Two fin whaling boats in Reykjavik harbour, shortly before heading out to sea. Credit: Lowana Veal/IPS

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Aug 18 2014 (IPS)

Although fin whaling by Icelanders has encountered increasing opposition over the last year, Icelandic whaling boats headed off to sea again in mid-June for the first hunt of the summer and by August 14 had killed 80 fin whales.

The story of what then happens to the whales once they have been taken back to Iceland is part mystery and part an economic balancing act between the country’s economic interests and its international image.

As soon as the whales are landed in Iceland, work begins on dismembering the whales. But does the meat get sold and where? How much money does it bring in for the Icelandic economy? And are the costs involved more than the revenue?

All of the whale meat is sent to Japan, but Hvalur hf, the only Icelandic company that hunts fin whales, has encountered a great deal of resistance in transporting it there and has had to resort to commissioning a ship to take the meat directly from Iceland to Japan, undoubtedly leading to extra costs.“The story of what happens to the whales once they have been taken back to Iceland is part mystery and part an economic balancing act between the country’s economic interests and its international image”

IPS was unable to find out the fate of the fin meat sent to Japan earlier this year. Two months after arriving at its final destination, a Japanese source, who did not want to be named, told IPS: “My colleague told me that the whale blubber is still in the cold storage of Osaka customs.” The Japanese embassy in Reykjavik acknowledges that there is at least some sale of fin whale meat, but actual figures do not seem to be available.

Earlier this year, a group of North American animal rights and environmental groups started to pressure North American companies to stop buying fish from Icelandic fishing company HB Grandi because of its links with Hvalur hf. Almost immediately, the Canadian/U.S. company High Liner Foods said it would no longer buy fish from HB Grandi and a number of other companies followed suit, including the U.S. health food chain Whole Foods.

The campaigners also called on U.S. President Barack Obama to invoke the Pelly Amendment, which allows the President to embargo any and all fisheries products from countries operating in a way that undermines a conservation treaty – in this case, the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling.

Obama decided to invoke the Amendment, and has already implemented one albeit diplomatic rather than economic action, which was not to invite Iceland to the large international “Our Ocean” conference hosted by the United States in June.

Besides the well-known Pelly Agreement, there is also the Packwood-Magnuson Amendment of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, which allows the President to block foreign fleets from access to U.S. fisheries if their country is deemed to have diminished the effectiveness of an international conservation programme.

In 1984, Iceland and the United States signed an agreement whereby Iceland would obtain fishing permits in U.S. waters if it agreed to stop whaling. Due to various complications, although Iceland stopped whaling for 20 years in 1986, it did not start fishing in U.S. waters until December 1989 and then only caught a few tonnes of fish.

In spring this year, Social Democrat MP Sigridur Ingibjorg Ingadottir and seven other Icelandic opposition MPs tabled a parliamentary resolution calling for an investigation into the economic and trade repercussions for Iceland of whaling.

There was not enough time to discuss the matter in the last parliamentary session that ended mid-May, but Ingadottir is currently revising and updating the proposal with a view to submitting it early in the next parliamentary session, which starts in September.

“There are two main aspects to the proposal. One concerns the economic and trade interests of the country and the second Iceland’s image on an international scale,” she told IPS.

According to a report published in 2010, “In the years 1973-1985, when Hvalur hf pursued whaling of large cetaceans, whale processing usually stood for about 0.07 percent of GNP. The contribution of whaling itself to GNP is not known.” Minke whaling is not included in these figures.

Ingadottir, who trained as an economist, says that this figure is very low. “At that time, whaling was an industry and pursued systematically. Since then, a range of other large industries and commercial enterprises have sprung up, so the figure is likely to be lower,” she notes.

Gunnar Haraldsson, Director of the University of Iceland’s Institute of Economic Studies and one of the authors of the 2010 report, told IPS: “The problem is that no official figures exist on the returns of whale watching and various other parameters, thus there is a need to collect this sort of data specifically. It is therefore necessary to carry out a new study if we want to know what the national gains (and costs) actually are.”

Whale watching has blossomed over the last few years and at least 13 companies run whale-watching trips from various places around Iceland. Between 2012 and 2013, the number of whale watchers increased by 45,000, and the total number is now around 200,000 annually.

Three MPS had also called for an inquiry into whaling in the autumn of 2012. This was supposed to cover overall benefits to the economy, including economic interests, animal welfare issues and international obligations. A committee was set up to look into the organisation and grounds for whaling, but this petered out.

“The committee has not actually been dissolved, but it hasn’t met since the new government took over (in May 2013],” Asta Einarsdottir from the Ministry of Industries and Innovation told IPS. When asked why the committee had not met, Einarsdottir replied: “The Minister has not had a chance to meet with the Chair of the committee, despite repeated requests.”

Einarsdottir said that the committee was quite large and included representatives from the whale-watching and conservation sectors as well as from the whaling industry and various ministries.

Meanwhile, Icelandic lamb has also been affected by the whaling dispute. Over the last few years, Icelandic lamb has been exported to the United States and sold in the Whole Foods chain of shops under the banner of “Icelandic lamb”.

Last year, however, the chain decided not to brand the lamb as Icelandic because Iceland’s whaling activities had given Iceland a bad name. The expected increase in sales did not occur, and considerable pressure had to be applied to persuade them to keep selling the meat at all.

Ingadottir is forthright in her opinions. “Are they damaging our interests? Are they protecting a narrow group of interests rather than the national interest? What are we actually protecting with this whaling?” she asks, adding: “Iceland has to come up with very good reasons for pursuing whaling in order to continue doing it.”

(Edited by Phil Harris)

Although most of Iceland already uses renewable energy for its heating and electricity, a handful of places are still reliant on oil. But, at least on Grimsey island in the north, this could change in the future.

Grimsey has a population of 90 and currently uses about 200,000 litres of oil annually for district heating and electricity. Located 40 km off the northern mainland, it would be difficult and expensive to provide these essential needs via a pipeline.

A number of alternative solutions have been suggested over the years and one of these involves the use of wind energy. One of the researchers involved in the project, Daniel Chade from the University of Strathclyde in Scotland, described how the scheme would work.

“Initially, wind turbines could be placed on Grimsey, which would support diesel electricity generation. Subsequently, a hydrogen storage system could be added to increase efficiency of the system. At this stage of the project development, around 90 percent of energy should be produced from renewables,” he said.“In general, the wind-hydrogen system is also adaptable for other remote communities. For example, all northern parts of the globe are characterised by an excellent wind potential” – Daniel Chade, researcher at the University of Strathclyde in Scotland

While Chade believes that it is not a good idea to stop using diesel generators completely because it would not be very cost effective, he said: “However, in the future, oil prices will probably rise and renewable technology costs will decrease. Then I believe application of a 100 percent renewable energy system without a diesel generator should be feasible.”

Can the technique be used elsewhere in the world? Yes, said Chade, adding: “In general, the wind-hydrogen system is also adaptable for other remote communities. For example, all northern parts of the globe are characterised by an excellent wind potential.” He noted that that in Alaska, for example, there are around 200 places where diesel generators are used and in Canada about 300 remote locations rely on diesel generators.

“In some of them,” Chade added, “energy prices are higher than on Grimsey so, from an economic perspective, application of wind turbines with hydrogen energy storage should also be feasible there.”

Batteries are often used to store excess energy, but these only have a storage capacity of a few days. Hydrogen, however, can store energy for weeks or months.

“Nowadays, most of the available storage technologies are suitable for a maximum of a few days storage. In the case of hydrogen it can be stored over months, which is advantageous for Grimsey due to the seasonal wind variations. For example, some of the hydrogen produced during winter months from excess electricity might be used during summer when the wind potential is much lower,” Chade told IPS.

The above scenario only deals with electricity production, not district heating. Hydrogen can, in fact, be used for district heating as well, but more research needs to be done on the heating needs of Grimsey islanders before this is developed further.

Woodchips, however, are an option for district heating in Grimsey, which Runar Isleifsson from the Icelandic Forestry Commission is investigating.

“We have investigated whether it is practical and technically feasible to use wood pellets or woodchips to heat residential and industrial premises in Grimsey,” he told IPS.

“One of the main provisos is to use waste heat from the diesel plants that produce electricity for the island. These provide around 40 percent of what is needed. According to our calculations, this should be feasible and pricewise is very competitive with heating using traditional electricity (produced using hydropower) which is not available on Grimsey,” Isleifsson explained.

“Woodchips appear to be more practical than wood pellets,” he added.

Asked whether he thought that the wind energy system could be used in conjunction with woodchips, Chade said: “I think that he [Isleifsson] has a good idea. However, I believe that the heat from diesel generators that he proposes using might be substituted by the heat which would be generated by a wind turbine/hydrogen system. In such a case, his idea could be implemented together with our system.”

Meanwhile, in the capital Reykjavik, engineers from the EFLA company, the National Energy Authority and Iceland Drilling have been looking into the use of heat pumps to heat buildings in “cold” areas elsewhere in Iceland.

They say that up to four times as much energy can be produced from a given heat source, even in what might normally be considered unfavourable conditions.

For instance, even if it is cold outside, “absolute zero” – the point where no heat energy remains in a substance – is -273 °C, so a temperature of 0 °C will still contain considerable energy. Coupled with the use of special liquids which will boil at 0 °C, energy can be amassed from the outside air and used for domestic heating.

The energy produced is more than that needed for operation of the heat pump.

Heat pumps are of course not a new invention, but they have not seen much use in Iceland and it is difficult to predict how much energy they will produce because conditions in Iceland vary from place to place.

Lake Thingvallavatn, Iceland. Credit: Lowana Veal/IPS

This is what mechanical engineer Heimir Hjartarson has tried to clarify. He and his colleagues have looked at different places where heat pumps could be used.

“We at EFLA have collaborated in pilot projects where a water-to-water heat-pump system has been installed in a summerhouse close by Lake Thingvallavatn and also an air-to-water heat pump on the Snaefellsnes peninsula in West Iceland. The findings from these projects were that the electric energy for heating could be reduced to nearly 25 percent of what it was before installation,” Hjartarson explained.

A heat pump is now used to heat the swimming pool, school and sports complex in the town of Kirkjubaejarklaustur in South Iceland. These had been heated using waste heat from a waste incinerator, but the incinerator was closed down in December 2012 due to excess levels of dioxin and other pollutants. Use of the heat pumps has cut the cost of heating the pool with hydropower-produced electricity by two-thirds.

Gudmundur Ingi Ingason, Chair of the District Council for the Kirkjubaejarklaustur area, says that the heat pumps have worked very well. “We had already started using two heat pumps in the community centre, which were very effective, so we decided to buy some for the swimming pool as well after the incinerator was closed down. These are air-to-water heat pumps which take air from the atmosphere to heat the pool – like a fridge, but in reverse,” he explains.

According to Hjartarson, heat pumps are actually very suitable for heating swimming pools when no geothermal energy is available, because the heat obtained from each kilowatt is multiplied. “We have been looking into a system in which you only need to heat up water by about 2 °C [before it is pumped out into the pool again], which is very suitable for heat pump systems,” he concluded.

Workers start to dismember a fin whale at the whaling station in Hvalfjordur, about 45 km north of Reykjavik. Credit: Lowana Veal/IPS.

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Apr 14 2014 (IPS)

Posters with the words “Do you know who caught your seafood?” are now appearing on buses, trains and other venues in Boston. They are part of a campaign organised by a coalition of U.S. environmental groups called Whales Need Us, to draw attention to the links between Icelandic whalers and fish sold in the U.S.

A picture of a whale appears on the poster, together with the name of the website where those interested can find more information.“The campaign has contacted retailers, wholesalers and the food service industry across the U.S. to let them know that American consumers do not want to buy seafood from whalers."

The groups decided to focus on Boston because the launch of the campaign mid-March coincided with the opening of the North American Seafood Expo at the Boston Convention Centre.  Supporters picketed the stall of HB Grandi, one of Iceland’s largest fishing companies, asking onlookers to stop trading with the company because of its links with whaling.

The expo is the largest seafood trade event in North America.

At the start of the protest, fish consumers were requested to ask their local food retailers and restaurants to verify that their seafood products did not come from a source linked to Icelandic whaling.

“The campaign has contacted retailers, wholesalers and the food service industry across the U.S. to let them know that American consumers do not want to buy seafood from whalers, and asking for their help,” says Susan Millward, executive director of the Animal Welfare Institute, one of the organisations behind the Whales Need Us campaign.

On Mar. 18, the last day of the three-day expo, Canadian-U.S. seafood company High Liner Foods (HLF) announced it would discontinue trading with HB Grandi because of its whaling connections. It had been trading with the Icelandic company since October 2013.

Since the end of the expo, U.S. companies Trader Joe’s and Whole Foods Market have severed ties with Rhode Island-based Legacy Seafoods, another company that imports substantial quantities of fish from HB Grandi.

HLF say they do not have any existing contracts outstanding with HB Grandi, and are committed not to enter into any new contracts with them until they have fully divested their involvement and interest in whaling.

“Even though HLF’s policy is strict on not doing business with suppliers directly involved in whaling, it has nothing to do with individuals or shareholders of HB Grandi. We have no control over the ownership of privately or publicly owned companies in HLF’s supplier base,” Elvar Einarsson from High Liner’s procurement division tells IPS.

At the end of 2011, High Liner bought Icelandic Group’s U.S. and Asian operations. Icelandic Group also agreed to a seven-year licensing agreement with HLF for the use of the Icelandic Seafood brand in North American countries until 2018.

“For HLF the marketing and sales of seafood from Iceland under the brand Icelandic Seafood is an important part of our business. There will be no change on HLF’s procurement from its other Icelandic suppliers and hopefully HB Grandi’s circumstances will change so they will be able to become one of HLF’s suppliers again,” says Einarsson.

Last September, Kristjan Loftsson from the whaling company Hvalur increased his family’s shares in HB Grandi from 10.2 percent to 14.9 percent. On the HB Grandi website, Loftsson is listed as chairman of the board.

At the time, there was obviously some concern over the repercussions that this could have. The fishing website Undercurrent reported “an Icelandic industry player” as saying: “Hvalur is Iceland’s only whaling company, and it’s increasingly a controversial activity. It’s obviously a risk to a company selling wild fish that their ownership is closely connected to whaling.”

Vilhjalmur Vilhjalmsson, CEO for HB Grandi, has stated publicly that he will not speak to the press on the company’s trade with High Liner Foods. In a short press release issued by his company, he is quoted as saying: “We agree with the government’s policy on sensible utilisation of natural resources and have nothing to do with what operations individual shareholders choose to practise or not practise.”

But Millward emphasises that they are not trying to attack Icelandic fisheries as such. “The campaign is in no way meant as an attack on Iceland’s economy and is geared only at those companies linked to the Hvalur whaling company,” she says.

In 2011, President Barack Obama issued diplomatic sanctions on Iceland as part of the Pelly Amendment. The Whales Need Us coalition has once again made use of this.

“The campaign has also urged the public to contact President Obama, and ask that he take targeted action against Icelandic companies connected to whaling by invoking the Pelly Amendment, a tool promulgated by the U.S. Congress as a means of compelling compliance with international conservation treaties,” Millward told IPS.

To an extent, this policy worked. Obama has said that he would invoke the Pelly Amendment and instigate a number of measures aimed at Iceland. But once again, these measures appear to be diplomatic rather than trade sanctions, although they are more extensive than before.

Coincidentally, Icelandic Social Democratic MP Sigridur Ingibjorg Ingadottir has just put forward a parliamentary proposal that calls for an investigation into the economic and trade repercussions for Iceland of whaling.

“The investigation will take into account both minke whales and fin whales,” she told IPS. “Are we prepared to sacrifice more for less, when there is growing opposition to whaling and Iceland is catching more whales than are deemed sustainable by the IWC [International Whaling Commission]?”

The IWC says that the annual sustainable catch for fin whales in the North Atlantic is 46, whereas Iceland has set a quota of 154.

Meanwhile, Loftsson and other Hvalur employees are becoming increasingly sensitive to outside criticism and have now removed the company phone numbers from ja.is, the Internet listing of Icelandic phone numbers.

Women gather at a rally in Reykjavik to mark victory for their rights, but remain more vulnerable than men to the economic crisis. Credit: Lowana Veal/IPS.

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Nov 17 2013 (IPS)

Women in Iceland have been more badly affected by the economic collapse in 2008 than their male counterparts, both in terms of physical and mental health, studies show.

In one study carried out this year on people interviewed both before and after the financial crash, unemployed women, female students and women not active in the labour market showed particularly high stress levels in the year following the crash, along with women nearing retirement age (67 in Iceland) and non-skilled women.

“Most research on people who have experienced economic setbacks has been directed at men, and yes, those who have studied both sexes have found that men are more affected than women. Our results of the effects of the economic collapse are unusual, i.e. the effect on mental health appears to be primarily on women,” Unnur Anna Valdimarsdottir from the Centre of Public Health Sciences (CPHS) at the University of Iceland tells IPS.“Stressful events have been shown to have, if anything, more effect on heart diseases of women than men, and it is possible that different stressors could be gender-specific."

“Women have been more affected by the economic collapse and subsequent recession in Iceland than has been publicized, or seen in other countries,” says Chris McClure, a PhD student at CPHS.

“Most research to date indicates men being affected the most. However, what has occurred in Iceland is unique and may be an indication of a number of factors, including the high psychological burden of Icelandic women to maintain the household, their employment, their relationships, and their families.”

McClure points out that so far very few media releases have highlighted the negative consequences of the collapse in Iceland. Instead, most have focused on the resilience of the population.

“Statements like these, during times of austerity measures, can cause negative effects on the population moving forward,” he says.

Vulnerable groups are more prone to stress, say the authors. For instance, women over 60 might have experienced greater job insecurity or the prospect of their pensions or life savings disappearing, as well as the uncertainty of finding work if they are made redundant.

With non-skilled workers, the prospect of being in an occupation in which they are easily disposable or lacking credentials to get another job could have led to increased stress.

Previously, research studies on the relationship between unemployment and psychological outcomes had generally focused on men, but in some of these the societies studied were those in which men were the typical breadwinners for the family.

This is not the case for Iceland. With one of the highest employment rates among the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), a grouping of 30 wealthy countries, women in Iceland represent almost 80 percent of the workforce, almost the same as men (85 percent).

Financial and occupational losses during the weeks around the financial collapse represented a great threat to family security, and this may have affected women differently to men. The authors attribute this as one of the reasons for the difference.

But it is not just stress-related diseases that affect women more than men in Iceland. In the week that the banks fell, the number of women who visited the cardiac emergency department of the national university hospital, Landspitali, shot up by 40 percent, while the number of women who were diagnosed with heart-related diseases increased by 80 percent.

Valdimarsdottir is one of the people who have looked into this. “Stressful events have been shown to have, if anything, more effect on heart diseases of women than men, and it is possible that different stressors could be gender-specific,” she says.

“For instance, there is a stress-related condition called stress cardiomyopathy (broken heart syndrome) which is virtually only found in women. But this is non-fatal and usually lasts only a few days,” she points out.

She and her colleagues at CPHS are also looking at trends surrounding birth outcomes, as well as suicide attempts and more long-term health outcomes in both sexes which could conceivably be related to the crash.

The only men who were recorded with increased stress were those who were married or in the middle-income bracket. Women in the middle-income bracket also experienced increased stress, though not as much as young women. In both cases this could largely be due to the steep rise in mortgage payments that came straight after the bank crash.

McClure also says that in Iceland the prevalence of smoking is higher in women than men. “Our findings point to a strong link between smoking cessation and stress levels. Moreover, we found that women, compared to men, were much less likely to quit smoking following the collapse, which is linked to their stress levels.”

Figures from the Directorate of Health show that the number of abortions has risen since the bank crash. However, Hildur Bjork Sigbjornsdottir, who compiled the figures, told IPS that it is impossible for her to pinpoint the reasons for these, as often there is more than one reason for the decision. “Usually, though, it’s a combination of various social factors.”

Hydro plants on the Lower Thjorsa, above, could potentially provide energy for a new aluminium smelter. Credit: Lowana Veal/IPS

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Jun 9 2013 (IPS)

The new Icelandic government was only a day old when it announced in mid-May that it would do all it could to push ahead with the Helguvik aluminium smelter. Construction for the smelter began in in 2008 but since then has met with a variety of problems, mostly energy-related.

Critics of the project say that too many aspects of the project still remain unresolved and allege that the rush to build the smelter is a corporate tactic to draw Iceland’s government into developing infrastructure that it will be forced to continue supporting, to the detriment of the country’s protected areas.

Environmental concerns, meanwhile, were nearly inconspicuous during election campaigns, and on May 1, a few days after election results were announced, a Green March tagged along behind the trade unions’ march to remind political parties that the election had been won on a platform of cutting taxes and slashing home loans rather than on building new aluminium smelters.

The Green March focused on environmental issues and specifically the fact that the new government had no mandate to build more aluminium plants – which consume large quantities of energy and produce pollutants such as carbon dioxide and perfluorocarbons – or power plants.

Yet the day before the April 27 elections, Michael Bless, the head of Century Aluminium, which owns the plant, said he was optimistic a new government would ensure that development of the Helguvik plant could continue in earnest.

The governmental agreement issued two weeks ago by the winning Independence Party (IP) and Progressive Party (PP) emphasised that conservation and utilisation could proceed hand-in-hand.

The environment section began, “Clean renewable energy…offers great marketing opportunities that could lay the base for increased exports and a stronger image of the country.”

As Iceland’s geothermal and hydro energy is seen as renewable, a previous environment minister, Siv Fridleiksdottir, justified building the Karahnjukar dam and Fjardaal aluminium plant by saying that building energy-sucking aluminium plants in Iceland, where the energy is clean and renewable, was preferable to building them where they would run on dirty energy.

Energy blocks

The new minister for industry, Ragnheidur Elin Arnadottir, comes from the constituency which houses the partly built Helguvik smelter. It also has the highest unemployment rate in the country, and the municipality sees the smelter as a potential source of employment. She is keen for the project to go ahead.

Arnadottir told IPS that she is looking into possible incentives from the government side to facilitate the project, including possible state aid for various aspects of infrastructure such as road building and harbour expansion.

But the main stumbling block is still the lack of energy needed to fuel the plant and the price that Century Aluminium is willing to pay for the electricity, especially with the current global price of aluminium at rock-bottom.

Until a few years ago, aluminium companies in Iceland paid very little for electricity, as they consumed so much electricity and their operation was considered good for the economy.

But times have changed, and now energy companies are demanding higher prices for the electricity they produce.

The environmental impact assessment for Helguvik assumed a total capacity of 250,000 tonnes of aluminium produced annually, although ideally Century would like the smelter to produce 360,000 tonnes to be more cost-effective.

Energy for the plant was supposed to be provided by the regional heating company HS Orka and capital city-based Orkuveita Reykjavikur (OR) and sourced from geothermal plants, none of which have been built yet.

New pollution regulations for hydrogen sulphide (H2S), which is produced by geothermal plants, will also mean that at least one of these plants cannot be built until H2S emissions can be contained.

Despite these plans, Ketill Sigurjonsson, an energy specialist from the energy consultancy firm Askja Energy Partners, says that geothermal plants will probably be too expensive for an aluminium smelter.

“There may be some options in low cost hydropower, but it is still unclear if these will be enough to provide a full-sized aluminium smelter with sufficient electricity,” he said.

Earlier this year, the Icelandic government approved the Master Plan for Hydro and Geothermal Resources, which categorises all potential hydro and geothermal power plants into three categories: utilisation, meaning the plant faces no obstacles for development; pending, meaning more research is needed; or protection, meaning development is not allowed.

But in late May, Sigurdur Ingi Johannsson, the minister for fisheries, agriculture and the environment, announced that he had ordered a review of the plan, with the aim of moving some of the plants from the pending category, such as the hydro plants in the Lower Thjorsa River, into the utilisation group.

These plants could potentially provide energy for Helguvik or other large-scale industrial projects, such as a silicon factory. But Johannsson’s statement has caused unrest amongst environmentalists, some of whom have campaigned to save the Lower Thjorsa from development.

Tactical moves?

Arni Finnsson, from the Iceland Nature Conservation Association, has strong views on the matter. “Century Aluminium has conducted its business in a totally irresponsible manner with regard to a new smelter in Helguvik,” he said.

“Without having secured any energy at all for a new aluminium smelter…it started building the smelter, apparently in order to put pressure on politicians who are sensitive to high unemployment rates, for them to deliver the energy,” Finnsson told IPS.

“To build a smelter of 250-360,000 tonnes a year would require major destruction of valuable nature areas,” he added, pointing out that both local and national energy companies would have to draw on energy from several projects that had not yet been designed or planned.

“Century Aluminium’s plan is to start the smelter with some 180,000 tonnes a year and then force the Icelandic government to provide more energy against a threat of decommissioning the plant,” he explained.

“Iceland would have to build power plants in areas which are currently protected or have been slated for protection,” he concluded.

Three members of Iceland's Pirate Party, Jon Thor Olafsson, Birgitta Jonsdottir and Helgi Hrafn Gunnarsson, in front of the Althingi parliament building. Credit: Lowana Veal/IPS.

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, May 6 2013 (IPS)

With an unprecedented number of political parties contesting Iceland’s latest elections, Icelanders are discovering that if they are passionate about a particular issue, they need simply to find like-minded people and establish a political party.

Iceland’s population is just under 323,000. Yet fifteen parties took part in the latest elections on Apr. 27 for a total of 63 seats. Part of the reason for the increase in political parties was a growing discontent with the “Big Four” parties.

These include the ruling Social Democratic Party (SDP) and Left-Green Party, which together had imposed cuts in public spending due to demands from the International Monetary Fund. There are also the Progressive Party (PP) and Independence Party (IP), widely regarded as responsible for the financial crash in 2008 and frequently accused of filibustering during the last parliamentary session.

Four of the new parties contested only a few constituencies. Activist Sturla Jonsson, for instance, created the Sturla Jonsson party to support people who were in danger of losing their homes or vehicles and to inform them of how they could use Icelandic legislation to fight the authorities.

Another, Birgitta Jonsdottir, decided to start a Pirate Party in the spirit of the international Pirate Party movement, which emphasises transparency in government dealings and finances. The risk paid off, and three members were elected – the first time the Pirate Party has won seats in a national election.

Jonsdottir was elected to the Althingi, Iceland’s parliament, in 2009, following demonstrations in January of that year that brought down the right-wing government in power at the time and seen as responsible for the crash.

Another new party, Bright Future, gained six seats. This party likens itself to the liberal European Green parties.

Little environmental progress            

Despite gains by these parties, generally more progressive, one area in Iceland that is still likely to suffer following the 2013 elections is the environment.

The largest parties in the new Althingi are still those responsible for the development of the Karahnjukar power plant and associated Alcoa aluminium smelter prior to the bank crash in October 2008.

In a recent survey carried out by Gallup for the conservation organisation Landvernd, 51.3 percent of respondents said they were against the construction of new aluminium plants. Only 30.9 percent were in favour.

The head of Century Aluminium, Michael Bless, said last week that he was optimistic a new government would ensure that development of the proposed aluminium plant at Helguvik in southwest Iceland could continue in earnest.

This plant was originally scheduled to begin operating in 2010 but has suffered a number of setbacks, mostly to do with the provision of power.

It is also unlikely that the new Althingi will spare the ecologically sensitive Lake Myvatn in north Iceland and will instead continue to develop the nearby Bjarnarflag geothermal plant, which will damage the lake and flora and fauna within and around it.  It could cause health problems for those living nearby.

The question of EU membership

With the Social Democratic Party, the main party that had pushed for accession to the European Union, suffering a resounding defeat in the elections, the future of EU negotiations is uncertain.

However, opinion polls show repeatedly that while Icelanders generally feel that Iceland is better off outside of the EU, the majority of the population want negotiations to continue and to be given the opportunity to vote on the matter in a public referendum.

The right-wing Independence Party voted at its last national meeting to halt EU negotiations completely, but some candidates have publicly stated that they feel this decision goes too far.

“We should have a referendum to find out whether or not Icelanders want to continue EU negotiations,” says Valgerdur Gunnarsdottir, one of the new Althingi members for the IP, emphasising that this is her personal view.

The other large party, the centre-right Progressive Party, is also against continuing EU negotiations, although it says that a referendum should be carried out before halting them.

PP members have been given the role of forming a ruling coalition and have publicly stated that they will not back down from their election promise of using funds recovered from hedge funds and other foreign creditors to slash mortgage debts by 20 percent.

They are currently undergoing formal discussions with the IP to reach this goal, but if this task proves too difficult, they will talk to other parties instead.

Critics have said that the measures proposed by the PP and IP would lead to another crisis in the Icelandic economy.

Thorvaldur Gylfason, a university economics professor and founder of the Democratic Watch party, one of the new parties in the recent election, criticised the IP during a television interview on the eve of the elections. He fervently hoped that the PP and IP would not be in a position to privatise the banks once again.

He later told IPS, “There is no way that the Independence Party and Progressive Party can stand by their promises, especially if they are carried out at the same time.”

Before the election, critics had pointed out that these parties’ promises would benefit only the wealthy. Others are concerned about how the environment will fare.

The Green March at the end of the May 1 trade union demonstration aimed at reminding new politicians that election campaigns were mostly centred on reducing home loans and cutting taxes and that no authority was given to build new power plants with ensuing environmental destruction.

Still others worry whether the new constitution written by Gylfason and 24 others two years ago will be passed. Before the Althingi dissolved prior to elections, ten weekly demonstrations were held to pressure the body to pass the constitution.

These demonstrations were initiated by Hordur Torfason, instigator of the protests that brought down the Icelandic government in January 2009.

Asked whether he envisioned these protests continuing, Torfason told IPS, “Various options are in the pipeline and will come to light in due course.”

The new parliament will have two fewer women in its ranks, bringing the proportion of women down from 42.8 percent to 39.7 percent.

Trafficked persons in Iceland often live in cramped living conditions and work up to 16 hours a day. Credit: Sunbeam photos/CC-BY-2.0

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Dec 27 2012 (IPS)

For 18 months, a Chinese immigrant named Xing Haiou slept on a massage table in a windowless room in Reykjavik after completing his 12-hour workday.

Brought to Iceland by his distant relative, Lina Jia, Haiou received no wages between June 2002 and December 2003, although Jia paid his parents a monthly pittance for “borrowing” their son to work in her massage parlour.

Xing Haiou eventually accused Jia of non-payment of salary, and received a sum equivalent to 18 months’ work at minimum wage, including overtime.

At the time, he was not formally recognised as a victim of trafficking and forced labour. Today, authorities in Iceland are making a concerted effort to broaded the definition of those terms to better protect victims and survivors.

According to one source, who spoke to IPS under strict condition of anonymity, three questions can determine whether or not human trafficking has occurred: what was actually being done to the person, what methods were used, and what was the purpose of it?

The Icelandic police’s guidelines for trafficking are largely derived from the Norwegian ‘Guide to Identification of Possible Victims of Trafficking’.

These guidelines also seek to correct three common misconceptions of trafficking: that if the person did not take opportunities to escape, he or she is not being coerced; that individuals cannot be said to be victims of trafficking if their current living conditions are better than their previous ones; and that for a specific case to be termed trafficking, the person or group of individuals concerned must have crossed over a national border.

“If people use a definition of trafficking that is too limited, we are excluding most of the victims.  Basically, if a person’s vulnerable situation is being exploited, then it’s trafficking,” according to Margret Steinarsdottir from the Icelandic Human Rights Centre (ICEHR).

“If people come to Iceland of their own free will, even if they know they will be entering a situation in which they will be exploited, they could still be called victims of trafficking,” she added.

Her opinion reflects the framework of the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, which was adopted in Warsaw in 2005.

Steinarsdottir, a lawyer, has worked with numerous people she says could be classified as victims of trafficking. Contrary to popular opinion, not all victims of trafficking are ensnared in the sex trade, nor are the victims always women.

In Iceland, she says that forced labour is prevalent in sectors like construction and agriculture, while a large number of trafficked persons end up as au pairs in private houses.

Restaurants also conceal a large number of forced labourers, mostly from Eastern European countries, who sometimes work up to 16 hours a day.

According to Steinarsdottir, many people mistakenly believe that trafficking is masterminded by groups of gangsters, when in fact many cases involve individuals who are lured by false promises of stable employment.

Sun Fulan, a young Chinese woman, was promised an “eight-hour workday doing light household chores, with Sundays off”.

Instead, she ended up working 14 to 15 hours a day delivering newspapers and leaflets, working in a massage salon and helping to renovate three properties owned by Lina Jia, the same woman who brought Xing Haiou to this country.

Despite the long hours, which also included housework, Fulan received only a fraction of her promised salary. Finally, in February this year, she wrote to the authorities in Iceland and China, informing them of her plight.

Steinarsdottir has also talked to immigrant women who got married in Iceland and were then forced by their husbands to work as prostitutes. In many cases, the men take away the women’s earnings and threaten to send them back to their home country if they complain.

This situation too, she claimed, can be classified as trafficking.

Steinunn Gydu- og Gudjonsdottir, who manages the newly established ‘Kristinarhus’, a refuge for women victims of prostitution or trafficking, has also dealt with a case of forced labour.

“It wasn‘t clear whether the woman had been brought to Iceland only for forced labour or also for prostitution, but all the typical signs were there: she didn‘t have her passport, all of her earnings were taken away from her, and she was threatened,” Gydu- og Gudjonsdottir told IPS.

Asked how authorities deal with cases of forced labour, which primarily occur around the capital, Reykjavik, Asgeir Karlsson from the Icelandic National Commissioner of Police, told IPS, “We normally send people to the trade unions, but otherwise the local (police) branch in the person’s vicinity deals with such cases.”

“I have not heard of any cases of forced labour this year, and cases do not seem to pop up as often as before the bank crash in 2008,” according to Steinarsdottir.

“But that may be because the people concerned are scared of coming forward and complaining, fearing that they will not be able to get another job,” she concluded.

(END)

The Associated Whistle-blowing Press (AWP) seeks to provide impartial news based on wikileaks' raw data. Credit: Bradley Manning Support Network/CC-BY-SA-2.0

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Sep 24 2012 (IPS)

With the imprisonment of Bradley Manning and detainment of Julian Assange, WikiLeaks is effectively on hold. But that does not mean that leaks and whistleblowing activities have stopped.

GlobaLeaks lists a large number of leak sites, which are active to different degrees. Soon The Associated Whistleblowing Press (AWP) will be added to the list.

“One of the main motivations for the AWP is to unite journalists around the world and bring stories to light,” says Brazilian journalist Pedro Noel, one of the main people behind the initiative. “WikiLeaks used to analyse and report on the files they released, but they don’t do that any more.”

Noel perceived a gap in the whistleblowing community, between raw data – documents that conclude wrongdoing – and newsmaking in an impartial way, free of political and economic agendas. He decided that a new platform was needed.

“If the data does not get explained and treated in a way that people can understand, there’s no point in releasing it.”

Noel is currently based in Reykjavik, where he is setting up an office, and building links worldwide. He and his colleagues intend to launch the new whistleblowing site in the last week of September.

Noel was once a volunteer with WikiLeaks, so he knows how the system there works. He says there a number of differences between the AWP and WikiLeaks.

“First, there are structural differences. We’ll have a decentralised framework. With AWP, editors and staff will swap positions: we don’t want to have an ‘icon’. We’ll work with journalists and activists in different centres, and all the working groups will have their own platforms to receive documents and the like,” he tells IPS.

On the other hand, “WikiLeaks all goes through one website, which is in English only. Also, WikiLeaks publishes files of global interest, especially those related to the U.S. AWP wants to correct wrongdoings on a local basis and thus help local communities.”

Noel says it is important to have teams working in different countries and in different languages. “We want to emphasise the local scale as well as the international.

“Another important difference is that WikiLeaks gives exclusivity on the files it discloses, such as to the British newspaper The Guardian and others in the release of Cablegate.” Cablegate refers to the release of U.S. diplomatic cables that had been sent from its consulates and embassies around the world.

“AWP is building a team of researchers and analysts who will themselves publish stories, using local websites.” The main website will have links to the local websites, which will come online when the site is launched.

Anonymity is ensured as AWP uses open-source GlobaLeaks technology, which is specifically designed for whistleblowing, and is accessed with the TOR browser –that builds in anonymity. This means that AWP will not be able to trace the sender of the files. In addition, AWP encourages encryption of email.

AWP will keep a leaked document offline until they have determined it is genuine. Although the sender cannot be traced, Noel is optimistic that this should not be a problem.

“Electronic information tells a lot about the source. A photo gives certain electronic information, and the same goes for a scanned document. It is also possible to see whether a scanned document is genuine or whether it is composed of several different documents,” Noel says.

Iceland may seem a strange place to house a whistleblowing service, but Noel says one of the main reasons for the decision is the Iceland Modern Media Initiative (IMMI) parliamentary resolution that was passed unanimously in 2010 by the Icelandic Althingi (parliament) with the aim of giving safe space to whistleblowers and investigative journalists.

The resolution also wants the Althingi to introduce a new legislative regime to protect and strengthen freedom of expression, allowing Iceland to become an international transparency haven.

Initiated by activist and parliamentarian Birgitta Jonsdottir, the IMMI resolution pulls together the best sections of transparency legislation from all over the world. To become law, it now has to be put through the legislative process. This has suffered some setbacks, but is progressing slowly.

Various drawbacks have come to light. One is that various specialists have pointed out that Internet security is substantially inadequate in Iceland. Will this have an effect on AWP?

Smari McCarthy is the director of IMMI and sits on the steering committee that has been set up to investigate issues that need to be looked into in greater depth concerning the implementation of IMMI. He says that the security considerations are real but are being dealt with.

“This year, a Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT) was established in Iceland to serve as a coordination and incident management centre for Icelandic network security issues. In addition, the foreign ministry of Iceland has appointed a national security committee, consisting of members of parliament, to whom I testified a month ago on issues regarding network and information security in Iceland.”

At the moment, McCarthy says “it cannot be said that the situation in Iceland is markedly worse than in most European countries.”

The existence of IMMI is instrumental in the setting up of AWP in Iceland, Noel says, “but we have the same relationship with them as with any other individual or media initiative based in Iceland.”

The Hellisheidi geothermal power plant in Iceland that may provide energy to Britain. Credit: Lowana Veal/IPS.

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Jun 5 2012 (IPS)

With rising energy prices and stringent requirements for producing a higher proportion of energy from renewable sources in the near future, long-distance electricity cables are increasingly thought of as a viable option for providing electricity.

The cables, or interconnectors to give them their proper name, transmit energy by way of High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) rather than the conventional Alternating Current (AC). For long-distance connections, HVDC cables are highly energy efficient, losing only 2-3 percent of power over 1,000 km.

Now, UK Energy Minister Charles Hendry is undergoing discussions with Iceland’s state-owned energy company, Landsvirkjun, on the possibility of setting up an underwater cable between the two countries to provide Britain with renewable energy from Iceland.

The energy would come from existing geothermal and hydroelectric power plants, although if the two pilot windmills which are scheduled to be installed later this year prove successful, wind power could also potentially be used to power the interconnector.

Landsvirkjun has in fact been exploring the possibility of setting up an underwater cable with Europe since the early 1990s or even before, but the cost has always been thought of as prohibitive although the initiative was always known to be technically feasible.

The cables would lie at a depth of about 1000 m while the distance between the two countries is around 1,200 km. Other interconnectors exist that are longer or deeper, but none are both as deep and as long as the proposed cable linking the UK with Iceland.

What is the next step? “The government has set up a committee to look at the economic benefits for Iceland,” says Magnus Bjarnason from Landsvirkjun.

Asked whether more power plants would need to be built to power the interconnector, Bjarnason replies: “Technological advances have enabled energy distribution to become more efficient. In all such systems, there has to be enough excess capacity to deal with power failures or other emergencies.

“It all boils down to reducing waste in the system,” he concluded.

Some Icelanders are wary of the proposed interconnector, though. At a recent gathering of conservation organisations, participants said that environmental impacts had not been considered at all. The forum concluded that investigating such impacts should be prioritised and information should be made available before other components of the matter are looked at.

“The proposed cables would put pressure on building more power plants, both hydro and geothermal, for exporting energy. These are often located in sensitive wilderness areas which we want to protect.

“In addition, the Icelandic power transmission system would need much bigger transmission lines with associated visual and other environmental impacts to connect to the undersea cables,” explains Gudmundur Ingi Gudbrandsson from Landvernd environmental association.

Gudbrandsson also points out that little has been done to investigate the environmental impact of windmills in Iceland.

Interconnectors are not a new discovery. Britain already has undersea interconnectors that link to the Netherlands and France, and interconnectors that will link the UK with Belgium, Norway and Denmark are being considered. Hydropower will be used in the Norwegian case, but wind power will provide energy from Denmark.

The German-led Desertec venture aims to harness renewable energy from deserts and transport it via HVDC to areas in need. It is an ambitious project and has already started up initiatives in Morocco, Tunisia and Egypt, although the foundation says that deserts can be utilised anywhere.

Concentrated solar power (CSP) will be the main source of energy for Desertec projects, but wind and other technologies will also be used. In Morocco, a 500 MW CSP complex composed of 12 square kilometres of parabolic solar panels is being built in Ouarzazate.

Most of the energy will probably be used by Morocco itself, but the excess will be exported to Spain via an undersea interconnector. The first 160 MW is expected to go online in 2014.

In Tunisia, the TuNur solar project will supply energy to Italy via an undersea interconnector by 2016, while in Egypt a huge wind farm will be set up at Gulf of el Zayt on the Red Sea and a solar and natural gas plant is already producing electricity from Kuraymat, about 100 km south of Cairo. But like the Moroccan case, it is the locals who get first use of the energy.

In Europe, a project similar to Desertec has just been announced. Called Norstec, it consists of 20 companies in the energy business which will make use of the North Sea’s renewable resources, mainly offshore wind. The interconnector that might lie between the UK and Denmark would be part of this grid. Further details will be discussed at the Renewable UK conference on global offshore wind this month.

With the help of interconnectors, renewable energy targets for 2020 and 2050 could become a reality.

What do academics in the field think? “In general I think these interconnectors are a good idea, enabling renewable electricity surpluses and deficits to be balanced out over a very wide area and reducing the need for backup/storage,” says Godfrey Boyle, renewable energy professor at the UK’s Open University.

His colleague Dave Elliott concurs. “Overall I’m in favour, as long as it doesn’t let governments off the hook on green energy projects nationally and doesn’t exploit host and supply countries,” he says. (End)

“With the fuel from the agriculture project, we are encouraging farmers to look at possibilities they might have to produce their own energy, while at the same time getting the Agricultural University and Farmers’ Association to work towards supporting and encouraging the farmers,” says Haraldur Benediktsson, chair of the Icelandic Farmers’ Association about the campaign to reduce energy bought by farmers by 20 percent by 2015 and 80 percent by 2020.

Benediktsson continues: “The project is not fully developed yet, but basically there are three main factors involved. First, to utilise better the energy that farmers currently buy: saving energy in farming practices and increasing energy efficiency. Secondly, to analyse the possibilities for energy production on farms, whether in the form of methane, wind energy, hydropower or biomass, and to hold courses on subjects such as understanding the methane production process.”

Farmers have shown considerable interest in the latter. Innovation Centre Iceland (ICI) has organised courses that they called Energy Farmer. These courses “may possibly start up again, even later this year, as there was so much interest in the subject,” says Ardis Armannsdottir from ICI.

“The third factor is to define and evaluate how quickly Icelandic agriculture can become self-sufficient in energy,” Benediktsson tells IPS, adding: “Several small projects have been started, such as preparations for advice on saving energy, creating teaching material for the AU and continuing education on methane production.”

It seems there is no lack of enthusiasm for small-scale energy production in Iceland. A number of individuals and companies have grand plans on how to make Iceland self-sufficient in energy. One of these is a chemist and former teacher Thorbjorn A. Fridriksson.

“Icelanders can produce all the oil and gas they need by ecological means. We have vast areas of land in the south that could easily be planted with grass species which could then be transformed into biomass for energy, while as a backup Iceland has enough peat reserves to last for many years,” says Fridriksson. “But it won’t be economical until a certain volume of production has been reached.”

In a little shed by his house in South Iceland, Fridriksson has set up processing equipment in which he transforms straw from a neighbouring farmer into tar, fuel oil, gas and other materials.

“The technology is well known and has been used for decades. We don’t need to spend large sums of money in research,” Friðriksson tells IPS.

He says the process is based on hydrogenation of biomass. This technology has been known for a century and was used extensively in Germany during the Second World War, but after that its use dwindled.

“First of all one has to collect the grass or other similar material, prepare it, clean it and so forth, then produce diesel, fuel oil and maybe petrol out of it by injecting hydrogen at high temperature and pressure into the biomass. Maybe just 200 litres a day will result to begin with; it is really only a prototype. This would be part of an RD&D (Research, Development and Demonstration) plan for full-scale production lines,” Fridriksson explains.

“One needs to produce 2,500 tonnes a day,” he adds. “This will need two million tonnes of biomass and will be able to compete with petrochemical products as long as the price of a barrel of oil does not fall under 60 dollars. The resulting fuel will be enough to fuel all Iceland’s vehicles, construction equipment, boats and aeroplanes.”

Although most houses in Iceland are heated geothermally and all of the country’s electricity comes from geothermal or hydroelectric sources, when fuel for cars, boats and planes are included the proportion of renewable energy in Iceland is 67 percent.

The government wants to increase this percentage by encouraging use of alternative fuel sources for the transport sector. Eco-friendly fuels currently power only 0.6 percent of cars, the majority of these being methane-fuelled.

Metanorka, a company whose name translates as Methane Energy, has recently received a grant to map where sufficient organic waste is available to stand under methane production.

“Another side of this grant is to reduce the initial and operating costs of micro biogas plants, which will mean that methane production will be economically feasible in a number of places in the country,” says Dofri Hermannsson, managing director of the company. “We have also received a grant from the Roads Administration to calculate the economic and environmental impact of producing and using methane gas in cars in rural areas.”

Independent of any grants, the company intends to build a medium-sized methane plant next year about 50 km from Reykjavik, in collaboration with a large pig producer and a refuse-collecting company.

Iceland’s Agricultural University has its main campus at Hvanneyri, 48 km north of Reykjavik, but has outposts in Reykjavik and the village Hveragerdi, 45 km east of the capital. The staff use methane-fuelled vehicles when travelling between the locations, fuelling in Reykjavik at one of the few methane-filling stations in the country.

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Mar 24 2012 (IPS)

“We want to hear each others’ stories on how we have coped with changes, how we have got to where we are now and thus how we can be an inspiration to others,” says Anna Loa Olafsdottir, one of the people behind a group of women in southwest Iceland who call themselves SKASS.

SKASS (Association of Dynamic, Serious and Creative Women) from Sudurnes region, southwest Iceland, was set up in the spring of 2010 to “encourage women to let their dreams be true, whether this is to do with business, establishing a company or something entirely different,” Olafsdottir tells IPS. “Whether this is different to how men operate is something that every woman must answer herself.”

FKA (Icelandic Association of Women Entrepreneurs) is a group of women entrepreneurs in Reykjavik. Founded in the spring of 1999, FKA grants annual awards to individual women or women running companies.

The awards announced in January went to an 83-year-old woman who opened a shop in 1965 and still works there; to a new human resources company called Attentus run by three women with the aim of providing personnel services to companies; to a woman who now runs a highly successful whale-watching business; and to a company called Ja.is that is now run by two women who bought out the company in late 2010 in conjunction with an investment fund called Audi 1.

FKA’s decision to reward the company has been controversial. Critics have pointed out that Ja.is closed two out of its four locations last year and that many women lost their jobs as a result.

One critic is Dominique Pledel Jonsson, who had been a member of FKA since 2005 until deciding to resign because of FKA’s decision to reward Ja.is. “I believe that women can offer a different business world to men,” she tells IPS. “But women are best at everything they do only if they do so on their own grounds, not if they mimic men and become as ruthless and greedy as them or form women’s clubs instead of old boys’ clubs.”

Audur Capital is one of the few financial entities in Iceland which survived the banking crisis without losing money for their customers. It was set up in 2007 by two highly placed women in the financial sector who wanted to create a financial services provider that acted differently to the norm – one which set responsible behaviour, candour and feminine values above short-term profit and greed.

When developing their business model, the firm used a 2007 report published by Barclays that quotes research carried out by a women-oriented research body called Catalyst, which showed that companies with the highest female representation on their senior management teams enjoyed a 34 percent higher return on equity than did firms with the lowest representation.

One of their main offerings is Audur 1, a private equity fund that primarily seeks investment opportunities in businesses with a high growth potential that are managed or owned by women. For instance, Audur 1 has substantial investments in Ja.is.

The Innovation Centre Iceland has set up a 15-week course called Brautargengi for women who have a business idea in mind and want help bringing it to fruition. The course involves 75 hours of class time, but in addition participants are expected to spend at least 10 hours a week on developing their pet project.

About 20 women attend each course in Reykjavik, but fewer attend those held outside the capital. Selma Dogg Sigurjonsdottir, project manager for the courses outside Reykjavik, says that “women come with all sorts of ideas: design, tourism, various kinds of manufacturing and other service-oriented projects.”

In 2010, researchers at the University of Iceland carried out a study on the effectiveness of Brautargengi, in which all participants who attended a Brautargengi course between 2001 and 2009 were contacted. “The results showed that 55 percent of those who replied had got a company running, 19 percent were developing a business idea and only 26 percent were doing something else,” Sigurjonsdottir told IPS.

Dagny Reykjalin, a graphics and web designer, established the design and advertising company Blek in 2010 after taking the Brautargengi course in business administration in Akureyri, North Iceland. “After two years in operation, Blek has formed a well- established client base from all around the country as well as overseas,” she says.

Reykjalin is in touch with others from her course who have already set up businesses. One set up a photography studio, another an architect business, while a third, Bjarkey Sigurdardottir, is a soprano singer who sings at weddings, funerals and christenings.

But some women are not satisfied with the current situation or the options open for women who want to set themselves up in business. One of these is retired social worker, Gudrun Jonsdottir, who was one of the founders of a feminist political party, the Women’s List. The party was set up 40 years ago but has now been absorbed into the Social Democratic Alliance, one of the ruling parties in Iceland.

Jonsdottir explains that “the number of women in politics has certainly increased, which is also seen in the increasing number of women who run companies or who are in start-up companies, but it is exceedingly rare for these women to threaten, preach and try to change the existing system, or to lay down the foundations of values which to my mind consist of feminist thinking in which caring, joint responsibility, empowerment, decentralisation of power and opposition to both ever-increasing consumerism and economic growth are core values.

“I feel that we women now are at a dead end, trusting in state feminism which I feel is based on legally granting women the same rights as men. These are human rights, but I want us to aim higher, towards overturning society’s values.”

For the third year running, Iceland tops all other countries on the Global Gender Gap Index, ahead of Norway, Finland and Sweden. However, when it comes to economic participation and opportunity, Iceland is only ranked 24 on the list.

Excerpt:

Three years ago, thousands of Icelanders were standing outside Iceland’s parliament building chanting “incompetent government” in an attempt to bring down the conservative government that had been seen as responsible for the collapse of the country’s banking system.

In 2008 all three major commercial banks collapsed because they could not refinance their short-term debt. It was the largest banking collapse ever in relation to the size of the economy.

The protestors won, the government resigned, and a left-wing government consisting of the Left-Green Movement and the Social Democratic Alliance took over. The new government pledged to look after the welfare of the average Icelander, but opinions differ whether it has managed to do that.

After the crash the Icelandic krona devalued significantly, which meant that the price of anything which had to be imported or was dependent on foreign currency increased considerably. Food, fuel and consumer goods were particularly affected, and are still much more expensive than they were prior to the crash.

For instance, all of the organisations that provide food assistance to people in need have reported a substantial increase in clients.

People lost their jobs, or took wage cuts, or were banned from working overtime, or worked on the black market. Those in the building sector were particularly affected, as the house market collapsed. However, the unemployment level has improved somewhat, and now only 6.1 percent of Icelanders are registered unemployed.

Consumer loan repayments also rose significantly. The people worst off are those who bought real estate or cars in the year or two preceding the bank crash, when house prices were at their peak and – at least for houses – the banks were offering 100 percent loans.

In Iceland, a nation of 300,000, about 75 percent of people own the property they live in. Before the crash, would-be house buyers were frequently advised to take out mortgages in foreign currency, or a blend of Icelandic and foreign currency. After the crash, the exchange rate almost doubled – which meant that it cost more to repay loans – and the price of real estate fell. New homeowners were left with worthless real estate for which they had to repay loans that exceeded the value of the property.

But people with loans in Icelandic currency also suffered. One woman, Kristin Hafsteinsdottir, bought her small flat in 2007 but increased mortgage payments became too much for her, so she went to work overseas for a year.

To keep her job open, she had to return within a year, which she did – and then paid off her mortgage by taking money out of her savings from her work abroad and her pension fund.

Last year she was told the loan on her flat had returned to 110 percent of the market value. She had become one of the people eligible for one of the new schemes to help homeowners, the so-called 110 percent measure. Here, the financial institution or bank writes off a portion of the loan if mortgage payments have been kept up to date.

She is still in financial difficulties, though. “Now the price indexation is crippling me again. The loan is related to the consumer price index, and every time that goes up so does my loan and the price increase compensation,” she told IPS.

One option for people in difficulty is the Debtors’ Ombudsman. “People come here for various reasons and we try to tailor the solution to the individual. Most have applied for debt mitigation, but there are also a sizeable number who want to solve their problems in a less drastic way than debt mitigation,” says Svanborg Sigmarsdottir, information officer for the agency.

“Most lenders also offer a temporary solution whereby only interest on the loan is paid and the payment of monthly instalments is postponed. It is also possible to apply for postponement of both instalments and interest. When the monthly payments begin again, they will be higher than before the freezing, as interest is calculated from a higher amount than before,” she said.

The Association of Icelandic Homes (AIH) was set up a few days before the January protests began, with the mission of looking after the interests of property owners. Their demands include the abolition of indexation and the rectification of loans.

According to the national tax authority, 40 percent of Icelanders have negative equity – they owe more than they own. This corresponds to 60,000 families. Some of these people have given up on life in Iceland and moved overseas. Norway is especially popular, as abundant work is available in the oil industry.

But some people return, for one reason or another. Sturla Jonsson is one of these.

Prior to December 2007, Jonsson ran a thriving business. Then things started to slow down, and he got no contracts between December and the following May. The work he did get was not enough to pay the oil expenses for his vehicles, let alone the mortgage repayments on his house.

In June 2009 Jonsson went to Norway to work, first getting work in the trucking business and then with tiling. He managed to earn enough to keep up with the repayments, but finally returned to Iceland as his back was causing problems.

He then discovered that his mortgage repayments had been recalculated and he had to pay back more than he could. “My house was sold at auction by the District Commissioner,” he told IPS. He will have to vacate the premises by early March. “But I’ve studied the law and I’ll fight it,” he added.

The bank collapse did not have purely negative repercussions, however. For instance, children are happier. Icelanders have always worked extremely long hours, often doing two or more jobs. With overtime cut back after the crash, they have more time to spend with family and friends.

The crisis also made people suddenly wake up and take stock of their situation. Is it really necessary to have two new, fuel-hungry 4-WD cars for a family of four? Perhaps not. Today, signs of extravagances of pre-crash consumerism are said to be “very 2007”.

And yet wages in banks are increasing. There has been an upsurge in the sale of luxury cars. Icelanders are once again flocking to overseas cities on shopping trips – this time Boston is popular.

After its final review of the Icelandic economy, the IMF declared that Iceland’s economy was recovering well. Clearly at least some Icelanders are benefitting from the new situation.

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Oct 6 2011 (IPS)

U.S. President Barack Obama has decided to impose diplomatic rather than trade sanctions on Iceland because of the country’s whale-hunting activities.

He has implemented an instrument known as the Pelly Amendment, also known as Section 8 of the Fisherman’s Protective Act. This is a law from 1978 that allows the U.S. President to ban the import of products from countries that allow fishing operations or trade that diminish the effectiveness of an international fishery conservation programme for endangered or threatened species.

This was the upshot of a process initiated in December 2010, when 19 American NGOs filed a “Pelly petition” pursuant to the Pelly Amendment to call on the Secretaries of Commerce and Interior to certify that Iceland is undermining international conservation agreements. They called for the imposition of trade sanctions against fisheries-related businesses linked to the Iceland company which is responsible for killing fin whales.

Then U.S. secretary of commerce Gary Locke acted on this and certified in July that Iceland be subject to the Pelly Amendment because, as Obama put it in his letter to the Icelandic authorities, “Nationals of Iceland are conducting whaling activities that diminish the effectiveness of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) conservation programme.”

However, Locke recommended at the time that diplomatic sanctions rather than trade sanctions be implemented.

This means that American diplomats are supposed to voice their concerns about the continuation of commercial whaling by Iceland when on official visits; seek ways to stop whaling by Icelandic companies; and consider whether it is appropriate to continue cooperation in Arctic cooperation projects.

Obama’s letter also states: “Iceland’s increased commercial whaling and recent trade in whale products diminish the effectiveness of the IWC’s conservation programme because: (1) Iceland’s commercial harvest of whales undermines the moratorium on commercial whaling put in place by the IWC to protect plummeting whale stocks; (2) the fin whale harvest greatly exceeds catch levels that the IWC’s scientific body advised would be sustainable if the moratorium were removed; and (3) Iceland’s harvests are not likely to be brought under IWC management and control at sustainable levels through multilateral efforts at the IWC.”

Obama had 60 days to respond to Locke’s decision. In the intervening time, an Icelandic delegation visited Washington and met with the U.S. State Department and two Alaskan Senators to discuss the situation.

They emphasised that Iceland only conducts whaling from two abundant and healthy stocks in the North Atlantic, minke whales and fin whales, and that the whaling activities are fully sustainable and based on best scientific information.

But it appears that these talks came to no avail.

In response to Obama’s letter, the Icelandic Minister of Fisheries and Agriculture, Jon Bjarnason, expressed surprise and disappointment. “The U.S. authorities are not consistent when they criticise Iceland for its fin whale hunting on the one hand and ask for the support of Iceland and other member States of the International Whaling Commission for their bowhead quota off Alaska on the other hand. Scientific information clearly shows that the Icelandic fin whale hunting is no less sustainable than the U.S. bowhead whaling,” he said.

The five-year U.S. bowhead quota is subject to approval by a 75 percent majority of member countries of the IWC at its Annual Meeting in Panama in 2012.

Bjarnason’s ministry defended the Icelandic position by saying: “There is no legal or scientific justification for actions to be taken by the U.S. due to Icelandic whaling activities.” Furthermore, “Iceland’s whaling activities are fully lawful and its international trade in whale products is in accordance with its international obligations.”

While the ministry of fisheries was boldly trying to defend their position, other ministers had a slightly different view.

Minister for the Environment Svandis Svavarsdottir doubts if whaling in the present context can ever be called sustainable, both from the standpoint of the environment and judged by economic factors. “Foreign markets for whale meat are few and miniscule, making the potential income of whaling negligible in a larger economic context,” she says.

Minister for foreign affairs, Ossur Skarphedinsson makes a clear distinction between the minke and the fin whale catch. “Our policy is clear. We shall utilise our resources in a sustainable way. The fin whale stock in the northern seas is without doubt not endangered, and when the Americans state the contrary they unfortunately reflect a rather infantile command of the scientific facts,” he told IPS.

Skarphedinsson continued: “However, in the strict sense of the definition of sustainability it can be questioned if fin whales are utilised in a sustainable way if there doesn’t exist a market for the product, as stated by some respectable opponents of whaling. This has been recently discussed twice in the government and I have been asked in my dual capacity as minister of foreign affairs and foreign trade to produce a report, among other things on the market aspect, in cooperation with the minister of agriculture.

“We shall take it from there, although I add, that the recent action of the American government against Iceland is not helpful to speed that up. Indeed their arguments against Iceland are devoid of any scientific data, reflecting a rather questionable motive as well as methodology.”

“As far as the minke whale catch is concerned, it is scientifically impossible to argue that these are unsustainable, and only the American administration steps as low as to question our data on the minke catch without wanting to inspect the data. It is difficult to come to an accommodation with people that play by such twisted rules,” he added.

Although no fin whales have been caught this year because of declining demand for whale meat in Japan, some fin whale meat has been exported there. The American groups have also complained about that.

“Our source found that 572 tons of fin meat (and blubber) were imported in 2010 and 410 tons of meat have been imported this year,” says Nanami Kurasawa from the Japanese marine conservation organisation IKAN, adding: “Around 335 tons of meat is still in the bonded warehouse.”

Excerpt:

A campaign directed at tourists visiting Iceland aims to show them that, contrary to what they are led to believe by some restaurants, whale meat is not a traditional dish enjoyed by most Icelanders.

Volunteers campaigning in Reykjavik. - Lowana Veal/IPS

Beneath the slogan is a picture of a whale, followed by "Whales are being killed to feed tourists. Don’t let your visit leave a bad taste in your mouth."

The leaflets are produced by the animal campaigning group International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), but the umbrella group for Icelandic whale-watching companies, Ice Whale, is also involved in the campaign.

IFAW is conducting a campaign against eating whale meat because "we have noticed that in recent years, more and more restaurants in Iceland are putting whale meat on the menu, suggesting that it is being promoted to tourists," says IFAW’s UK publicity officer Clare Sterling.

However, a Gallup consumption and lifestyle survey last year showed that only 0.9 percent of Icelanders eat whale meat on a weekly basis, 36.8 percent eat it less than five times a year, and 52.6 percent never eat it.

Meanwhile, the IFAW webpage about the campaign says that "an estimated 40 percent of tourists are persuaded to eat whale meat."

The sale of whale meat in Iceland has increased over the last few years, partly because "tourists are being encouraged to eat whale meat, under the mistaken belief that it is a traditional dish enjoyed by most Icelanders."

In 2009, the University of Iceland, in conjunction with Icelandic whale-watching operators Elding, carried out a survey of almost 1,500 tourists on whale-watching trips in Iceland.

"They were asked how many of them had tried whale meat (19 percent) and how many would consider trying whale meat out of curiosity (86 percent)," said Sterling.

Currently "about 20 percent of whale meat goes directly to restaurants, the rest going to wholesalers," says Gunnar Bergmann Jonsson from the Association of Minke Whale Hunters (AMWH), which supplies whale meat to the Icelandic market.

In March, IFAW decided to ask permission from the airport authority, Isavia, to put up an advertisement with similar wording to the leaflet at Keflavik, the international airport for Iceland.

This was supposed to stand all summer, starting from the beginning of June. IFAW paid in advance for the hanging of the advertisement.

However, soon after the advertisement was put up, Isavia said that the organization was asked to change the wording or take it down. They said that they had never seen or agreed the final text, and had received some complaints.

One of these was from Jonsson, the manager of AMWH. "I thought it was inappropriate for the authorities that run the airport building to hang up propaganda like this, especially as it is a state-owned building," he told Tierramérica.

Eventually the advertisement was taken down and the organizers were refunded. But the leafletting continues, with volunteers spending two weeks at a time in Iceland before being replaced by others. The volunteers come through the Icelandic voluntary organization SEEDS.

"We talk to some of the people we leaflet," says Elena from Canada. "We generally get good responses from the tourists, who say they are not interested in eating whale meat, but we get many negative responses from Icelanders."

Leah, a volunteer from the U.S., added: "Since the campaign started, we have noticed that fewer restaurants are advertising whale meat outside their shops."

Iceland’s quota for catching minke whales (genus Balaenoptera) this year is 216. Halfway through the season, about 44 minke whales have been caught. "We never intended to catch the whole quota – we only catch for the market in question, which is Iceland," says Jonsson.

Sixty minke whales were caught in 2010, although the quota was much higher.

It seems that no fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus) will be caught in Iceland this summer, or at least not until August at the earliest. Kristjan Loftsson from Hvalur, the company that operates the larger whaling boats, blames the March earthquake and tsunami in Japan (the biggest importer of whale meat) for his decision, saying that the market there has crashed as people no longer go out to eat in restaurants.

But the decline in whale meat consumption appears to have started before the tsunami. According to a survey carried out in Japan in 2010 by IKAN, the Iruka (Dolphin) and Kujira (Whale) Action Network, in conjunction with journalist Juniko Sakuma, Japan had around 6,000 tons of unsold whale meat in storage, although whale meat had become cheaper and less whales had been caught by the Japanese.

"It is not true that the whale meat stock increased after the disaster," IKAN's Nanami Kurasawa told Tierramérica.

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Jul 27 2011 (IPS)

Down by the old harbour in Reykjavik, a small group of volunteers in pale blue T-shirts can be seen handing out leaflets that say “Meet us don’t eat us”. Beneath the slogan is a picture of a whale, followed by “Whales are being killed to feed tourists. Don’t let your visit leave a bad taste in your mouth.”

Volunteers campaigning in Reykjavik. Credit: Lowana Veal/IPS.

IFAW are conducting a campaign against eating whale meat because “we have noticed that in recent years, more and more restaurants in Iceland are putting whale meat on the menu, suggesting that it is being promoted to tourists. This has also been confirmed by feedback from the public,” says IFAW’s UK publicity officer Clare Sterling.

However, a Gallup consumption and lifestyle survey last year showed that only 0.9 percent of Icelanders eat whale meat on a weekly basis, 36.8 percent eat it less than five times a year, and 52.6 percent never eat it.

The IFAW webpage about the campaign says that “an estimated 40 percent of tourists are persuaded to eat whale meat.” The leaflet says that the sale of whale meat in Iceland has increased over the last few years, partly because “tourists are being encouraged to eat whale meat, under the mistaken belief that it is a traditional dish enjoyed by most Icelanders.”

“In 2009 the University of Iceland, in conjunction with Icelandic whale watch operators Elding, carried out a survey of almost 1,500 tourists (1,474) on whale watching trips in Iceland. They were asked how many of them had tried whale meat (19 percent) and how many would consider trying whale meat out of curiosity (86 percent),” replies Sterling.

Currently “about 20 percent of whale meat goes directly to restaurants, the rest going to wholesalers,” says Gunnar Bergmann Jonsson from the Association of Minke Whale Hunters (AMWH), which supplies whale meat to the Icelandic market.

In March, IFAW decided to ask permission from the airport authority, Isavia, to put up an advertisement with similar wording to the leaflet at Keflavik, the international airport for Iceland. This was supposed to stand all summer, starting from the beginning of June. IFAW paid in advance for the hanging of the advertisement.

However, soon after the advertisement was put up, Isavia said that the organisation was asked to change the wording or take it down. They said that they had never seen or agreed the final text, and had received some complaints.

One of these was from Jonsson, the manager of AMWH. “I thought it was inappropriate for the authorities that run the airport building to hang up propaganda like this, especially as it is a state- owned building,” he told IPS.

Eventually the advertisement was taken down and the organisers were refunded. But the leafletting continues, with volunteers spending two weeks at a time in Iceland before being replaced by others. The volunteers come through the Icelandic voluntary organisation SEEDS.

“We talk to some of the people we leaflet,” says Elena from Canada. “We generally get good responses from the tourists, who say they are not interested in eating whale meat, but we get many negative responses from Icelanders.”

Leah, a volunteer from the U.S., added: “Since the campaign started, we have noticed that fewer restaurants are advertising whale meat outside their shops.”

The quota for catching minke whales this year is 216, but this target will not be reached. Halfway through the season, about 44 minke whales have been caught. “We never intended to catch the whole quota – we only catch for the market in question, which is Iceland,” says Jonsson. Sixty minke whales were caught in 2010, although the quota was much higher.

It seems that no fin whales will be caught in Iceland this summer, or at least not until August at the earliest. Kristjan Loftsson from Hvalur, the company that operates the larger whaling boats, blames the March earthquake and tsunami in Japan for his decision, saying that the market there has crashed as people no longer go out to eat in restaurants.

But the problems started before the tsunami. According to a survey carried out in Japan in 2010 by IKAN, the Iruka (Dolphin) and Kujira (Whale) Action Network, in conjunction with journalist Juniko Sakuma, Japan had around 6,000 tonnes of unsold whale meat in storage, although whale meat had become cheaper and less whales had been caught by the Japanese.

“It is not true that the whale meat stock increased after the disaster,” IKAN’s Nanami Kurasawa told IPS.

Excerpt:

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Jun 19 2011 (IPS)

Public health authorities in Reykjavik have criticised plans for the expansion of the Hellisheidi geothermal power plant. They say that levels of the gas hydrogen sulphide could increase by 40 percent if a new geothermal field, Grauhnukur, is developed and nothing is done to ensure that the levels of the gas remain below maximum permitted levels.

The steam contains the problematic hydrogen sulphide. Credit: Lowana Veal/IPS.

“Electricity from the expansion in autumn will go to the Grundartangi aluminium plant, and conceivably to the Century aluminium plant at Helguvik in Southwest Iceland, if that plant is ever completed,” informs Eirikur Hjalmarsson, Communications Director at the plant’s operators, Orkuveita Reykjavikur (OR).

One of the byproducts of geothermal energy is hydrogen sulphide (H2S), a gas that is emitted in the steam from geothermal plants and is often described as smelling of rotten eggs.

In California, the limit for H2S has been put at the level at which people notice the smell from it. This was discovered to be 42 micrograms per cubic metre, averaged over an hour.

An environmental impact assessment (EIA) was produced for the proposed borehole at Grauhnukur but has been heavily criticised by the Reykjavik Public Health Authority (RPHA).

Although monitoring of H2S has occurred for several years around Reykjavik at stations operated by three public bodies, RPHA say that no mention is made of these figures in the EIA. Only predictions calculated from a model situation are given in the report – yet RPHA say that at one monitoring station, Hvaleyraholt, the actual yearly average in 2009 was 2.4 times above the predicted figure in the EIA.

Since the Hellisheidi power plant began operating in 2006, on a yearly average the amount of sulphur in the atmosphere has increased by up to 140 percent above the forecasted level of H2S in the EIA, according to measurements taken at Hvaleyraholt on the outskirts of Reykjavik.

RPHA also say that the EIA only gives predicted figures in the vicinity of the actual plant, where no one lives, while the easterly prevailing wind frequently carries H2S towards the capital city of Reykjavik.

The levels of H2S started to increase as soon as the Hellisheidi plant went on line. Iceland’s Environment Agency is one of the bodies that routinely records levels of air pollutants in Reykjavik. Between February 2006 and February 2007, before and after the Hellisheidi plant went on line, the level was exceeded 48 times for varying periods of time. Of these, 45 measurements were taken after Sep. 1, 2006.

Hydrogen sulphide is known to cause eye irritation in high concentrations, along with breathing difficulties. But little is known about chronic health effects of long-term exposure at lower concentrations.

However, Ragnhildur B. Finnbjornsdottir from the Environment Agency’s environmental quality department carried out a preliminary survey last year as part of her master’s degree and found a possible connection with some heart patients. “A 4.5 percent increase occurred in the dispensation of vasodilator drugs on the same day that the pollution occurred and also three to four days after the pollution peak, up to 2.5 percent and 4.3 percent respectively, based on a 24-hour average for H2S,” she told IPS.

Most of the drugs in this class are consumed on a continuous basis, but the class also includes drugs that are taken when acute cardiovascular events occur.

“But because this was only a preliminary study, these figures can only be seen as indications,” she added.

PhD student Hanne Krage Carlsen, from the University of Iceland’s Centre of Public Health Sciences, carried out a similar study to Finnbjornsdottir’s but looked at the use of asthma drugs. She found a positive correlation.

“When the three-day average of H2S in Reykjavík increased, the sales of prescription asthma medication to adults increased three to five days later, suggesting that some asthma sufferers had more symptoms – causing them to need more medication – so they had to fill their prescriptions a little sooner than they would have otherwise done,” she said.

Last year, Iceland’s environment minister, Svandis Svavarsdottir, responded to public pressure and set a regulation on H2S levels in the atmosphere. The WHO level is 150 micrograms per cubic metre per day, but that is aimed at reducing acute eye irritation.

Because so little is known about the effects of long-term exposure, Svavarsdottir decided to set a much lower limit, 50 micrograms per cubic metre per day. Until July 2014, this limit may be exceeded five times per year, but after that time not at all.

Last year, the limit was exceeded twice, according to Anna Rosa Bodvarsdottir from RPHA.

Technically speaking, it is possible to reduce H2S substantially using new equipment, and in fact operating permits for industries that cause pollution by H2S are obliged to use BAT – best available technology.

But this is extremely expensive, and creates unwanted products such as pure sulphur, sulphuric acid and gypsum. Instead, OR are testing a new process that is designed to capture the H2S in the steam and pump it back into the system.

What will happen if this technique does not work well enough? Will new equipment then be bought, especially considering that in addition to the expansion of the Hellisheidi plant, OR are hoping to build yet another geothermal power plant, Hverahlid, only about 10 km east of the Hellisheidi plant?

“OR has committed itself to cleanse the H2S from Hverahlid power plant and intends to keep the exhaust from Hellisheidi power plant within the limits of the regulation,” replies Hjalmarsson.

Excerpt:

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, May 29 2011 (IPS)

Iceland’s national power company, Landsvirkjun, has announced that it intends to double its generating capacity over the next 15 years, with a blend consisting mostly of hydroelectric and geothermal plants but potentially using wind and tidal energy as well.

Some of these plants have been announced previously but have not progressed due to opposition, which in some cases has led to planning complications. This is the case with the three plants in the Lower Thjorsa river, the Hvammur, Holt and Urridafoss Power Stations, which were first designed between 1998 and 2000.

In Skafta district in Southeast Iceland, several hydroelectric plants are being considered, one of which, the Holmsar power plant, might be developed by Landsvirkjun. Opposition has arisen to these too.

Olafia Jakobsdottir is a member of the Eldvatn environmental group in her area. Asked why they oppose the plant, she replied: “The Skafta district is undisturbed as there are no power plants in the region. The Holmsar Plant would damage the reputation of the area. A reservoir, transmission lines, roads, canals and other developments that would be part of such a project could have an extremely negative effect on tourism and agriculture, which are the main industries in Skafta district.”

“Just because we investigate the feasibility of building a plant, that does not mean that we will eventually build it,” says Ragna Sara Jonsdottir, director of corporate communications for Landsvirkjun. “Only a small proportion of plants investigated will come to fruition. The final decision hinges on what the Icelandic master plan for hydro and geothermal energy resources says about the matter,” she told IPS.

This plan has been expected for several years and is expected to appear sometime this summer.

Even though Iceland’s electricity comes from renewable sources, “Landsvirkjun accepts that new power plants can be controversial,” says Ragna Arnadottir, executive vice-president of the company. “We also want to ensure higher prices for the energy we produce.”

Iceland has always been considered a cheap place for aluminium companies as the price they paid for electricity was linked to the price of aluminium on the world market. This is no longer the case. Now, these companies have to negotiate their electricity prices with Landsvirkjun.

Over 80 percent of the energy produced by Landsvirkjun goes to heavy industry, including aluminium plants. Its 15 existing plants include the controversial Karahnjukar dam, site of many protests a few years ago. The development is now called the Fljotsdalur power plant and is used purely to fuel the Alcoa aluminium smelter in East Iceland. This was the last plant to be developed by Landsvirkjun.

The next plant in the pipeline is a geothermal plant in northeast Iceland. However, very little has happened in terms of building new power plants since the financial crash in October 2008. “Financing was difficult in the wake of the banking crisis, but the company’s access to financing has improved gradually,” says Jonsdottir.

To a certain extent, funding in Iceland has been affected by the IceSave dispute, which is about Iceland’s reluctance to guarantee repayment to British and Dutch savers who had high-interest savings accounts in Icelandic banks and lost their money when the banks crashed.

“The discussion on IceSave and the uncertainty connected with it have certainly had an effect on Landsvirkjun’s access to finance, though not to the degree that it has stopped the flow of money to the company,” says Jonsdottir.

Full financing was finally procured from the European Investment Bank and Nordic Investment Bank, together with Icelandic sources, for one hydroelectric plant, the Budarhals power plant, construction of which started in November 2010. It is expected to start operating at the beginning of 2014.

The Budarhals plant will feed into the national grid, although it is supposed to provide electricity for increased capacity of the Straumsvik aluminium smelter, run by Rio Tinto Alcan on the edge of Reykjavik.

Although the Budarhals plant should not be affected, international credit rating company Standard & Poor’s has just lowered Landsvirkjun’s long-term corporate credit rating, after it had lowered the credit rating for Iceland as a whole.

But Landsvirkjun is not worried. “We expect this rating to be temporary as the long-term prospects of Landsvirkjun and Iceland are good. In general we can say that it will make foreign funding of new projects more expensive,” says Jonsdottir. “We do not have any pressing developments at the moment and are continually working on improving our key financial figures.”

Wind power has not yet been exploited on a commercial level in Iceland, but Landsvirkjun is now participating in the Nordic research project ICEWIND that is looking at ice build-up on turbines, how wind energy works in cold climates, off-shore wind generation and development of wind turbine parks in Iceland.

In addition, an experimental 50-metre-high mast for measuring wind has been constructed in South Iceland. Various measurements are currently being taken. It is not certain yet, though, that windmills could become part of Landsvirkjun’s energy portfolio in the next 15 years.

“It’s hard to say. It depends how these measurements turn out, but I’m optimistic,” says Ulfar Linnet, director of research at the company.

Wind energy is thought to work well with hydropower as the two balance each other out in terms of peak demand. While wind energy is being produced, less output is needed from hydro stations, and the reservoirs can be used more efficiently.

“Tidal energy could be a possibility within five to ten years,” affirms Ingolfur Orn Thorbjornsson from Innovation Centre Iceland (ICI). Research is ongoing in the West Fjords region of Iceland, and a prototype is being developed with support from ICI.

Landsvirkjun supplies 74 percent of Iceland’s electricity.

Excerpt:

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Feb 26 2011 (IPS)

In the northwestern Icelandic town of Isafjordur, milk is causing pandemonium. A local milk marketing board recently tested one farm’s milk for the presence of harmful chemicals. Dioxin, and dioxin-like compounds, were found to be present in amounts higher than the recommended maximum levels, threatening the future of local farmers, and angering residents.

Dioxins are highly toxic compounds produced as a byproduct in some manufacturing processes, notably herbicide production and paper bleaching. They are a serious and persistent environmental pollutant.

The milk that was tested came from a farm called Efri-Engidalur, located in a valley only 1.5 kilometres from a waste-burning incinerator that was closed by the authorities last year due to consistently high levels of pollutants.

“Usually, measurements are done by the authorities, but we decided to test for dioxin because we were concerned about the incinerator,” said Einar Sigurdsson, of MS Iceland Dairies.

As a result of the findings, the Icelandic Food and Veterinary Authority (IFVA) decided to test samples of milk, meat, and hay from several farms in the surrounding area.

The findings revealed increased levels of dioxin and dioxin-like compounds in the majority of the samples. Dioxin-like compounds are polychlorinated biphenyls, commonly known as dioxin-like PCBs, which behave like dioxin, so are generally classified with it in terms of toxicity.

In 2007, the Environment Agency of Iceland (EAI) measured emissions from waste incinerators. According to regulations of the European Commission, the executive arm of the European Union, maximum emission levels of dioxin should not exceed 0.1 ng/m3.

“The emission levels are measured per cubic metre in the exhaust from the incinerator rather than total emissions. As a result, an incinerator that burns more waste but has a lower emission measurement can emit more dioxin,” explains Sigridur Kristjansdottir from the EAI.

However, in 2007, emission levels in Isafjordur were 21 times the maximum EC regulation level.

In addition, concern has arisen in the small town of Kirkjubaejarklaustur, in South Iceland, where dioxin levels were recorded at 95 times the maximum exposure level in 2007. And in Vestmannaeyjar, an island just off South Iceland, the dioxin level was 84 times the maximum exposure standard.

In all three cases, the results were sent to the Ministry for the Environment but were not released publicly.

In Kirkjubaejarklaustur, the waste incinerator is located in the same complex as the local school, sports centre, swimming pool, and music school. The original plan had been to use the waste heat from the incinerator to heat the surrounding buildings.

When the dioxin level was revealed, local residents became angry and demanded that the plant not operate while children were at school. One parent, civil engineer Oddur Bjarni Thorarensen, took his children out of the school.

But, according to Kristjansdottir from the EAI, “in the environmental impact assessment for the plant, the pollution dispersal forecast indicated that maximum pollution levels would be expected to occur at a distance of about 150 metres from the plant (relative to open areas).”

“This assessment was one of the items produced to justify that pollution levels would not be expected to be high in the immediate vicinity of the incinerator,” says Kristjansdottir.

The Infectious Disease Control division of the Directorate of Health has decided to monitor residents of Isafjordur, Kirkjubaejarklaustur, and Vestmannaeyjar for the presence of dioxin.

“It is possible to scan for possible dioxin by testing hair for lead. A positive test indicates that dioxin may be present,” says Gudrun Sigmundsdottir, head of the department.

Steingrimur Jonsson, the farmer from Efri-Engidalur, says that no one has come yet to take samples from him. He and his family have regularly been consuming milk and meat from their 20 cows and 80 sheep.

“But since dioxin was found in the milk, we have stopped eating our produce,” he said.

Dioxin is an accumulative toxin and is not considered to be particularly toxic to humans unless a lot of produce containing it is consumed – as could well be the case for farmers, who tend to eat a lot of home-produced food.

But, if dioxin levels were too high in 2007 at three plants, when did the dioxin pollution begin? And what will this mean for the future of Iceland’s livestock industry?

“They can tell how long the pollution has been going on by taking soil samples, which they have done. But it’s a slow process,” says Jonsson.

He sees no future for livestock in his area. “Not if the milk and meat cannot be sold,” he told IPS.

Last year, 384 sheep were slaughtered near Isafjordur. These yielded about 6.5 tonnes of meat, of which almost five tonnes were sold overseas to the UK and Spain. Because the meat had not been tested for dioxin, all of the lamb has since been recalled as a precautionary measure.

Ironically, in the lead-up to the 1992 Rio conference on Agenda 21, it was Iceland that originally suggested that international controls be implemented to measure the release of persistent organic pollutants (POPS), including dioxin, and their impact on the environment.

But, as secretary general of the environment ministry Magnus Johannesson told IPS, “there was little enthusiasm for this on the international level.”

The POPS Convention was eventually agreed in Stockholm in 2001, while regulation on the release of pollutants from waste-burning incinerators began in the EC in 2003. Operators of incinerators were given five years to conform to the new regulations.

However, “because the four waste-burning incinerators that were operating according to old licences had so little throughput, the EC agreed that these plants did not have to improve their technology while they were operating,” says Johannesson.

The four plants include the now-closed incinerator near Isafjordur, the plants at Kirkjubaejarklaustur and Vestmannaeyjar, and a plant at Svinafell that was not measured for dioxin in 2007. The latter is used mostly in summer for burning tourist waste.

Excerpt:

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Dec 29 2010 (IPS)

For decades, fisheries around the world have relied on practices that take for granted certain assumptions about the industry, such as protecting younger fish while exploiting older fish and using trophic levels to monitor the health of fisheries. Recently, however, some scientists have begun to question these unanimously accepted practices. Experts are beginning to think that the science behind the global fishing industry may be completely wrong.

One example of this re-evaluation can be seen in relation to conventionally accepted practices whereby young fish are protected and older fish are exploited. Younger fish are generally smaller and weigh less than their older counterparts, so policies rely on assessing fish population by biomass.

For instance, in Iceland, certain areas will be closed to fishing when there is a large proportion of small fish in the area. Spawning and nursery areas will likewise be protected.

Defying convention, Prof. George Sugihara and his team at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography have begun to criticise the current scenario whereby small fish are protected and large fish are caught. They say that this system can alter the age pyramid within a given fishery, such as pollock, by removing the few, older fish that make up the top of the pyramid while leaving a broad base of faster-growing, small young fish.

Why does this pose a problem? “It’s not the young ones that should be thrown back, but the larger, older fish that should be spared,” said Sugihara. “Not only do the older fish provide stability and capacitance to the population, they provide more and better quality offspring.”

The danger, according to Sugihara, is that current policies that manage according to current biomass targets while ignoring fish size pose risks that can destabilise the entire population. This instability can, in principle, affect the whole ecosystem, magnifying risk for all ecologically related fisheries.

This danger is especially prevalent when trying to rebuild fish stocks, Sugihara said. “Regulations based solely on biomass harvest targets are incomplete. They must also account for age-size structure in the populations.

“Current policies and industry pressures that encourage lifting bans on fishing when biomass is rehabilitated – but where maximum age and size are not – contain risk,” Sugihara warned.

In addition to the practice of exploiting fish based on biomass calculations, other conventionally accepted practices in the fishing industry are beginning to be re-evaluated by experts. One such practice has to do with using trends in trophic levels of fish to measure the health of world fisheries.

In 1998, using global catch data, stock assessments, scientific trawl surveys, small-scale fishery data, and modelling results, scientists developed a comprehensive test that used trends in the trophic levels of fish over four decades to measure the health of world fisheries. As the first of its kind, this system for analysing the health of fisheries was considered groundbreaking.

The trophic level of an organism shows where it fits in a food web, with microscopic algae at a trophic level of one and large predators such as sharks, halibut, and tuna at a trophic level of about four.

Twelve years later, confidence in this method of assessment is waning. A new study, carried out by Trevor Branch from the University of Washington, together with scientists in the U.S., UK, Canada, and Australia, reveals weaknesses in assessing ecosystem health from changes in the trophic levels of what is being caught.

Branch and his team based their findings on a large number of trawl surveys that consider the numbers and types of fish that actually live in these ecosystems, as well as catch data, to dispute the conventional wisdom.

Branch explained that there are two major weaknesses in the accepted metric: “One, in just under half of all ecosystems, this catch metric goes up when the ecosystem gets worse, or goes down when the ecosystem gets better. Two, this metric can remain constant, even when increasing numbers of species are collapsing in the ecosystem,” he said.

The significance of these findings is crucial, Branch said, because “the measure is the most widely adopted indicator by which the overall health of marine ecosystems is determined.”

For example, the UN’s Convention on Biodiversity uses the average trophic level of fish caught as the main measure of global marine diversity.

“The 1998 paper was tremendously influential in gathering together global data on catches and trophic levels, and it warned about fishing impacts on ecosystems,” Branch said.

“Our new data from trawl surveys and fisheries assessments now tell us that catches weren’t enough. In the future, we will need to target limited resources in the best way, focusing on species that are especially vulnerable to fishing and developing indicators that reflect fish abundance, biodiversity and marine ecosystem health. Only through such efforts can we reliably assess human impacts on marine ecosystems.”

Excerpt:

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Dec 3 2010 (IPS)

New eco-labels on Icelandic seafood are misleading and unregulated, concealing practices that damage the environment, critics say.

Nets that net too much. Credit: Lowana Veal

However, critics claim that these labels obscure the truth of the fishing industry in Iceland, which relies on over-fishing and ecologically damaging practices to meet demand for profit.

One problem with the new labeling system is that it doesn’t rely on any objective criteria for certification – individual companies are responsible for certifying their own products as ecologically friendly without having to meet any specific standards. This has resulted in an array of labels for all types of fish.

Icelandic cod, for example, can be certified as eco-friendly in a variety of ways.

Finnur Gardarsson, a member of the Fisheries Association of Iceland, told IPS that Icelandic cod fisheries are being evaluated by Global Trust Certification, an “independent, accredited, third-party certification body” based in Ireland that will complete the certification process within the next few weeks, labeling the cod ‘Iceland responsible fisheries – certified’.

At the same time, the Icelandic Group, one of the top ten seafood companies worldwide, has begun a Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) that will label Icelandic cod and haddock ‘certified responsible seafood – MSC’.

And Ny-fiskur, a fishing company that operates in the southwestern tip of Iceland, is beginning to label its cod ‘Friend of the Sea’.

In addition, an ‘Iceland Responsible Fisheries’ logo, which was developed in 2009 in response to requests by overseas buyers, is currently being used by more than 80 companies to market their fish abroad. The only criterion is that all the fish being sold must be of Icelandic origin.

Underneath the issue of using dubious certification for marketing purposes lies a deeper criticism: that the fishing industry in its current state is causing harm to the environment by relying on damaging practices.

Gretar Mar Jonsson, a long-time fisherman and former member of the Althing (Icelandic parliament), told IPS that with the current fishing management system, “men only land the best fish, discarding the rest, which means we are not treating our resources well.”

Greenpeace echoed this statement in its International Seafood Red List. “For (haddock) stocks in Northeast Arctic and Iceland, scientists have recommended that better management is needed,” it said. “Greenland halibut stock levels are at a historic low in waters around Iceland.

“Scientists have advised that fishing should be reduced,” it added.

However, Icelandic quotas have been increased for both haddock and Greenland halibut. For the latter, the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) recommended a catch of 5,000 tonnes for Iceland, East Greenland and the Faroes combined. Icelandic authorities subsequently decided on a quota of 13,000 tonnes, almost three times the recommended amount.

In addition, the Scripps Institution of Oceanography says that “fisheries that are being heavily depleted, reliant on high-impact methods such as bottom trawling that aren’t destined for human consumption, should be excluded from certification.”

Bottom trawling, an industrial fishing method that drags large, heavy nets across the seafloor, has been shown to kill corals, sponges, fishes, and other animals. The method is heavily restricted around the globe and, in some waters, banned.

Information from the Directorate of Fisheries reveals that bottom trawls accounted for 44.5 percent of the total catch of Icelandic ships in the 2009- 2010 fishing year. The practice was used for catching main commercial fish: cod, haddock, saithe, and other demersal species.

Excerpt:

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Dec 2 2010 (IPS)

In Iceland, strict quotas on the fishing industry result in unnecessary waste and distort data, say critics of the system.

The small boat harbour in Reykjavik. Credit: Lowana Veal

Quotas are based on a variety of considerations, from regulations set by international agreements to the opinions of individual fishers and boat owners. The intent of the quotas is to support sustainable fishing. But critics say that the quotas are detrimental to the industry as a whole, resulting in miscalculated data and excessive waste.

Sigmar Thor Ingason, a fisherman familiar with the Icelandic system, told IPS that although boats are allocated quotas for a particular type of fish, the waters they fish in often contain a variety of fish species that inevitably get caught in the nets and hauled aboard.

If the intention is to catch cod, he said, “Other fish such as saithe, redfish, and haddock will inevitably be caught as well.

Usually the proportion is 70 percent cod and 30 percent other species,” he estimated.

The bycatch—the fish not included in the allotted quota—can’t be brought back to shore. Most often, the bycatch is thrown back into the sea. Because these fish generally do not survive the fishing process, the majority are dead when discarded.

Gretar Mar Jonsson, who has been fishing Icelandic waters for more than 30 years, blames the quota system for encouraging this waste by bypassing the landing process, whereby fish caught at sea are processed and then sold without being weighed and recorded. Jonsson said that because the quotas are allocated by weight, fishers and boat owners keep only the most valuable fish and throw the rest back into the sea.

“They don’t want to fish the cheap fish which bring in little money, as the quota is expensive,” he said.

Jonsson estimated that about 20 to 30 percent of every catch is discarded, which results not only in excessive waste but misrepresents data used to calculate fish populations that influence the quotas.

“This means that ichthyologists do not have the correct figures for fishing in Icelandic waters, which distorts the whole picture of how much is caught,” he said.

Jonsson holds strong views about how to address the problem. “The fishing management system needs to be modified by taking up a day system whereby days are allocated to each boat,” he said. “This would prevent discard, as the motivation for it would disappear.”

At present, Icelandic authorities are unwilling to concede that a problem exists.

“Boats have quotas and catches are monitored by the Directorate of Fisheries,” said Olafur Astthorsson, Deputy Director of the Marine Research Institute (MRI) in Iceland.

“Illegal fishing does not exist in Iceland because of the fishing management system that exists here,” he added.

Excerpt:

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Oct 11 2010 (IPS)

Iceland’s economy has been rocky since the bank collapse in October 2008, but one field has been expanding — geothermal energy.

Faced with a dearth of projects, Icelandic engineering companies have increasingly been looking overseas for work. They are being supported by the government and even by the President directly, to win projects for tapping geothermal energy abroad.

Katrin Juliusdottir, minister for industry, hosted Indian energy minister Dr. Farooq Abdullah in September to step up cooperation between the two countries in geothermal energy.

At the World Economic Forum in Tianjin, President Olafur Ragnar Grimsson discussed geothermal energy projects with Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, and signed an agreement on digging for geothermal energy in Inner Mongolia. The new energy will be used for district heating, greenhouse cultivation and electricity.

Icelandic firm Enex has been working in Shaanxi in China and will also work on the Mongolian project.

Iceland is looking further. “In East Africa utilisation of the geothermal potential could free the people of several nations from the bondage of energy poverty,” foreign minister Ossur Skarphedinsson told the UN General Assembly late September.

State-owned Iceland GeoSurvey (ISOR) is one of the more experienced companies. Set up in 1945 as part of the National Energy Authority, it has worked on geothermal projects in more than 40 countries.

“In Kenya, Uganda and Djibouti, ISOR has carried out geothermal exploration and related activities, while it has also carried out well testing in Germany, numerical modelling in China and capacity building within the governmental sector in Nicaragua,” says ISOR spokesperson Brynja Jonsdottir.

“ISOR is also responsible for much of the teaching and training carried out at the Geothermal Training Programme of the United Nations University (UNU- GTP), and launched several training courses this year in Indonesia and Kenya (1-11 weeks) in cooperation within UNU-GTP.”

Together with the Icelandic engineering company Verkis, ISOR has set up the company GeoThermHydro based in Chile. “GeoThermHydro offers services encompassing the major portion of the work comprising the development of geothermal and hydropower plants,” managing director Carlos Jorquera tells IPS. “This entails drilling consultation, field management, steam gathering systems, dams, power transmission facilities, consultation on and management of power station construction.”

Last May, Reykjavik Energy and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries signed an agreement to cooperate on geothermal ventures overseas. Reykjavik Energy will lead the venture but Iceland GeoSurvey and three engineering companies — Mannvit, EFLA and Verkis — are also involved, along with a drilling company and two architect studios.

“But it is still in the beginning stages,” says Kristjan B. Olafsson from Reykjavik Energy Invest (REI), the international arm of Reykjavik Energy.

“REI has been working mainly in Djibouti in the Assal Rift Valley. The pre- feasibility study for a geothermal plant has been completed, and four boreholes have been dug, 2.5 km deep. This is thought to be sufficient steam, energy and pressure for the project. But negotiations are still ongoing about the next stage.”

“Mannvit is principally working in Hungary, where we are working with the Hungarian firm Pannergy and have 14-15 projects on the go, although we also have offices in Germany and the UK and one project still going in Slovakia. Our newest project is in Santiago,” says Runolfur Maack, director of overseas operations with the company.

EFLA signed an agreement in June with Croatian energy firm Energy Institut Hrovje Pozar with the aim of strengthening the development of geothermal utilisation and other forms of energy production in Croatia and some of the Balkan countries. EFLA has also set up a company called Turkison in Turkey undertaking geothermal exploration with a view to designing geothermal power plants for district heating.

One company involved in the overseas market is Reykjavik Geothermal, founded in 2008 purely for geothermal projects abroad. “We are working in Abu Dhabi, Kenya, Papua New Guinea and India,” says Gudmundur Thoroddsson, managing director of the company.

Another company, Envent, was set up by REI and Geysir Green Energy to work on geothermal projects in the Philippines and Indonesia. Its biggest current project is on Biliran, an island in the Eastern Visayas region of the Philippines, where a 50MW geothermal power plant is due to come on line in 2012.

The bank Islandsbanki (formerly known as Glitnir) has now a special geothermal energy team. The division was set up in 2006 and includes financial advisors “who are specialised in giving advice about geothermal projects,” says the team’s executive director, Arni Magnusson.

Excerpt:

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Sep 13 2010 (IPS)

The British have a fascination for the rich, fatty meat of the mackerel, that summertime extravagance often served as pates and salads at fashionable pubs and restaurants. A far cry from the humble cod that is a staple of the more downmarket chip shops on the nation’s high streets.

But recently there are fears that a dispute over mackerel fishing may lead to a repeat of the cod wars with Iceland in the 1970s. According to reports in the British press, Iceland and the Faroe Islands have flouted agreed quotas, unilaterally awarding themselves a huge share of the mackerel stock in the north Atlantic.

Scottish fishers are especially furious because they rely heavily on mackerel, which last year brought in revenue of 135 million pounds, more than that of any other fish. The fishers, along with some politicians including Scottish member of the European Parliament (MEP) Struan Stevenson, are calling on the EU to impose trade sanctions against Iceland and the Faroes.

The Faroese boat Jupiter has already been prevented from offloading mackerel at Peterhead when Scottish fishers blockaded the port in early August. Norwegian ports also are refusing to handle Icelandic and Faroese fishing boats.

The cod wars had come after earlier unilateral moves by Iceland when it had expanded its fishing limits, initially from four nautical miles (7 km) to 12 nautical miles (22 km) in the 1950s; then to 50 miles (80 km), and finally to 200 miles (320 km) in the 1970s.

The British people have more recent grievances too against Iceland, an island similar in size to Britain but with a population of just 350,000. These include the volcano with an unpronounceable name which erupted in April, grounding flights in Europe. And the UK is a long way from collecting what it is owed after the collapse of Iceland’s banks which left the country in dire economic straits.

While younger people in UK may find it hard to recall the earlier fishing disputes, Iceland’s fishers are still buoyed by the earlier cod wars when Icelandic trawlers cut the nets and rammed the boats of UK rivals, forcing the Royal Navy to intervene.

“They celebrate the fact they think they won the cod war, to the extent that the Icelandic gunboat that actually opened fire on a British navy vessel is now a celebrated restaurant in Reykjavik harbour,” said Stevenson, who is the senior vice-president of the European Parliament’s fisheries committee.

Mackerel never used to be caught commercially in Iceland, as it was not found in sufficient numbers. But warming seas have meant that fish – including mackerel – are moving northwards to colder seas, entering Iceland.

Mackerel fishing is currently managed globally by negotiations between the coastal states of Norway, Iceland, the Faroe Islands and the EU, although at the meeting in March this year nothing concrete was decided. Faced with increasing stocks of mackerel, Iceland has been trying to attend the negotiation meetings, but with limited success.

“Iceland has been trying to attend since 1999. In 2008 we were allowed in as observers but consider that during the last two years we have been present as a validated state,” says Johann Gudmundsson, political advisor to the minister for fisheries and agriculture.

Icelandic authorities first set their own quota of 36,000 tonnes for mackerel in 2007. “We raised it to 112,000 tonnes in 2008, 116,000 tonnes in 2009, and 130,000 tonnes this year,” said Sigurdur Sverrison from the Federation of Icelandic Fishing Vessel Owners (LIU).

The Faroe Islands have set their own quota at 85,000 tonnes, again unilaterally.

Mackerel is certified by the Marine Stewardship Council as being sustainable, and other countries are worried that this over-fishing by two countries might lead to quota cuts across the board.

As European Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Commissioner Maria Damanaki said in a press release last month: “We will make every effort to come to an agreement with all states fishing on the north-eastern mackerel stock.” But she did not rule out further action, including trade sanctions.

However, a memo put out by the LIU states: “Iceland has every right to fish for mackerel within the Icelandic jurisdiction, just as Norway and the EU have the same right in their respective jurisdictions.”

“No one wants to reduce the amount of mackerel they are allowed to catch. Negotiations are necessary to determine what each country can accept,” says Sverrison.

The Marine Research Institute collaborates with the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) to advise on the total catch for mackerel, which this year was estimated to be between 527,000 and 572,000 tonnes.

“We looked at eggs and distribution, and found that relative to last year, about three times more mackerel was found in Icelandic territorial waters,” says Thorsteinn Sigurdsson, Head of Marine Resources at the MRI.

“This means that in some other places there will be less mackerel around than usual,” he added.

An ICES Advisory Committee paper notes that mackerel was over-fished in 2007 and 2008. “It was also over-fished in 2009,” says Sigurdsson.

How much is the Atlantic quota for 2010? “It is difficult to say, but at a rough guess it would be something like 700,000 tonnes,” Sigurdsson told IPS.

Some people have suggested that Iceland wants to fish more mackerel because it is bankrupt, but Gudmundsson says this view “is just rubbish”.

The next meeting of the four coastal states is on Oct. 10-12, when the mackerel quotas for 2011 will be decided. However, in a bid to end the current dispute the EU will convene a meeting with representatives from Iceland and the Faroe Islands in September.

Time is running out though. “There are about 23,000-24,000 tonnes of mackerel still waiting to be caught,” says Audunn Agustsson, catch supervisor with Iceland’s Directorate of Fisheries.

Excerpt:

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIC, Jul 8 2010 (IPS)

“It’s unbelievable, the eruption has had a very good effect on the grass,” says farmer Finnur Tryggvason in Raudafell, just beneath the Eyjafjallajokull glacier that erupted in April and continued till late May.

Ash clouds beneath the Eyjafjallajokull glacier. Credit: Lowana Veal

“It’s like putting fertilizer with potassium and phosphorous on the ground,” he says. But it was not an entirely unmixed blessing. “The species composition has changed slightly, and some species have disappeared.”

By the end of the eruption, the farm was covered by an ash layer of about 6-8 cm. “Although the grass is long now, it is a bit sparse. And there is more angelica than before,” Tryggvason says. Some of the ash is still around but grass has sprung up, and so the ash is not as obvious.

Many farmers in the area have already cut the first hay of the summer. Tryggvason is not one of them. “I don’t think I’ll cut any hay this year as it will be better for the ground if the dead grass forms a layer on top of the ash. The nutrients from the ash will then sink into the ground with rain.”

Not far from Raudafell, Olafur Eggertsson has a large farm where he cultivates various grains and keeps a herd of cows, which he has kept inside since the eruption. The ash at his farm, Thorvaldseyri, was coarser than the ash at Raudafell.

“I ploughed up 38 hectares of land after the eruption and sowed 15 hectares. The crop looks fine, though we need more rain.”

Asked why his cows are not outside, Eggertsson said “the weather lately has been bad, but I will probably let them out later in the summer.”

Fluoride in ash is poisonous to animals, so scientists from the Agricultural University of Iceland (AUI) are testing fluoride levels in streams, fields, crops and grass in the area.

One of the researchers is Gudni Thorvaldsson, who also has a hobby farm in the area. “We are trying to find out how long it takes for the concentration of fluoride to decrease. The levels seem to be decreasing very rapidly, partly due to growth and partly due to rain,” he says.

“When grass grows, the fluoride is spread over a larger mass and so the concentration decreases accordingly. Similarly, when it rains the fluoride is washed away. But the weather has been unusually dry since the eruption.”

Thorvaldsson and his colleagues are also looking at the concentration of other nutrients in grass and crops. “Even though it is only fluoride that is toxic to animals, if another nutrient such as phosphorus is present in exceedingly high amounts, that can have an adverse effect too.”

Gretar Hrafn Hardarson, a vet from the AUI, is examining whether cows eat ash-covered grass with lust or not. He and his colleagues are testing the animals with newly cut hay blended with ash, but Hardarson says it is too early to make any conclusions. “The cows seem to be ok about eating the grass, but whether it is healthy for them is another matter.”

There is no difference in the chemical composition of fine versus coarse ash, according to Niels Oskarsson from the University of Iceland’s Institute of Earth Sciences. “The only difference is the surface area.”

Not surprisingly, the volcano brought considerable hardship for farmers in the area, especially those on the worst-hit farms such as Raudarfell and Thorvaldseyri. This year, the Farmers’ Association is sending relief workers to allow exhausted farmers who have livestock to feed the chance to get away for a few days. The relief teams will repair fences, feed and milk cows and carry out general farm duties.

Tryggvason will not get any extra help, but a relief farmer has just started at Thorvaldseyri. “The relief worker will be with us for a week, and will work as a normal farmer. It means my son can get away for that time,” says Eggertsson.

Although the volcano is currently quiet — scientists do not consider an eruption finished until three months have passed without activity — ash deposited during the eruption can still be blown around for years depending on weather conditions.

On the day IPS visited the area, the ash in the air was the worst since the eruption. “I think the animals are all right, though,” says Tryggvason, as we sit inside his house watching the ash swirling around outside.

Excerpt:

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, May 12 2010 (IPS)

Vigorously pursuing those allegedly responsible for Iceland’s 2008 financial crisis, investigators have got issued an international arrest warrant against Sigurdur Einarsson, chairman of the board of governors of the failed Kaupthing Bank.

The prison where some of the Kaupthing bank officials are being held. Credit: Lowana Veal/IPS

Einarsson, who lives in London, was said to be reluctant to come to Reykjavik for fear of being arrested and Icelandic authorities have refused to offer any assurances.

Curiously, in December, Britain’s Serious Fraud Office had opened an investigation into suspected fraud by Kaupthing while trying to attract British investors to its high interest deposit accounts.

On May 6 two former top officials of Kaupthing, formerly Iceland’s largest bank, were called in for questioning by Iceland’s special prosecutor and were then detained in isolation at the main Litla-Hrauni prison in the southern part of the country.

Hreidar Mar Sigurdsson, former CEO of Kaupthing, was placed on 12 days in remand, while Magnus Gudmundsson, former director of the bank in Luxembourg, was remanded to seven days in custody.

Kaupthing, Glitnir Bank hf and Landsbanki Islands hf collapsed in October 2008 after running up total debts worth 61 billion US dollars, calculated as being equivalent to 12 times the country’s GDP.

The government was compelled to take over the three banks and seek an International Monetary Fund bailout as Iceland fell into a deep economic slump, triggering public outrage.

Special Prosecutor Olafur Thor Hauksson was appointed in January last year to investigate suspected criminal actions around the time of the collapse of the banks in October 2008.

“We are researching alleged market abuse by Sigurdsson and Gudmundsson, along with illegal loan granting and breach of trust,” said Bjorn Thorvaldsson, one of the prosecutors who works at the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP), when asked why the two men were taken into custody.

Two months after Hauksson started his term in office, Norwegian-French investigative judge Eva Joly, who uncovered the Elf oil company fraud case, became Hauksson’s advisor. She has been continually pressing for more funds and more personnel to push the process onwards.

However, the arrests would not have been possible had it not been for the Parliamentary Althingi’s Special Investigation Committee (SIC), which published its report on the causes behind the 2008 collapse of the Icelandic banks on Apr. 12.

The authors of the report interviewed people from banks, government ministries, the Financial Supervisory Authority (FSA), the Central Bank of Iceland (CBI) and other bodies, although it states that “the Commission was not expected to address possible criminal conduct of the directors of the banks in their operations”.

Amongst other things, the report summary says: “The banks had invested their funds in their own shares”, and “the banks held a lot of their own shares as collateral for their lending. With share prices declining, the quality of their loan portfolio declined. This could in turn affect the banks’ performance and, consequently, the price of their stock. Additionally, the employees of the banks in many cases owned significant shares in their own bank, sometimes even financed by the bank itself.”

Hauksson’s team used information found in the report, widely acclaimed by Icelanders as thorough and hard-hitting, to build on its case for questioning Sigurdsson and Gudmundsson.

According to the Icelandic State Broadcasting Service, at a meeting between Joly and Icelandic Prime Minister Johanna Sigurdardottir, four days after the publication of the SIC report, Joly said she was pleased with it and called it “extremely well researched’’ and giving ‘’investigating bodies a true picture of the lead-up to the economic collapse”.

Top Kaupthing officials expected to be interviewed this week include Ingolfur Helgason and Steingrimur Arason, who now run the financial advisory company Consolium in Luxembourg. They arrived in Iceland on Monday.

Officials of companies that Kaupthing had been dealing with immediately before the collapse of the bank have also been interviewed.

Thorvaldur Gylfason, economics professor at the University of Iceland, has publicly encouraged the Icelandic authorities “to seek assistance from Poland on how to deal with the seven politicians and public officials found by the SIC to have ‘shown neglect’, a polite way of referring to gross dereliction of duty.”

“The Polish parliament recently passed legislation to curtail the self-dealt pensions and related privileges of 40,000 former agents of the security services. Their pensions had on average been three times those of ordinary Poles. In view of human rights considerations and retroactivity, such legislation needs to be carefully crafted,’’ Gylfason said.

Gylfason reference was to the main conclusions of the SIC that Geir Haarde, Arni Mathiesen and Bjorgvin Sigurdsson – then prime minister, finance minister and minister of business affairs respectively – showed negligence “by omitting to respond in an appropriate fashion to the impending danger for the Icelandic economy that was caused by the deteriorating situation of the banks.”

Excerpt:

It took the conviction of five Lithuanian men in March, on charges of bringing a 19-year-old girl into Iceland for sex work, before this country truly woke up to the reality of trafficking.

In what became Iceland’s first convictions for trafficking, the Lithuanian men were sentenced to five years each in jail on Mar. 8.

Yet, the Lithuanian case may have gone unnoticed except that the victim showed signs of distress while on the plane that brought her to this country last October.

Suspicion aroused, police soon discovered that she was travelling on false documentation and that she had already been forced into prostitution in Lithuania.

“The girl had never flown before. She had been provided with a ticket and told she was going to Iceland, but she didn’t know where Iceland was and thought she could hitch a ride back home with a truck driver,” Hildur Jonsdottir, chair of the National Coordination Unit Against Human Trafficking (NCUAHT), told IPS.

Gudrun Jonsdottir from Stigamot, a women’s centre for survivors of sexual abuse and violence, told IPS: “It has taken 10 years to get the public in Iceland to become aware that trafficking exists in Iceland too.”

“We get 30-40 people a year because of pornography and prostitution-linked services,” she added. However, very few foreign women come to Stigamot. “Their bosses do not want them to come to us,” continued Jonsdottir.

Jonsdottir says there are varying definitions of human trafficking. Stigamot adheres to the definition provided by the Palermo Convention, which says that the distinction between pornography, prostitution and trafficking is unclear.

Under the Palermo definition, trafficking can occur within a country as well between countries, and can be prostitution or other forms of sexual exploitation, which could extend to strip clubs.

Frida Ros Valdimarsdottir, a specialist working in the field of human trafficking and sex work prevention who has identified 59-128 cases of trafficking over the last three years, says that cases seldom reach the police.

‘’People do not always define themselves as victims of trafficking – in reality this happens only occasionally – so it is more of an interpretation on my part and less on that of my interviewees,” she says.

Valdimarsdottir built her work on interviews with government employees, community associations and similar organisations and, like Stigamot, stuck to the Palermo definition.

“It is a known fact that when governments begin to take trafficking seriously and work on measures for victims, more people seek advice from them than from the police. So I am not surprised that more people feel it is more beneficial to look for support and help from government institutions than from the police,” she added.

Valdimarsdottir points out that while the number of trafficking cases in Iceland is far lower than in other countries, it does not necessarily mean that the problem is small. ‘’It is much more likely that the Icelandic government had failed to act on this issue until the case of the Lithuanian girl came up at the end of last year. Government officials have actually admitted this,” she said.

Another case of trafficking that compelled the government to sit up and take notice centres on a young woman from Equatorial Guinea, now an Icelandic citizen, who was initially charged with trafficking, importing illegal drugs into Iceland and operating a brothel, but was acquitted of the trafficking charge.

A few days later she was charged again for trafficking and the case is currently under judicial process. One consequence of the prosecutions is that Althingi, Iceland’s parliament, now governed by Social Democrats and Left-Greens, finally passed legislation in March banning striptease shows and clubs. Earlier a Left-Green politician had tried to bring about a ban but failed. The no-stripping legislation followed another last year aimed at prosecuting buyers of sex services, on the Swedish pattern. Some of the clients of the Equatorial Guinean woman have been identified and will be brought to trial.

Plans are on to help the victims of trafficking under a series of 25 new measures being implemented by NCUAHT. About 10-12 of these have already been implemented while others, such as those on providing information and setting up a registration system, are in the pipeline.

“Implementation has occurred incredibly quickly,” informs Jonsdottir. “Target professional groups such as the police and lawyers will be provided with information, but it is also important for people like flight attendants to be fully informed,” she said.

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Apr 19 2010 (IPS)

Incredible as it may seem, daily life for the vast majority of Icelanders is completely unaffected by the volcanic eruption under the Eyjafjallajökull glacier, that has left thousands of air passengers around the world stranded due to flight cancellations.

Plumes of ash streaming away from the Eyjafjallajökull glacier in Iceland. Credit: Lowana Veal/IPS

But for the Icelandic community of about 700 or so people living in the area south or east of the glacier, it is a different story.

Farmers make up the greatest proportion of those living in the affected area. Finnur Tryggvason from Raudafell is one of them. On his farm, 10-15 km south of the eruption site, Tryggvason keeps horses and a few sheep.

“It has been black as night here all day long because of the ash cloud,” Tryggvason told IPS on Saturday night. But the following day the ash cloud was lower – three km rather than eight km high – and therefore did not travel far. “There has been a lot of thunder too, but lightning was not visible because of cloud cover,” he added.

Because it is an active volcanic country, Iceland is no stranger to volcanic eruptions. The last eruption, just east of the current one, ended only 36 hours before the current one started. That event, however, was harmless and quickly became known as the ‘tourist eruption’.

Geologists keep a close watch on the situation and a Civil Protection Department (CPD) controls operations if an eruption happens. In the last two eruptions, a large number of earthquakes in the area preceded the start of volcanic activity.

This time, about 800 people were woken at around 4 a.m. and evacuated before the eruption started to a Red Cross Mass Care Centre that had been set up in the nearest town, because the CPD feared an impending eruption and felt there could be flooding as well.

Farmers were later allowed to go home to milk and care for their animals, but had to return to the centre. The evacuation order was lifted early evening for all except the residents of 20 farms, who were not allowed to sleep at home until Saturday night.

Tryggvason was one of the people who were evacuated initially. “But there really was no need for it, as my farm is high up,” he says.

Many of the people who were evacuated this time were also evacuated for the previous eruption, again because of the risk of flooding.

“Life has been horrific for the residents concerned. Farmers excepted, many have left their homes completely and gone to stay with friends or relatives outside the affected area,” says Urdar Gunnarsdottir from the CPD media centre.

Those in the affected areas have received dust masks and protective goggles from rescue teams to wear outside. Many have tried to seal windows and doors in their houses and barns, in the hope of keeping out the fine ash particles. But this does not always work.

“Ash has crept into the house, and especially into the outbuildings which were not sealed as tightly,” says Tryggvason.

Gudrun Larsen is a geologist with the Institute of Earth Sciences who has been measuring the ash layer in the affected area. “In the lowland, the thickness could reach up to five cm, although in places where ash had settled after being blown from elsewhere, it was sometimes thicker,” she told IPS.

What are the long-term effects of the ash? “They are impossible to predict. It depends on how long the eruption lasts, how strong the winds are, and how thick the ash layer is. If the ash layer is thin, it could be washed away by rain, but the situation is worse if the ash layer is thick as it has a high fluorine content that is not good for animals,” says Gunnarsdottir.

Fluorine can bind with calcium to produce calcium fluoride, an insoluble compound that can lead to calcium deficiency and cause weak bones and teeth. Farmers are currently being encouraged to bring their animals under shelter, but when this becomes impossible – some horses have never been inside a stable before – to ensure that they have access to fresh water and hay.

Some people are optimistic, though. Thorarinn Olafsson grows barley on his farm, Drangshlid. “I’m just ploughing the ash back into the soil. It’s not too deep where I am, only one to two cm, which is less than some places,” he says. He intends to sow 100 hectares of barley compared to the 160 hectares he sowed last year.

“We really need a lot of rain now to wash the fluorine and other toxic compounds away,” he says.

Is it sensible to plough volcanic ash back into the soil? “I haven’t studied the actual chemical breakdown of the ash, but fluorine is not toxic to vegetation so in my opinion a small amount of ash ploughed back should not pose any problem,” says Sigurgeir Olafsson from the Icelandic Food and Veterinary Authority.

If the ash layer is thick, however, it can be very damaging to fields. The Farmers’ Association is concerned that hay might have to be brought into the area if the eruption continues for a long time.

The eruption has led to floods that in some cases have damaged roads, bridges and levees. At one point, this led to a temporary food shortage in the southern town of Vik and problems with milk collection from dairy farmers. And as the wind direction had changed and there was limited visibility, the school in Vik was closed on Monday.

Is there a possibility that the ash cloud will reach Reykjavik or other areas with a greater population density if the wind direction changes? “It is impossible to say. It depends on how strong the wind is, what the wind direction is, how much ash is present, and other factors,” says Gunnarsdottir.

In the affected area, meetings are being held to inform residents of the current situation and the effects of ash on livestock and vegetation. Others keep up to date by checking out the web cameras of the eruption and media coverage.

Ironically, the international airport and most of the domestic airports in Iceland have been open as usual since the eruption began. It is Europe that is at the receiving end of the ash cloud, not Iceland.

Excerpt:

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Apr 15 2010 (IPS)

Early April Greenpeace protestors in Rotterdam intercepted seven containers with 140 kg of fin whale meat from Iceland, destined for Japan. They said that the import of whale meat to the Netherlands is illegal, but Dutch authorities turn a blind eye on consignments destined elsewhere.

In a press release about the action, Greenpeace said: “The international trade in fin whales and other whales is banned under CITES – the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna. The Netherlands is one of the 175 signatories to this treaty. Japan and Iceland refuse to comply with CITES and continue to trade in whale meat.”

Kristjan Loftsson from the company Hvalur, which was exporting the meat, has to find another way of getting the meat to Japan as the original shipping company, NYK, refused to take the meat any further.

“But you don’t need to worry, we’ll find a way,” he said when IPS asked him if a solution had been found.

Very little fin whale meat was sold in 2009, though. Statistics in Iceland say that a whole 3 kg of whale meat was exported, worth ISK 5,442 (43 US dollars).

However, Einar K. Gudfinnsson, the former fisheries minister who announced the resumption of commercial whaling early last year, has predicted annual revenue of up to ISK 5 billion (39.6 million dollars) for the 150 fin whales and 100 minke whales that he said could be caught annually.

The news is interesting in the light of a new report on the advantages and disadvantages of whaling that the ministry for fisheries and agriculture commissioned from the University of Iceland’s Institute of Economic Studies.

After talking to officials from a number of government institutions and whaling interests, the authors concluded that whaling would be economically advantageous to Iceland.

In February, before the report was published, a quota of 200 minke whales and 200 fin whales was set for 2010.

Would it not have been better to wait for the whaling report before deciding on the whale quota? “The report has nothing to do with the decision on the whaling quota which was made by Gudfinnsson in January last year. The publication of the report was delayed from September till March and that was nothing we could change,” said Johann Gudmundsson, advisor to the fisheries minister.

Although many in the current ruling coalition are against commercial whaling, Iceland is currently bound by the regulation that Gudfinnsson set, but a bill has just been set before the parliamentary Althingi that would allow a revision of the law.

Minke whalers actually made an overall loss in 2009, although minke whale meat was sold on the domestic market. Initially the intention had been to sell 80 percent of the minke whale meat to Japan.

Why was it not sold to Japan? Gunnar Bergmann Jonsson from the Association of Minke Whale Hunters told IPS: “We will not be exporting any minke whale meat for the time being, but hope to do so in the future. We are still building our company up and to export all the whale meat immediately was simply too much to take on.”

Nevertheless, the report says that extra revenue would be provided for the minke whale industry if some of the meat is sold on the foreign market.

Hunting and processing 150 minke whales and 150 fin whales would provide 80-90 jobs on a yearly basis, say the authors of the report. In comparison, ten companies sell whale-watching tours; of these the four largest provide 120 jobs during the peak period and 40-50 outside of this.

The main benefit of whaling, though, would come from the fish that could be caught if not taken by whales. On a long-term basis, the populations of cod, capelin and haddock would increase and allow extra quotas for the fishing industry of 2,200 tonnes of cod, 4,900 tonnes of haddock and 13,800 tonnes of capelin, say the study authors.

These figures have been disputed, however. Hilmar Malmquist, curator of the Natural History Museum of Kopavogur, has long been critical of the science used by pro-whaling interests. “The report is badly written and lacks scientific credibility. It is highly pro-whaling and biased towards interests in the fishing and whaling sector, such as the Federation of Icelandic Fishing Vessel Owners,” he says.

“Regarding results on how whaling might increase economic returns of commercial fish catch, one of the basic assumptions in the report is a two-decade-old “multi-species model” provided by Iceland’s Marine Research Institute, which has been strongly criticised by the scientific community and rejected as a useful tool for assessing long-term interactions between species in the complex marine ecosystem,” he continued.

The biological multi-species model only includes three whale species, two fish species and one species of shrimp and is highly simplistic, according to Malmquist, “but they use this model to extrapolate data to estimate fish populations after 50 years. The report also considers only negative effects of fish consumption by whales and does not consider beneficial predation,” Malmquist points out.

Beneficial predation happens when whales eat fish that usually prey on cod and other commercial fish. The logic behind this argument is that if there are fewer whales around to eat the predatory fish, the predatory fish will eat more cod so the exploitable cod population will actually become smaller.

The last section of the report deals with the impact on tourism and Iceland’s image overseas. It acknowledges that this aspect should be researched further and if it appears that whaling will damage the nation’s credibility to outsiders, the decision should be reconsidered.

Greenpeace is trying its best to do this. “By exposing Iceland’s whale meat trade in Rotterdam, we hope to change Iceland’s position and end its unnecessary whale hunt”, they say in their press release.

The report also suggests that the whaling station itself might attract tourists like it did in its heyday. “But that was 20-30 years ago. They don’t consider that the attitude towards hunting whales might have changed over time,” says Malmquist.

On a slightly different note, Malmquist points out: “Authors of the report regard the big baleen whales as an Icelandic resource. Here, authors omit the fact that the big whale species are more or less all born outside the Icelandic economic zone, down south close to the equator in international waters. Therefore, international law applies to them and how they are treated.”

Excerpt:

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Feb 15 2010 (IPS)

Views within Iceland towards membership of the European Union (EU) are mixed. Though Iceland has officially decided to apply for EU membership this does not mean that it will join, even if invited to do so.

Iceland is already a member of the EEA (European Economic Area), which provides many of the advantages enjoyed by EU countries but does not allow for uptake of the euro.

After the banks collapsed in October 2008, there was considerable discussion about the potential benefits of taking up the euro instead of the Icelandic krona, and whether this would be possible without becoming a member of the EU.

Urdur Gunnarsdottir, press officer with the foreign ministry, says that the advent of the euro would bring both advantages and disadvantages. “The main advantage of continuing with the Icelandic krona is that the autonomy of the Icelandic authorities over its monetary policy increases the possibility of a quick response to changes in the economic situation,” she says.

“The main disadvantage of the Icelandic krona,” she continues, “is its volatility to external influence because of its smallness. This has resulted in unsteady exchange rates and unpredictability for households and businesses. Lack of a reliable lender of last resort has also been detrimental to the Icelandic economy.”

The debate about the euro led to general discussion about whether membership of the EU would be a good idea per se.

However, of all the political parties in Iceland it is really only members of the Social Democratic Alliance (SDA) who are wholeheartedly positive towards EU membership.

Why are they so keen?

“Membership of the EU would greatly improve the situation of families and householders in Iceland, partly because of lower costs of goods and the much lower interest expenses,” says Baldur Thorhallsson, professor of politics at the University of Iceland and Chair of the SDA European Committee.

He says that it is important for Iceland to take up the euro, adding: “Entry into the EU and take-up of the euro are prerequisites for the increase in job opportunities for companies in high-technology and the software fields of industry. In this way it will be possible to boost jobs for young people and prevent them from leaving the country [to look for work abroad]. In addition, Iceland is part of Europe, Icelandic culture is European culture, and Icelanders have things in common with other Europeans.”

When a new government was formed by the SDA and the Left-Green Party (LGP) in February 2009 in the wake of the bank collapse and public protests, membership of the EU was one of the crucial points brought up by the SDA in the discussions that preceded the announcement of the new coalition government’s platform for action.

Although the SDA was known to be pushing for EU membership, the LGP was against it. How would this problem be resolved? Would one party give in or would there be a compromise?

The LGP acceded and agreed to EU membership if there was a national referendum first.

A few months later, on Jul. 16, a motion that Iceland would apply for EU membership was passed in the Icelandic Althingi (parliament). All of the SDA MPs voted for membership but only 8 of the 14 LGP legislators did so.

However, if the EU decides to accept Iceland as a member state, the option of joining it would then be put to the Icelandic public in a referendum. The results of the referendum would be advisory but not binding.

One of the major obstacles for Iceland joining the EU has to do with the fishing industry. Basically, Iceland wants control of its fishing resources, which it would not get if it became part of the EU because it would then have to take up the Commons Fisheries Policy (CFP).

Arthur Bogason, chair of the National Association of Small Boat Owners, explains further. “All decisions would be taken out of the country. Icelanders still remember when we where fighting for the extension of the fishing limits (Exclusive Economic Zone) to 200 miles in 1975. Many feel that by joining the EU, Iceland is giving away its sovereign rights over the fishing grounds and moving the decision making to Brussels.”

The EU bans whaling, which would put an end to Iceland’s controversial whaling activities.

Agriculture is another area of concern. Haraldur Benediktsson, chair of the Farmers’ Association, says that the position of Icelandic farmers is built purely on their interests. “The Commons Agricultural Policy does not suit Icelandic agriculture, which is narrow and practised under difficult conditions. Iceland produces 50 percent of its food needs today and for a nation that lives on an island far north in the ocean, food security must not falter,” he told IPS.

He went on to explain further: “Production must not be reduced so that we are in a bad position in regard to fresh produce if something goes wrong with transportation, for instance. Agriculture and processing are also the backbone of industry in rural areas – in some areas this accounts for 25-30 percent of employment. Most appraisals of independent parties on the effect on agriculture say that the reduction would be substantial on joining the EU.”

Capacent, a Nordic business consultancy, carries out surveys at six-monthly intervals for the Federation of Icelandic Industries on attitudes of Icelanders towards EU membership. The latest survey was carried out in late August/early September last year.

Gudbjorg Andrea Jonsdottir, research manager for Capacent Iceland, says that more people in the last survey were against EU membership than for it. “Nevertheless, the majority of Icelanders want discussions with the EU to proceed,” she says, adding: “Negativity towards EU membership seems to be increasing amongst Icelanders.”

In the last survey, when Icelanders were asked how they would vote if a referendum was held on EU membership, 61.5 percent said they would vote against while 38.5 percent said they would vote for it.

And at a recent party meeting, the LGP decided to reiterate its opposition to EU membership.

The road to the EU will not be easy.

(*The story moved at 12:50 GMT Feb 15, 2009 contained an error in the dateline. It should have been Reykjavic and not Helsinki)

Excerpt:

By Lowana Veal
REYKJAVIK, Dec 22 2009 (IPS)

Iceland already gets over 72 percent of its energy from renewable, hydroelectric and geothermal sources, but Icelanders are ambitious when it comes to energy and scientists are now looking at osmotic and tidal power to meet future energy needs.

The Thjorsa river has five hydroelectric plants but is due for more. Credit: Lowana Veal/IPS

Osmotic power, harnessed at estuaries, is probably the world’s newest form of energy. However, the basic technology behind it is over 30 years old as it is basically desalination in reverse.

Thorsteinn Ingi Sigfusson of Innovation Centre Iceland (ICI), who has been involved with the development of osmotic energy and tidal power, says that osmotic technology is relatively safe and simple.

“When you have a saline mass of water on one side and freshwater on the other, chemical energy separates these masses. The system uses a special diaphragm which lets the freshwater through from one side but does not let the saline water through in the opposite direction. This means that the freshwater penetrates into the saline with a resulting increase in pressure on the saline side,” the professor said.

“This pressure is consequently used for powering a generator. The pressure can amount to 100 m of water column and can subsequently be used to move a generating wheel linked to an electric generator,’’ Sigfusson said. “At an estuary, two such masses of water meet. If you constantly design a situation where the freshwater and saline waters meet, you can harness this set pressure difference.’’

Sigfusson cited the example of the river Thjorsa in South Iceland, which is home to five existing hydroelectric power plants and four planned ones which are controversial.

“Where Thjorsa meets the sea, you could probably add 30-40 percent of the already harnessed power upstream. This does not involve any dams and the station can be placed underground, not visible to the eye, and will not harm any part of the river,” Sigfusson said.

Osmotic power has been developed in Norway as well, and the world’s first demonstration osmotic energy plant was opened there in late November. The Norwegian plant was developed in conjunction with the engineering company Statkraft.

Sigfusson says that the Norwegians decided 30 years ago that they did not want any huge hydroelectric plants and decided to develop alternatives. “I don’t think any problems have arisen with the Norwegian osmotic plant,” he says.

As to the future of osmotic energy in Iceland, Sigfusson says: “At the Energy Farmer seminar in Isafjordur, Northwest Iceland, the Westfjord Power Company (WPC) and ICI agreed to aim for a small desalination station in the West Fjords to be open to the public on Jun. 17, 2011. This will be at the existing Mjolka station, though there are other possibilities.”

As for tidal power, two types are envisaged. A tidal barrage plant – which will bear similarities to the Rance tidal plant in northern France built way back in 1966 – and a tidal current plant.

Bjarni M. Jonsson has been involved with the former. “It will measure the height difference between low and high tides,” he says.

Jonsson carried out measurements on the magnitude and depth of tides in several fjords that empty out into Breidafjordur Bay as part of his master’s degree in Coastal and Marine Management.

Jonsson found that the real power that can be harnessed from the fjords would be 75-80 Mw. But there is an added bonus: if the barrage is constructed, two crossings will be built across adjacent fjords to house the turbines. Bridges for these fjords were already in the pipeline by the Icelandic Roads Authority, so the plan would combine both projects.

What happens next? “We (myself, ICI, WPC and the West Fjords Economic Development Agency) have set up a small spin-off company called WesTide, to investigate further possibilities of this project,” says Jonsson.

A little further south, a company called Ocean Energy (OE) is also planning to harness the power of the West Fjords. Unlike WesTide, OE plans to use a turbine under the sea to generate power from the tidal current.

The company, which was set up in 2001, has already mapped the sea floor of the areas which seem most promising. The maximum harnessable power of the fjord appears to be 650 Gw hours/year in the first stage.

OE is currently awaiting a research permit to continue research into tidal currents. At the time it was set up, no permits were required – but now they are.

After the necessary research has been carried out, OE will look for a suitable turbine.

The turbine could conceivably come from Iceland, as on the former USAF base a new company called Valorka is developing a new kind of turbine which is primarily designed to be used in tidal power plants.

Company director Valdimar Ossurarson says that more research will be carried out next year with the aid of a grant received from the Technology Development Fund.

“The Valorka turbine is a new invention, but unlike most other tidal turbines it is not based on a windmill concept. The Valorka turbine will have a large surface area and is therefore more suitable for use in slower currents. Existing turbines need a current speed of at least 2 m/sec to work effectively, which only exists in some channels and fjords,” says Ossurarson.

“The Valorka turbine is expected to work effectively at the current speed commonly found by headlands and points. If this is confirmed in tests, our turbine may become the world’s first offshore tidal turbine. The Valorka turbine will be fully submerged, avoiding the environmental hazard of barrages,” he adds.

“There is a great deal of energy waiting to be used off the coast of Iceland: that’s where Iceland’s real resources lie,’’ Ossurarson said.

Excerpt: