of their business and strategy and three executives of its Icelandic operations are listed as key management.

Key People

Gunnar Gudlaugsson, Plant Manager of Nordural Grundartangi

Joined Nordural in 2008, from Straumsvik, the Rio Tinto Alcan smelter, where he had served for over ten years.

Ragnar Gudmundsson, Managing Director of Nordural

Nordural is the holding company for the Icelandic interests of Century. Previously Chief Financial Officer of Basafell, prior to which he was a senior manager at Samskip, both leading companies in Iceland.

Wayne R. Hale, Chief Operating Officer

Joined Century in 2007, having previously been with Sual in Russia (it was Sual, Rusal and Glencore’s Russian aluminium interests which merged to form UC Rusal). Has also worked for Kaiser and Rio Tinto.

Peter Jones, Director

2001-2006 was President & Chief Operating Officer of Inco Ltd. Former President & CEO of Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting Co (retired at the end of 2009).

David J. Kjos, Vice President of Operations in Iceland

Former manager of Cygnus Inc, an aerospace manufacturing company; prior to that was with the United Development Co & Kaiser Aluminium & Chemical Co.

Logan W. Kruger, CEO, President

Joined November 2005. Before Century, from 2003 he had been a leading executive at Inco, the large nickel mining company where he over saw operations in the Asia / Pacific region, including the Goro Nickel operation in New Caledonia and other projects in Indonesia, remaining as a director of the Indonesian subsidiary P.T. Inco (Inco has since been acquired by the Brazilian nickel miner Vale). He has also served as head of Anglo American’s operations in Chile (2002-03) and as CEO of the Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting Co in Canada (1998-2002).³ He is also a director of Amcoal which over sees the South African coal interests of the mining giant Anglo-American.

Andrew Michelmore, Director

From 2009 CEO of Minerals and Metals Group; former CEO & Managing Director of OZ Minerals. Both firms are leading Australian mining companies. Minerals & Metals Group is a subsidiary of Minmetals Resources Ltd, a Hong Kong based company with significant aluminium interests in China.

John P. O’Brien, Chairman of the Board

Chairman since January 2008. His background is in business management and restructuring.

Willy R. Strothotte, Director

Chairman of Glencore and of Xstrata (see below under Glencore).

Jack E. Thompson, Director

Also serves a director for a number of other mining companies including Anglo-American and Centerra Gold (largest Western-based gold producer in Central Asia), among others.

Though there are 4 other directors who appear to represent general institutional investors, it is clear from the above that the board is dominated by mining executives who share considerable common history. There is much more that is not obvious just from this board of directors. For example, Century and Noranda purchased from Kaiser Aluminium the bauxite mine at St. Anns, Jamaica and factory at Gramercy, Louisiana, though Noranda has since bought out Century. Noranda is a spin off from Xstrata who originally purchased it in 2006 when it took over the Falconbridge mining company.

Other links of note are:

Xstrata and Anglo-American Chile are joint owners of the Collahuasi copper mine, the world’s third biggest such mine and which in 2010 saw violent action against striking miners.⁴

Hudson Bay (of which Logan Kruger, now Century CEO, was CEO until 2002) is now the subject of a lawsuit over the murder of Mayan indigenous leader Adolfo Ich Chamán who spoke out over the company’s activities in Guatamala – he was hacked to death by security personnel in 2009.⁵ This took place while Century board member Peter Jones was CEO of the company.

Centerra Gold has acquired the Kumtor mine in Kyrgyzstan from the government there. Given that the deal saw little benefit to the people of that country, it has, as a result, played an important political role there.⁶ Jack Thompson, board member of Century and of Anglo-American sits on Centerra’s board also.

In 2006, indigenous tribes people stormed the Inco mine at Goro, New Caledonia due to environmental concerns.⁷ Inco’s CEO of the time was Peter Jones, while Logan Kruger oversaw operations at this mine from 2003-2005, and remains a director of its parent company P.T. Inco of Indonesia.

UC Rusal, the world’s single largest aluminium producer is controlled by Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska through his En+ Group which he chairs. En+ is the controlling interest in a large number of other extractive and power generation businesses, mostly based in Siberia.⁸

His co-chairman is the financier Nathaniel Rothschild who runs the mining investment company Vallar, has a $40m investment in Glencore and is on record as being keen to support a Glencore takeover of Xstrata.^9,10 Rothschild is also a personal friend of both Peter Mandelson, the former EU Trade Commissioner, and of George Osborne, current UK Chancellor.

Xstrata has large interests in Australia where it has been criticised for sharp business practices¹¹, run roughshod over indigenous people at the McArthur River site¹² and is subject of a campaign due to its environmental destruction at it Mangoola opencast mine.¹³

It is hard to single out any firm within the incestuous world of mining conglomerates as being better than the other. All have issues with relationships with indigenous people, suppression of union activity and environmental damage, however the ease at which these accounts can be found in the collective past and present of Century’s key people and directors is telling.

Glencore International AG

Marc Rich & Co

The origins of Glencore are in the trading firm controlled by commodities baron Marc Rich, a controversial figure over the last few decades. Rich built up a commodities trading empire by making deals with the likes of Ayatollah Khomeini to trade Iranian oil while a US embargo was in place. At the same time he was linking himself to Mossad, the Israeli secret service.

In 1983, he and his partner Pincus Green were accused of insider dealing, dodging tax and illegal dealings with Iran when that country was under US sanctions. As a result they both fled the United States and Rich was named among the top ten most wanted fugatives by the FBI until he was controversially pardoned by Bill Clinton on the latter’s last day in the White House. Interestingly, his representative in Washington for 15 years (1985-2000) was Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby, the subsequently disgraced Chief of Staff to Dick Cheney.

Rich settled in Switzerland where he founded Marc Rich & Co, continuing his commodities dealing, specialising in oil, gas and metals. In 1993/4 he failed in an attempt to corner the world zinc market, which lead to the loss of control of his company, though he remains a comfortably well off billionaire.

At the same time part of the company was spun off to become the equally controversial Trafigura. This is another commodity broker who entered the news when it brought out a ‘super-injunction’ to stop reporting of its role in illegal dumping of toxic waste in Côte d’Ivoire, though it has other scandals to its name as well.

Glencore

Marc Rich & Co was taken over by Rich’s inner circle and renamed Glencore. Many of its partners, of whom there are 485, will become very wealthy men following the listing of the shares. Day-to-day control remains principally with two of Rich’s former lieutenants, the highly seclusive and media-shy Ivan Glasenberg (current CEO) & Willy Strothotte (founding CEO and Chairman). Under these two, Glencore has continued to grow and dominate many of the markets it is involved in. It developed the tactic of investing in producers of raw materials, then striking deals that gave it exclusive access to their products which it would then trade on the market. The result is a global empire with its fingers in many pies, particularly metals, oil and grain. The ruthless and aggressive dealings methods developed under Marc Rich continued to shape the culture of the company, though it remains mired in considerable secrecy.

A large part of Glencore’s success is its willingness to do deals in places and with people were the more respectable sides of capitalism are wary to tread, doing deals in Congo and central Asia. It has also never been afraid to make deals that breached embargoes, including Saddam Hussein or South Africa during the apartheid era. Large-scale deals are being done in Central Asia with the numerous mining barons which emerged there after the collapse of the USSR, and who have strong links to corruption in those states. To this day many of its subsidiaries continue to be accused of human rights and environmental abuses.

The networks of control associated with Glencore are vast. In terms of its position in the world, it controls huge amounts of the addressable global market in copper (50%), zinc (60%), aluminium (38%), lead (45%), cobalt (23%), ferrochrome (16%), thermal coal (28%), wheat (10%), and one quarter of the worlds barley, sunflower and rape seed.^14,15 What this means is that it can effectively set prices for these commodities.

Addressable: the amount of a commodity accessible to a market. For example, many mines are owned by larger concerns who have acquired them entirely for their own use rather than for trading the ore/products on the open market. Thus the percentages quoted are for the volume of the global market rather than the total amount if all production is taken into account.

Leading Business Interests¹⁶

Glencore has a vast number of interests around the globe. The following is a brief on some of its leading assets and their problems, and it is certainly not exclusive. Many of the other mines it has a controlling interest in are open cast, with all the attendant problems, such as habitat destruction and pollution of the environment.

Argentina

The AR Zinc Group, acquired in 2005 operates the Aguilar mine, the Palpala smelter and a sulphuric acid producer, Sulfacid S.A. in the heavily mined north-western state of Jujuy, Argentina. These operations are part of a group of mines and related industries that have caused significant environmental damage and health problems to the various indigenous peoples of the region – demonstrations and protests against the presence of the mining companies have been held, including AR Zinc.^{17, 18, 19}

Australia

Glencore have a 40% stake in Minara Resources (formerly Anaconda), which runs the Murrin Murrin mine. Willy Strothotte, Ivan Glasenberg and others connected with Glencore sit on Minara’s board.²⁰ Both Murrin Murrin and Mt Isa Mines, which is controlled by Xstrata, were cited in 2009 as among the worst polluters in Australia.²¹

Bolivia

Glencore owns the Sinchi Wayra mining company that operates five mines. There has been an ongoing dispute with workers over attempts to increase working hours and on pay. The workers have called on the government to nationalise the company.²² In the past it has been criticized for mass lay-offs as a cost cutting tactic.²³

Columbia

The El Cerrejon Norte mine, jointly owned with Anglo American & BHP Billiton has been described as “a continuing horror story of forced relocations of indigenous people, human rights violations, environmental destruction and other assorted injustices”, in particular against the Wayuu people. Union organisers have received death threats from paramilitaries.²⁴ Similar allegations are made in relation to its coal mine at La Jagua, which Glencore’s subsidiary Prodeco purchased from Xstrata.^25,26,27 Prodeco also operates an open cast coal mine at Calenturitas, La Loma.

Congo

Glencore acquired control in 2008 of the financially troubled Katanga Mining²⁸, one of Africa’s biggest copper and cobalt producers. It is situated in a highly troubled region where militias have funded their struggles by selling off resource rich land. There are reports of water contamination and poor working conditions at its mines.²⁹ Swiss NGOs have been highly critical of Katanga Mines, with Bread For All and The Swiss Catholic Lenten Fund publishing a report accusing Glencore of involvement with of human rights abuses, child labour, pollution and tax evasion in the region³⁰, which has lead to a campaign against the company. ³¹ Glencore also owns the new mine at Mutanda, also in Katanga province. Glencore’s minority partner in Katanga is the Israeli magnate Dan Getler who specialises in investments in the Congo and who has links to blood diamonds and to right-wing Israeli politicians, in particular Avigdor Lieberman.³²

Kazakhstan

Glencore has partnered with Kazakhstan private investment company Verny Capital to take control of the Kazzinc, which has extensive mining and smelting interests throughout that country. Currently 51% owned by Glencore, that stake is expected to rise to 93% following Glencore’s floatation. Verny is controlled by the controversial Utemuratov family, which is close to President Nazarbayev, who is also believed to have a stake.³³ Under Nazarbayev there has been large-scale transfer of the nation’s mineral wealth into private hands and Glencore has been integral to that process.

Peru

Glencore owns the Iscaycruz & Yauliyacu mines (Los Quenualos), which have been accused of unsafe working conditions and subsequent anti-union activities.³⁴

Philippines

Xstrata’s proposed Sagittarius mine at Tampakan, Mindanao threatens indigenous peoples and important rainforests. On 9th March, 2009 a leading opponent of the project, Eliezer “Boy” Billanes, was assassinated.³⁵ Mines in Philippines, such as this one, have also been linked with threats to food security, partly due to the particular nature of the ecology they work in.³⁶

Russia

UC Rusal³⁷, the Russian aluminium giant; controls the world’s largest deposits of bauxite (the ore from which aluminium is obtained) and is the second biggest producer of global alumina (aluminium refined from bauxite) with a 14% of global production. Controlled by oligarch Oleg Deripaska, the firm was created by a merger of Rusal with the smaller SUAL and Glencore aluminium interests. There remain strong links between Glencore and UC Rusal with Glencore owning 8.7% of UC Rusal, and a friendship between Deripaska and Glasenberg.³⁸

As well as UC Rusal, Glencore has numerous other business interests in mineral wealthy Russia. Some of these date back to when Glencore was swift to do deals to take control of Russian state assets following the collapse of the USSR. Though it has been edged out of some of these companies who prefer to sell direct to consumers in China, etc, it does have deals with Russian producers of coal, oil and grain, in part through EN+, Deripaska’s company. There are rumours that it is trying to exploit links into the zinc, nickel and lead producers. Other deals and their relations to Glencore remain murky³⁹, but another major partner is the independent oil refiner Russneft.⁴⁰

Zambia

Glencore has control of Mopani Mines, which has come under environmental scrutiny, being believed to be the source of acid rain due to sulphur dioxide emissions.⁴¹ In 2005, 20 miners died in different accidents at the mine, blamed in part on cut backs in training.⁴² A Daily Mail investigation has claimed that Glencore is engaged in exploitation tax evasion through sharp pricing techniques, so depriving the country of much needed revenue.⁴³

Zimbabwe

In 2011 Glencore signed an agreement with Mwana Africa to acquire nickel from the Trojan mine at Bindura in Zimbabwe – notable for its links with Morgan Tsvangirai. Mwana’s is a South African based miner with copper operations at Katanga in the Congo and gold mines in Ghana.

Other global interests

Glencore owns the PASAR copper smelter in the Philippines, the Sherwin Alumina smelter in Texas (cited for hazardous chemical releases^44,45) and the Portovesme lead and zinc smelter on Sardinia. It also owns 70% of the South African coal miner Shanduka. As owner of the Moreno sunflower oil company, one of the biggest in the world’s largest suppliers of sunflower oil, Glencore is heavily involved in the producing and selling of genetically modified products.⁴⁶ It controls 270,000 hectares of agricultural land and has various grain processing sites around the world which aid its interests in these markets.

The smallest aluminium smelter in Iceland uses 50% more electricity than all of Iceland’s households and businesses combined, while contributing very little to the country’s GDP. Heavy industry has often been touted by Icelandic conservatives as a cash cow: foreign companies can provide the country with jobs, while utilising Iceland’s green energy to produce aluminium in a cleaner fashion.

While the myth of the “green smelter” has been definitively put to rest, aluminium is still billed by some as being good for the economy. However, Vilhjálmur Þorsteinsson – the chair of a study group assembled by the Ministry of Industry that studies Iceland’s energy use – has come to some damning conclusions about smelters in Iceland.

Iceland’s three aluminium smelters – Alcoa in Reyðarfjörður, Norðurál in Grundartangi, and Rio Tinto Alcan in Straumsvík – consume approximately 13 terawatt hours of electricity. The entire capacity of Iceland’s electrical output is 17 terawatt hours. Furthermore, Straumsvík – the smallest smelter in the country – uses 3.6 terawatt hours. The combined total energy consumption of every home and business in Iceland (apart from the smelters) equals only 2.3 terawatt hours.

At the same time, even the best estimates of what smelters contribute to the economy only put them in the neighbourhood of contributing to 5% of the GDP. Tourism accounts for about the same percentage of the GDP while using far less of the power grid. Meanwhile, Iceland’s service sector accounts for 69.9% of its GDP, and fishing accounts for 12%.

By Snorri Páll Jónsson Úlfhildarson, originally published in The Reykjavík Grapevine.

Those who are yet to give up on Icelandic media cannot have avoided noticing one Kristján Már Unnarsson, a news director and journalist at TV station Stöð 2. Kristján, who in 2007 received the Icelandic Press Awards for his coverage of “everyday countryside life”, is a peculiar fan of manful and mighty constructions and loves to tell good news to and about all the “good heavy industry guys” that Iceland has to offer.

To be more precise, Kristján has, for at least a decade (and I say “at least” just because my memory and research doesn’t take me further back), gone on a rampage each and every time he gets the chance to tell his audience about the newest of news in Iceland’s heavy industry and energy affairs. He talks about gold-mills when referring to dams built to power aluminium production; and when preparing an evening news item on, say, plans regarding energy and aluminium production, he usually doesn’t see a reason for talking to more than one person – a person who, almost without exception, is in favour of whatever project is being discussed.

After witnessing Kristján’s latest contribution to the ongoing development of heavy industry and large-scale energy production, i.e. his coverage of Alcoa’s recently announced decision not to continue with its plan of building a new aluminium smelter in Húsavík, wherein he managed to blame just anything but Alcoa itself for the company’s decisions, I couldn’t resist asking (and, really, not for the first time): What can really explain this way too obvious one-sidedness, manifest not only in this one journalist’s work but seemingly the majority of news coverage concerning heavy industry?

“Lack of professionalism,” someone might say. Professionalism would thus imply allowing more than one single voice to be heard, letting one argument meet another, allowing conflicts to take place and thereby giving the audience a chance to critically make up its mind. This lack of professionalism actually applies to such a huge quantity of all news material produced. Indeed, the constant recycling of content – of interviews, press-releases, photos etc. – and the manufacture of single-perspective news content often seems to be the mainstream media’s predominant modus operandi.

“Co-dependency,” could be another suggestion. And a good one, as it often seems that the bulk of journalists are seriously co-dependant with the ruling political and economical order. Take, for instance, the mantra of the never-questioned importance of non-stop economic growth, or the commonly heard phrase that during a protest “the police needed to use teargas” – as the decision to spray isn’t fuelled by a precise political will, but rather of a simple need.

These two are good answers, but definitely not good enough when standing on their own. To get the full picture, lets look into the relationship between mainstream journalism on the one hand, and public relations on the other. How, for instance, are the tops of the aluminium and energy companies’ PR departments staffed?

At Reykjavík Energy we have Eiríkur Hjálmarsson, former journalist and program maker at state TV station RÚV, whereas at Landsvirkjun we find one Ragna Sara Jónsdóttir, former journalist at RÚV and newspaper Morgunblaðið. Alcoa prides itself of Erna Indriðadóttir, long-time journalist at RÚV, while Rio Tinto Alcan sports Ólafur Teitur Guðnason, former journalist at RÚV, DV and business paper Viðskiptablaðið (it is worth noting that Ólafur is also known for his aonce-annual books analysing and criticising the mdia, not from the usual Chomsky-alike left-wing but rather a right-wing perspective). At last but not least, the only employee of Samál (or The Icelandic Association of Aluminium Producers), is Þorsteinn Víglundsson who, along with a few jobs in the financial sector, used to write news for Morgunblaðið.

Quite an impressive list, isn’t? And where does it bring us? Possibly to the assumption that the first-mentioned Kristján Már Unnarsson must be doing his entrance examination, or even an on-the-job-training. But that would be a bit too simplistic because practically, Kristján Már might well be preparing for a better paid PR job, whereas theoretically it really doesn’t mater if that is the case or not.

What matters is the ever impenetrable handshake between those two industries: Public Relations and The Media. What, in fact, is one medium’s coverage of a company but a conversation between the two parties? A pre-designed and post-edited conversation, for sure, but a conversation nevertheless. And the conversation element is crucial as a journalist’s co-dependency and lack of professionalism (deliberate or not) are of no use if the Holy Trinity’s most important link is missing. And vice versa: Without beneficial journalists, a PR stunt is likely to end up dead in the water.

The stunt’s key moment, as Spice Girls realised and told us, is “when two become one.”

As from 2005 Alcoa, along with national energy company Landsvirkjun, Húsavík’s authorities and – to begin with – the Icelandic authorities, has been working on the project, which would have required at least 400 MW of energy, produced by harnessing geothermal areas and glacial rivers in the North. In 2008 a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Landsvirkjun and Alcoa expired, and a year later the same happened concerning a MOU between the aluminium producer and the Icelandic government, the latter not willing to renew it.

Since then Landsvirkjun has signed a few other MOUs, regarding geothermal energy commerce, with possible buyers such as data centres and silicon factories, in some ways meeting with a popular demand for less destructive and more “green” use of the geothermal energy. Regardless of what one finds about the alleged “greenness” of such enterprises this development has inevitably raised the question if Landsvirkjun would be able to feed both Alcoa’s planned smelter and at the same time these smaller, less energy intensive factories.

Environmentalists have warned of the over-exploitation of geothermal energy. In fact, as early as in 2008, when Landsvirkjun’s official plan still seemed to include only Alcoa’s smelter, Saving Iceland insisted that the damming of one or more of the glacial rivers in the North was crucial if Landsvirkjun was to provide energy for a the smelter. At that time Alcoa had already stated that a 250 thousand ton smelter would be “unsustainable” and that the company would want to build at least a 346 thousand ton smelter in Bakki. For a smelter of that size 400 MW would have been needed in addition to the already planned 400.

In 2008 Þórunn Sveinbjarnardóttir, then Minister of Environment, ruled that the project needed to undergo a joint Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), taking into account not only the impacts of the smelter per se but the whole infrastructure around it, including the power plants and energy transportation. The company’s response, as well of others in favor of the smelter, was that the minister’s ruling was a political attack against the project, only meant to delay the process.

The first draft of the joint EIA report was ready in the spring 2010 and a few months later Iceland’s National Planning Agency published its comments on it. The Planning Agency’s comments were damming, stating that the projects impacts would be high and could not be mitigated; its greenhouse gas emissions would constitute 14% of Iceland’s total and 17,000 ha of pristine wilderness would be affected. Most importantly, as pointed out by Jaap Krater, ecologial economist and spokesperson of Saving Iceland, the Agency highlighted the “uncertainty on the full impact of the planned power plants and particularly on how much geothermal energy can be sustainably produced. Finally, the assessed energy projects will not be able to fully power the smelter, with 140 MW of capacity missing.”

This energy crisis – similar to the one Century Aluminum is facing, regarding geothermal energy for their planned smelter in Helguví, South of Iceland – is no doubt the main factor leading to Alcoa’s withdrawal, though the company and other interested parties blame the joint EIA and the current government’s energy policy. As mentioned before this has been clear for a long time – in January this year business newspaper Viðskiptablaðið reported that Alcoa was about to withdraw from the Bakki project due to energy uncertainties. The final straw, according to the paper’s sources, was Landsvirkjun’s discussions with a company called Carbon Recycling, which plans to build a methanol plant run on geothermal energy from the North. This was, however, rejected by the company only a week later. Alcoa said that the smelter was still on their drawing table and that a permit for at least 500 MW of geothermal energy existed.

Though Alcoa’s representatives, as well as Húsavík’s authorities and other parties favouring heavy industry, have since yesterday acted as Alcoa’s withdrawal is somewhat of a shocking news, Katrín Júlíusdóttir, Minister of Industry, says that it is of no surprise to her. Alcoa has, according to Katrín, had a head start on all other possible energy purchaser, which it has not used in its own favour.

In a two pages interview with newspaper Morgunblaðið today – free from even a single comment from an environmentalist or other critical perspective – Tómas Már Sigurðsson, Alcoa’s director in Iceland, does not admit that the actual energy uncertainty, addressed by environmentalists and the National Planning Agency, has been the company’s main hindrance. Tómas, however, hints at it when stating that Alcoa has from the start been clear about its thirst for more then 400 MW, given that more than that can be harnessed in the North.

Tómas also says that the price that Landsvirkjun wants for the energy is not “competitive” – or in other words: too high. For the last year Landsvirkjun has been heavily criticized for prizing its energy seriously low, mapping Iceland out as a cheap energy haven for the aluminium industry, which makes it especially interesting that now Alcoa – an international corporation and of the world’s biggest aluminium producers – claims it cannot pay for Icelandic energy.

Now, as Alcoa’s dream of a smelter in Bakki is over – after six years process, including an investment of two billion ISK (17,3 million USD) – Tómas says that the company will continue its plans of further projects in Quebec, the New York state, Norway and Saudi Arabia. Also, as repeatedly reported by Saving Iceland, Alcoa recognizes Greenland as its next Iceland, from a social and economic perspective – i.e. easy exploitable society and cheap energy – and plans to build at least a 400 thousand ton smelter there in the nearest future.

Albeit the clear fact that Alcoa’s withdrawal from Bakki does not manifest the company’s worldwide decrease in operations, it surely marks a milestone in the struggle against the aluminium industry – not only in Iceland, but also worldwide. More on that later.
_____________________________________

See also:

Alcoa in Greenland: Empty Promises? by Miriam Rose
Alcoa: Where Will the New Dams be Built? by Jaap Krater
Greenland’s Decision: Nature or Culture? by Miriam Rose

Through survivors’ testimonies, Kandhamal 2008 examines how Hindu supremacist groups turned two communities – Adivasi (indigenous) Konds and Pano Dalit Christians – against each other, with the tacit support of the State Government and local administration. More than 50,000 people became refugees, 5,000 houses were burnt and destroyed, at least 400 churches, prayer halls and institutions were desecrated, demolished or burnt down. This region is extremely poor, but rich in mineral resources which have attracted multinational mining companies including British firm Vedanta. The Odisha Government has ruthlessly pursued neo-liberal land acquisition policies formulated by the UK’s (Department for International Development (DfID) and the World Bank. The Konds have consistently fought this corporate land grab and the film highlights how Hindu supremacist groups and the State Government have sought to undermine that struggle.

Kandhamal 2008 will be premiered on Tuesday, 1 November, in Rm CLM.6.02 Clement House, London School of Economics at 7.15 pm. Director and researcher Samarendra Das, who was born in Odisha and has lived most of his life in Kandhamal, will discuss the background to and making of the film. Samarendra’s book, Out of this Earth: East India Adivasis and the Aluminium Cartel (Orient Black Swan, 2010), which was co-written by anthropologist Felix Padel, is a thorough study of the aluminium industry and its global impacts. For more information about the documentary screening contact:  sasg at southasiasolidarity.org.

Árni Daníel Júlíusson

It is funny how things can turn around. For decades, Iceland languished in neoliberal hell, with signs of opposition few and far between. Meanwhile the opposition to the neoliberal order of things grew all over the world—with massive protests in Seattle, Genoa and elsewhere—and the beginnings of a world-wide anti-globalisation movement represented by the World Social Forum, first held in Porto Alegre, Brazil, in 2001. Almost nobody in Iceland did or said anything to support these powerful movements against the neoliberal order, with the exception of the brave Saving Iceland organisation. Even the considerable activism surrounding the anti-imperialist campaigns against American military presence in Iceland seemed to die completely down in around 1990. Neoliberalism reigned, Iceland supported the Iraq invasion in 2003 and nobody said or did anything.

Everything changes

In 2008, everything suddenly changed. The Icelandic banks collapsed, and out of nothing there grew an immensely powerful protest movement, leading to the collapse of the ideological hegemony of neoliberal order in Iceland. It was symbolised by the January events of 2009, when saucepans and pots were taken into use by protesters, who drummed the right wing neoliberal government out of office in the last week of January.

Suddenly everyone and her brother was involved in organising some sort of protest, with many thousands turning up at rallies in the centre of town on a regular basis, and hundreds or thousands of people involved in organising alternatives to the prevailing neoliberal order.

Even the president of the country, who had been one of the cheerleaders of neoliberalism, suddenly turned into an invaluable ally of the protest movement against the financial system, enabling two national referendums on the Icesave issue. Under the leadership of Eva Joly a criminal investigation into the whole neoliberal financial scam of the nineties and noughties was organised, and a very thorough investigation on the causes of the collapse was initiated by the Icelandic parliament. There was even a Constitutional Assembly, which was meant to write a new constitution for the country.

Right wing, left wing: both neoliberals

To be sure, instead of the rightwing neoliberal government a leftwing neoliberal government ascended to power after parliamentary elections in April 2009. That was surely not the intention of the saucepan revolutionary movement, and the situation in Iceland has been tense since. An important part of the original protest movement has been paralysed, as it has seen it as its duty to defend the “left” government against what it sees as attacks organised by the right. So the most radical part of the original saucepan protesters, those who are of the opinion that the “left” government is just another neoliberal government, has found tactical allies among the right wing parties, and this alliance has had some victories, like the rejection of the Icesave treaties.

But the Icelandic protest movement against neoliberalism has been powerful enough to inspire people outside Iceland. Yes, indeed, people abroad have really been inspired by Iceland! This was first evident around the Icesave referendum on March 6, 2010. The international anti-globalisation movement followed it closely, for example the Jubilee movement, the international Attac movement and the Tax Justice Network.

Congratulations rained on Icelandic activists after the Icesave treaty was rejected, the so-called Icesave II treaty, wherein Icelandic taxpayers were supposed to pay large sums of money to the citizens of the Netherlands and the UK because of the collapse of the Icelandic bank Landsbankinn. Icelandic taxpayers refused to take responsibility for the wheelings and dealings of the international financial oligarchs, and this was widely admired by anti-neoliberal activists everywhere.

Rumours

But there was more to come. In 2010, rumours started to circulate on the Internet among activists, especially in those former provinces of the Roman Empire comprising the present day lands of Spain, Portugal and France, that there had been some sort of a quiet revolution in Iceland. This revolution was supposed to have been almost systematically shut out of the world media, in order not to present a possible model for revolution in other countries. These rumours appeared on French and Spanish websites, and at last they acquired some sort of critical mass. In December 2010 and January 2011, Attac Iceland started to receive a lot of questions about the quiet revolution in Iceland from members of Attac France and Attac Spain. Activists even started to visit Iceland to find out about the quiet revolution.

When Attac Iceland was slow to respond—and when it did it would not be ready to agree that there had been any sort of revolution in Iceland—it was pointed out by the international activists that the Icelandic banks had been nationalised, that the government had been forced from power, that the governors of the Central Bank of Iceland had been replaced, that Iceland had shown true grit by the rejection of the Icesave treaty. All of which was true, but Attac Iceland has not interpreted this as a revolution, even if it certainly can be viewed as a very powerful and successful protest movement, one of the most powerful popular responses to the collapse of the neoliberal order, and up until 2011 certainly the most powerful. And quiet it was not, as those activists who have come from Spain, Portugal and France to Iceland to investigate have found out.

Iceland as a model of revolt

Then in December 2010, Tunisia erupted in revolt. Egypt followed, and the world watched in amazement as country after country in the Arab world arose in revolution against the established order of American imperialist rule and the rule of US supported despots. There were certainly some references to the Icelandic revolt in these movements. And in May 2011 Spain erupted, with the M-15 movement and the Indignados movement forming as a powerful protest wave against the neoliberal order. Here the references to the Icelandic movement were numerous and quite visible, with public squares in Palma, Mallorca, renamed after Iceland in honour of the quiet revolution, the Icelandic flag being waved on numerous occasions and Facebook groups organised in honour of the Icelandic movement.

This was certainly a rather dramatic turnaround in the position of Iceland in relation to the neoliberal world order. Suddenly Iceland had turned from a model of the quiet, obedient neoliberal outpost, to become a model of protest movements around the world against this same neoliberalism.

The revolution that nobody wants to talk about

Then in the summer of 2011 the indignados started coming to Iceland themselves, organising TV-crews in order to document the Icelandic revolution. And, indeed, they did not find a quiet revolution: In the words of Portuguese document film maker Miguel Marques, who was here in August and extensively documented the activities of the Icelandic movement, the Icelandic revolution was anything but quiet. Another crew came from Spain and interviewed the Icelandic activists, and in October there will be a Venezuelan crew documenting Icelandic activism for the big South American TV network teleSUR.

So, for the Icelandic activists and anti-neoliberalist, the situation is a bit awkward. When finally Iceland produces something worthy of admiration of the international activist community, the activist groups in Iceland have been reluctant to admit to it being what the foreigners perceive it to be. Why is this? Why is the powerful protest movement in Iceland not lauded or presented in a positive light by the Icelandic activists? This is mostly because of the political situation in Iceland.

On one hand, the media, mostly right wing, the academics, mostly right wing or centre left neoliberals, and others of the talking and writing classes have very limited interest in promoting the Icelandic saucepan revolution. On the other hand many in the protest movement now support a neoliberal “left” government in the vain hope that it will eventually, in the distant future, maybe deliver on something of value, and this supports hinders any positive evaluation of the protest movement after the ascend of the “left” government. The radical parts of the protest movement do not have a positive evaluation of the results of the movement, exactly because the results of the parliamentary elections in April 2009 were that the neoliberal dominance in politics continued. So nobody seems interested in taking credit for the very real and positive results of the Icelandic protest movement 2008–2011.

The Energy Master Plan is a framework programme, meant to result in a long term agreement upon the exploitation and protection of Iceland’s glacial rivers and geothermal areas. Its making, which since 1999 has been in the hands of special steering committiees, established by the two above-mentioned ministries, reached a critical status in July this year when its second phase was finished and presented to the ministers who in mid August presented their proposition for a parliamentary resolution. Before it will be discussed in parliament the proposition will be open to comments and criticism from the public, as well as interested parties, energy and aluminium companies on the one hand, environmentalists on the other.

Twenty-Seven Energy Options Put on Hold

The proposition lists natural areas into three categories; protection, exploitation and hold. The last-mentioned includes areas that, according to the steering groups and ministers, have not undergone enough research for a decision to be made upon weather to protect or exploit them. Included in this category are, among other, the glacial rivers in fjord Skagafjörður as well as other rivers such as Skjálfandafljót, Hvítá, Hólmsá and Farið by lake Hagavatn in the south-west highlands. Also geothermal areas such as Trölladyngja and Austurengjar in Krýsuvík and certain areas around mount Hengill where the heavily indebted Reykjavík Energy (OR) already operates Hellisheiðarvirkjun, a sulphur polluting geothermal power plant. The 27 areas of the waiting category will be revised in five years, given that satisfactory studies have been made at that time.

Þjórsárver Wetlands to be Saved

Delightfully, the protection category features the uppermost part of river Þjórsá where Landsvirkjun wants to construct Norðlingaölduveita, a dam that would destroy the Ramsar listed Þjórsárver wetlands. River Jökulsá á Fjöllum, which has been seen as an energy potential for a new Alcoa aluminium smelter in Bakki, is also listed protected. The same applies for certain parts of river Tungná, in which Landsvirkjun is already building the Búðarháls dam that will provide energy for increased production in Rio Tinto Alcan’s aluminium smelter in Straumsvík.

The protection category also features geothermal areas such as the ones around Brennisteinsfjöll mountains on the Reykjanes peninsula, as well as Gjástykki, close to volcano Krafla and lake Mývatn. The same goes for the Grændalur valley and Bitra, which are located close to the small town of Hveragerði and have been particularily desirable in the eyes of energy companies. Bitra was saved by a local campaign in 2008 whereas Grændalur was recently threatened when Iceland’s National Energy Authority allowed a company called RARIK to operate test drilling in the valley, in complete contravention of previous rulings by the Ministries of Industry and of Environment.

Krýsuvík, Þeistareykir and Þjórsá to be Destroyed

The exploitation list features geothermal areas Þeystareykir, Bjarnarflag and Krafla in the north of Iceland, as well as Hágöngur in the mid-highlands west to glacier Vatnajökull. Also certain parts of the area around mount Hengill and finally geothermal spots in Reykjanes, Krýsuvík and Svartsengi, all three on the Reykjanes peninsula. Rivers Hvalá, Blanda and Köldukvísl are then all categorised as exploitable. And most critically the Energy Master Plan proposition allows for Landsvirkjun’s construction of three dams in the lower part of river Þjórsá.

Environmentalists Threefold Response

The most common response from environmentalist so far has been threefold. Firstly there generally satisfied by the protection of areas such as the Gjástykki, Jökulsá á Fjöllum and Grændalur, let alone the Þjórsárver wetlands. Shortly after the publication’s release, Iceland Nature Conservation Association (INCA) stated that, if approved by parliament, the Master Plan will mark the end of environmentalists’ forty years long struggle to save Þjórsárver from destruction. Though listed by the international Ramsar Convention on Wetlands due to its unique ecosystem, the wetlands have been on Landsvirkjun’s drawing table as a potential for construct a large reservoir, meant to produce energy for a planned expansion of Rio Tinto Alcan’s aluminium smelter in Hafnarfjörður, which was later thrown off in a local referendum. The plan has always been met with fierce opposition, no matter of Landsvirkjun’s repeated attempts to get it through by proposing a smaller dam and reservoir.

Secondly environmentalists are critical of the fact how many invaluable areas, such river Skjálfandafljót, are kept on hold instead of simply been categorised protected. Thirdly there is a clear opposition to the planned exploitation of certain wonders of nature, one example being the geothermal areas on the Reykjanes peninsula. Ellert Grétarsson, a photographer who has documented these areas extensively (his photos are here aside), fears that the drilling in Krýsuvík – covering between five and eight thousand square meters of land – will simply kill the area. And as a matter, says Ellert, the whole Reykjanes peninsula will be riddled with energy construction. Hjörleifur Guttormsson, former Left Green MP and a genuine environmentalists, shares Ellert’s worries and has asked for an integral study of Reykjanes before any decisions are made.

Þjórsá, the Bone of Contention

As as mentioned before the biggest concern regards Þjórsá, which has for a long time been the bone of contention between the two clashing arrays fighting for or against nature conservation. The struggle over Þjórsá has been especially tough, actually to such an extent that the government can be reputed to stand or fall with that conflict in particular. Guðfríður Lilja Grétarsdóttir, MP for the Left Greens, demonstrated, during parliamentary debate last April, her full opposition to the construction of dams in Þjórsá. At that point, three Left Green MPs, who up until then had been increasingly critical of the government and its lack of left-leaning policies, had just recently departed from the party, leaving the government with only one person’s majority in parliament. And as most members of the social-democratic People’s Alliance (Samfylkingin), which makes up the government along with the Left Greens, have not shown a sign of objection to the damming of Þjórsá, it wouldn’t be surprising if the river will be up for a heavy debate in parliament.

In fact it is more than sure that Þjórsá will be among the main matters of argument in parliament. The right wing Independence Party, which was in in power from and is largely responsible for the neo-liberalisation and heavy-industrialisation of Iceland, has always been one of the driving motors behind Landsvirkjun’s plans to dam Þjórsá. When the Master Plan’s proposition was presented in August, Ragnheiður Elín Árnadóttir, a MP of the party, called for the immediate starting of construction in Þjórsá. She also said she grieved the long period of which the project has been stuck within bureaucracy, referring to the attempts of Svandís Svavarsdóttir, current Minister of Environment, to halt the construction of one of the three proposed dams by refusing to include the dam, Urriðafossvirkjun, in a land-use plans for the parishes of Flóahreppur and Skeiða- and Gnúpverjahreppur (rural districts along Þjórsá) made by them at the request of Landsvirkjun.

Three Dams: Threat to Society and Ecology

The conflict in parliament mirrors the actual conflict in the Þjórsá region where locals have for a long time fought over the river’s fate. There Landsvirkjun hasn’t only used bribes in its attempt to get its plans through local administration, but also threatened farmers whose lands are at stake will the dams be built, by stating that if the farmers do not negotiate with the Landsvirkjun, the company will attempt for a land expropriation. This conduct has created a complete split within the local community, clearly demonstrated in last March when young locals from the region published a statement, in which they demanded a permanent halt to all plans of damming Þjórsá – thereby an end to the social conflict associated.

As a matter of fact two members of the Master Plan’s steering committee recently stated, when interviewed on state radio station RÚV, that due to the serious lack of studies regarding the social impacts of the planned Þjórsá dams, those plans should without any doubt have been put on hold. This is exactly what Guðmundur Hörður Guðmundsson, chairman of environmentalist organization Landvernd, said in last July following the publication of the Energy Master Plan’s second phase report.

Þjórsá’s position in the Master Plan proposition, yet shouldn’t be of any surprise. In the second phase report the three planned dams are not considered to be a great threat to the ecology of Þjórsá and its surroundings – contrary to the opinion of environmentalists who have voiced their worries concerning the dams’ impacts, for instance on the river’s salmon stock. Orri Vigfússon, chairman of the North Atlantic Salmon Fund (NASF), recently stated that “never before in the history of Iceland has there occurred such an attack on a sensitive area of wild salmon.” As is considered that the salmon’s spawning and breeding grounds are mosty located above waterfall Urriðafoss, where one of the three dams is planned to be built, Orri believes that the stock of salmon and salmon trout are likely to vanish.

Energy Companies Unsatisfied as Expected

As one could have imagined, Icelandic energy companies and other adherents of large-scale power production for heavy industry, are everything else than happy about the Master Plan’s proposition. Following its release Eiríkur Hjálmarsson, Public Relation manager of Reykjavík Energy, opposed the protection of Bitra on the ground that the company has already harmed the area with three examination boreholes, roads and electricity lines – but most importantly, spent 785 million ISK on the project. As reported earlier this year by Anna Andersen, journalist at the Reykjavík Grapevine, the foolhardy business operations of Reykavík Energy during the last decade or so – including large-scale geothermal projects associated with heavy industry – have brought the publicly owned company a debt of 233 billion ISK (2 billion USD or 1.4 billion Euros). Despite this financial collapse the company still advocates for the continuation of the agenda that brought it down.

Other energy companies have responded similarly, mostly complaining about the amount of areas listed as protected or on hold. Landsvikjun’s director Hörður Árnason has said that compared to the second phase report, the parliament proposition suggest that way too many energy options are put on hold. Another company, Suðurorka, owned by Alterra Power (former Magma Energy) and Íslensk Orkuvirkjun, had planned to construct a dam, called Búlandsvirkjun, in river Skaftá – a plan that the proposition puts on hold. The company argues that few energy options have been studied as thoroughly and while the studies might have been done – and might be thorough – not everybody agrees with the company on the impacts. Farmers in the area have opposed the project as some of their most important grasslands will be drowned under the dam’s reservoir.

Energy company RARIK will, due to the Master Plan, loose its grip on geothermal areas in Grændalur valley, as well as rivers in Skagafjörður and Hólmsá river – projects that the company claims to have invested in with 300 million ISK. Using the same monetary argument, HS Orka, also owned by Alterra Power, has been vocal about its 700 million ISK investment into their proposed, but now delayed if not entirely halted, geothermal plants in Trölladyngja. Finally representatives from Reykjahlíð, a small town that holds the good part of Gjástykki’s property rights, have stated that if the area will be protected, billions of ISK will be demanded as compensation.

The Predominant Strategy

Those arguments do in fact manifest the predominant strategy of those involved in the heavy industrialization of Iceland. Instead of waiting for all necessary contracts to been signed, all needed permissions to be granted, and all required energy to be ensured, the energy and aluminium companies have simply started major construction immediately when only one or a few permissions have been granted. And when criticised, not to mention when forced to stop, they have stated that because these projects have been announced and vast amounts of money put into them, they should be allowed to continue. If needed, they have also pointed out that because the natural areas at stake have already been harmed (by themselves), there is “no point” in preserving them.

One example would be Helguvík, where a framework for a proposed Century Aluminum smelter has already been built but hardly any construction has taken place there for two year. With every day that passes it becomes clear that not only has the company failed to ensure the energy needed to operate the smelter, but also that the energy simply doesn’t exist.

Geologist Sigmundur Einarsson has, for the last years, pointed this out and stated that the amount of energy needed for the Helguvík smelter cannot be found and harnessed on Reykjanes, like stated by the parties involved. For instance he believes that no more than 120 MWe can be harnessed in Krýsuvík, contrary to the official numbers of 480 MWe, and has repeatedly demanded answers from the authorities about where from the rest of the energy is supposed to come. Just as Saving Iceland’s questions about the whereabouts of energy for Alcoa’s planned smelter in Bakki, Sigmundur’s questions have never been answered, but he claims the Energy Master Plan proofs his theory.

Yet Another Three Kárahnjúkar Dams!

Environmentalists have reacted to the energy companies’ complaints and asked how on earth the companies can still pretended to be unsatisfied. As pointed out by Landvernd, these company’s are about be granted permission to harness energy equivalent of three Kárahnjúkar dams. From 2004 to 2009, Iceland’s energy production duplicated, largely with the construction of Kárahnjúkar dam, and is currently 16,900 gigawatt-hours. If the Energy Master Plan will be accepted as proposed, the energy companies will be able to duplicate the production again in few years, says Guðmundur Hörður, chairman of Landvernd, and continues:

The increase of public electricity usage is about 50 gigawatt-hours per year. The expansion entailed in the proposition would thus sustain that particular public increase for the next 265 years! If this will be the conclusion, the energy companies can be very satisfied. Still they send their agents onto the media, in order to cry and complain. That doesn’t give a good hint for a settlement.

Other environmentalists, Ómar Ragnarsson for instance, have mentioned that the whole discourse surrounding the Energy Master Plan portrays a false image. While the plan regards Iceland’s each and every hydro and geothermal area, potential for exploitation, the areas that have already been harnessed are kept outside of the discourse. Ómar says that it is simply false to state that “only twenty-two areas” have been categorised exploitable, as twenty-eight large power plants have already been built in Iceland. That means that out of the ninety-seven considered in the Master Plan, fifty have already been or will be utilised. In addition to the twenty-seven areas put on hold, another thirty-two have yet not been categorised by the steering committees, which makes the current proportion of protected areas even lower.

Ómar has also pointed out mismatches within the proposition. One example regards geothermal area Gjástykki that is listed as protected, as it is “a part of Krafla’s volcanic system, which has a protection value on a worldwide scale,” like stated in the proposition. But according to Ómar this will depend entirely on definitions. As an energy option, Vítismór, which is a part of Krafla’s volcanic system and is an inseparable part of the Gjástykki-Leirhnjúkur area, is currently listed as an addition to the Krafla power plant and would thus, regardless of its position within the Master Plan, be available for exploitation.

Limnology (or freshwater science) professor Gísli Már Gíslason upholds Ómar’s argument and has stated that half of Iceland’s “profitable hydro power” has already been utilised. One of those rivers is Jökulsá á Dal, harmed by the infamous Kárahnjúkar dam, which in order to be built required disallowing the protection of Kringilsárrani, an extremely important grassland for reindeer. This is not a unique incident as, for instance, the three dams in river Láxá are also manifestations of hydro power plants built in protected areas.

The Coming Struggle

Notably by the above-listed contradictions, which though demonstrate only a small part of the debate about the Energy Master Plan so far, the coming struggle about the fate of Iceland’s nature is going to be harsh and heavy. Armed with the rhetoric of economic crisis, unemployment etc., those in favour of heavy industry – in other words a big part of parliament, the energy companies, the Associations of Industry and Employers, the country’s biggest trade unions, and most recently Samál, a joint association of aluminium producers in Iceland – use literally every opportunity to push for the further development of industry, especially aluminium. In order for that development to occur, the country’s glacial rivers and geothermal areas have to be exploited on a mass scale.

Environmentalists, on the other hand, need to sharpen their knives and both ask and answer a great amount of questions. What, if any, are the actual benefits of heavy industry and its parallel large-scale energy production? And what are its impacts on Iceland’s society and ecosystems? No less importantly, what are its global impacts such as on the atmosphere or bauxite communities in India, Guinea, Hungary and Jamaica? How has it affected the economy and what are its contributions to the current economic situation? What are the impacts of the building of big dams and geothermal power-plants, fuelled by extremely high loans, bringing a temporary pump into the economy that inevitably leads to the demand for another shot? And what is the value of nature per se?

Only by answering all of these and many more questions, one can honestly try to answer the one fundamental question regarding the Energy Master Plan: What actual need is there for yet another three Kárahnjúkar dams, or in fact just a single more power plant?

By Snorri Páll Jónsson Úlfhildarson

On Friday September 2, two men appeared in court in downtown Reykjavík. It wasn’t their first time—and it probably won’t be their last. If found guilty, the defendants, Haukur Hilmarsson and Jason Thomas Slade, face up to six years in prison, due to a peculiar action on their behalves that marks a turning point in Icelandic asylum-seeker affairs.

On the morning of July 3, 2008, Haukur and Jason darted onto the runway of Leifur Eiríksson International Airport in Keflavík, hoping to prevent a flight from departing, and deporting. Inside the plane, which was headed to Italy, sat one Paul Ramses, a Kenyan refugee. The two activists ran alongside the plane, and placed themselves in front of it—halting its takeoff.

It would be wrong to assume that anything has changed since 2008. Iceland may have seen an infamous economic collapse followed by a popular uprising and a new government, but for the two activists it must feel like time is standing still. Since their arrest at the airport, they have been stuck in a seemingly endless legal limbo, first charged for housebreaking and reckless endangerment and later thrown between all levels of the juridical system. Last Friday, the case’s principal proceedings took place for the second time in Reykjavík’s District Court, after the courts original sentences were ruled null and void by Iceland’s Supreme Court.

THE ICELANDIC STATE VS. PAUL RAMSES

Paul Ramses originally arrived in Iceland in January of 2008. The year prior, he had unsuccessfully participated in Kenya’s general elections on behalf of the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM). Many Kenyan and trans-African associations claimed the electoral victory of ODM’s main opponents, the Party of National Unity, to have been rigged behind the scenes. The ensuing wave of fatal protests and riots had brought down 800 people by late January, and as ODM members faced mass persecution, Paul and his wife Rosemary fled Kenya and escaped to Iceland via Italy.

Paul Ramses and his wife Rosemary fled Kenya in 2008, afraid of their lives due to mass persecution against members of a political party that Paul was involved with. Shortly after their arrival, Rosemary gave birth to a son they named Fidel, thereby establishing her right to stay along with the newborn. Paul, on the other hand, needed to apply for asylum. The Directorate of Immigration (UTL for short) refused to take up his case and ruled for him to be deported to Italy. Although their ruling was made in April, Paul however wasn’t notified until three months later, the night before he was to be deported, when he was arrested by Icelandic police and separated from his family—an act that violated both his rights to appeal UTL’s decision and his son’s internationally protected right to stay with his parents.

WHAT IS THE DUBLIN REGULATION?

UTL’s decision to refuse Paul asylum was argued for by citing the Dublin Regulation, an agreement on asylum affairs implemented by the member-states of the Schengen Area. The Dublin Regulation permits authorities to deport asylum seekers to the first Schengen state they entered, but it does not oblige the state to deport the asylum seeker in any way—and, as a matter of fact, specially bids authorities to apply it in harmony with human rights conventions. However, UTL’s official policy has been to start every asylum application process by checking if it can be outsourced to another Schengen state.

That sort of policy is certainly not to lighten the burden of states—such as Italy, Spain and Greece—that are located at Schengen’s south and east borders (in 2008, 31.200 asylum application were filed in Italy, compared to 72 in Iceland). The South-European asylum seekers’ dilemma has been the subject of a multitude of damning studies and these three countries’ refugee policies have been heavily criticised by the likes of UN Refugee Agency, Amnesty International and European Parliament.

According to Jórunn Edda Helgadóttir, MA student of international and comparative law, The Dublin Regulation brings forward grossly defective rules that have allowed the Icelandic state to deport asylum seekers en masse by stating that “because everybody does it, we can too.” This was indeed how Björn Bjarnason, then Minister of Justice, replied upon being heavily criticised for the deportation of Paul Ramses: “Of course there is nothing unlawful or wrong with employing this treaty, any more than other international treaties.”

Such a statement is wrong, according to Jórunn as Iceland has validated the European Convention of Human Rights, in which it says that “no one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment,” and that “everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life”—two of many law paragraphs that were not considered in the case of Paul Ramses. “The focal issue at stake is will”, she says, as the “problem would never grow to be so huge if most governments weren’t so willing to pass their duties and commitments on to other states.”

“WE INTENDED TO SAVE HIS LIFE…”

Back at the airport, Haukur and Jason were arrested and air traffic continued after a short delay. Interviewed by online news outlet Vísir shortly after his release, Haukur cut the crap when asked about his and Jason’s motives. “We intended to save Paul Ramses life,” he said, expressing worries that they had failed. Surprisingly, the next day, hundreds of people assembled by the Ministry of Justice and demanded Paul’s return to his family in Iceland.

The pressure increased with daily demonstrations, petitions and parliamentary debates, as well national and international media attention—all of it to be diagnosed as “sentimentality” by Minister of Justice Björn Bjarnason. But eventually Björn himself succumbed to “sentimentality” and overturned UTL’s decision. Parallel to the aforementioned pressure, Paul’s lawyer Katrín Theodórsdóttir issued a complaint to the Ministry, demanding material handling of Paul’s asylum application from a humanitarian standpoint. Following the Ministry’s ruling, UTL finally granted Paul asylum.

“…AND WE DID”

Today Haukur believes that although the impact of a single act of direct action is hard to measure, he and Jason actually saved Paul’s life. And their action, he says, paved the way for what followed, as standing in front of a ministry or signing a petition requires much less effort than running in front of an aeroplane. In the aftermath, they claim, people were less afraid to protest. Using the same logic, he insists that the good number of direct action such the ones of environmental movement Saving Iceland, which both him and Jason have also been involved in, paved the way for the so-called ‘pots and pans revolt’ of 2008-9.

At the same time he believes that The State’s response to such actions, for instance by instigating serious court cases, is likely to keep newcomers from getting involved. “It is sad that people have to make such enormous sacrifices for such tiny changes,” says Haukur and mentions Þorgeir Þorgeirsson, an author who in 1994, after a ten years long fight, won a historical victory at the European Council of Human Rights. Þorgeir had been sentenced in Iceland for his articles decrying and depicting police brutality in Reykjavík. Even if proven right, public innuendos regarding state or city officials was illegal at the time—something that wasn’t altered until the European Council ruled in Þorgeir’s favour.

THE ICELANDIC STATE VS. HAUKUR AND JASON

Haukur and Jason were originally charged with housebreaking and reckless endangerment. But once in court, the prosecutor brought forward two additional penalty clauses not included in the original charges, which he encouraged the judge to take into consideration. Such a move is not only illegal, but also in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights, which states that everyone charged with a criminal offence should be given adequate time and facilities in preparing their defence.

Despite protest from their defence lawyer, Ragnar Aðalsteinsson, who had to defend his clients unprepared for these new clauses, the District Court found the two guilty. Haukur was sentenced to two months in prison while Jason was given a 45 days probationary prison term, a ruling that the two appealed to Iceland’s Supreme Court. And while the Supreme Court judges did agree with Ragnar regarding the illegitimacy of the District Court’s ruling, they didn’t rule for the case’s discontinuation. Instead of acquitting the two, the Supreme Court’s judges made the unusual decision to send the case back to District Court, to start from scratch again.

According to Hrefna Dögg Gunnarsdóttir, law student and employee at law firm Réttur, the Supreme Court’s ruling surely manifests that Iceland’s uppermost court of law recognised the prosecution’s illegal move. Yet the decision to grant the prosecution another chance crystallises the fundamentally different position of the prosecutor and the defence. “This could be compared to a basketball game, in which one of the two competing teams always gets the ball after a failed throw,” says Hrefna.

Does this mean that they should have been acquitted? Not necessarily, if looked at by the book of law. But when viewed in context with the fact that by granting Paul asylum, UTL—and thus the Icelandic state—recognised the threat he faced if deported to Kenya, one has to wonder why the courts still questions Haukur and Jason’s actions.

WHAT IS THE PURPOSE?

“The purpose of the charge is obviously to suppress resistance,” says Haukur. “I stopped hoping for an acquittal. Instead I use this case to learn how to analyse State Power, and to educate myself about this system and how it operates.”

During the procedure last Friday, one could witness the findings of Haukur’s studies as he delivered his 8.000 word’s long disputation—his own theory on the constant clashes between The Individual and The State’s innumerable tentacles. One of the more interesting points he made regards the humiliation entailed in having to discuss important issues on The State’s terms. While having ideologically argued for his actions, he claims he has constantly been met with idiotic and irrelevant questions; while wanting to discuss an important topic as refugee policies surely is, he has been met with a debate about fences and police regulations.

The prosecutor indeed questioned Haukur and Jason extensively about their entrance onto the airport driveway, about alleged signage that was supposed to forbid their entrance and why they didn’t obey orders from airport staff. The prosecutor, however, showed little or no interest in discussing the motives behind their actions, which usually is considered an important factor in criminal cases. Instead of entering an ideological dialogue with the defendants—a discourse that could eventually force him to face the overall legitimacy of their action—his obvious aim was to get them jailed for a mindless and dangerous criminal act.

Haukur has given up hope for an acquittal, but will admit that a victory in court would serve as an exemplary beacon for future cases against political dissidents, not to mention the legal and bureaucratic amendments it could lead to. But these are not these fundamental changes he hopes for. “The impact of these kind of cases on the behaviour of State Power can certainly lead to minor reforms, but the knowledge we can gleam from it can give rise to revolutionaries.”
______________________________________________________________

A shorter version of this article was published in the Reykjavík Grapevine magazine (p. 26).