Oslo, 30-09-98

Direct current (DC) links between Norway and Germany: in violation of the Bern Convention

The Norwegian Water Resources and Electricity Administration (NVE) has granted permission to Norwegian Statnett SF to establish three direct current links for the transmission of electricity between Norway and the Continent.

In the case of two of the connections, Eurokabel and Viking Cable between Norway and Germany, the establishment of an electrode station with its accompanying electrode cable will adversely affect the most important migration routes of predacious birds through Norway. Some of the biggest migrations of predacious birds in Scandinavia pass directly over the proposed trace alignment (path) for the electrode cables; in fact, the particular location in question is noted as the single area in Norway that attracts the largest numbers of migrating birds of prey of all species. For certain species, the large numbers have particular significance within a Scandinavian perspective. This is especially true of the following species: marsh hawk (also known as blue hawk), goshawk, golden eagle, Eurasian kestrel, and peregrine falcon. In conjunction with other consulted authorities, Bellona has appealed the approval of the venture to the Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy. The appeal is scheduled for a hearing in the autumn of 1998.

Hence we respectfully request the Secretariat of the Bern Convention to review the case to determine whether the consequences ensuing from this resolution constitute a violation of the Convention. The manifestation of the Secretariat’s position prior to a conclusive OECD ruling on the matter will influence the final parameters of the decision towards the most favourable possible outcome for biological diversity.

In the following pages we show how in our view the proposed project violates the Bern Convention.

Very truly yours,

Dr. Mai Britt Knoph
Project leader,
Bellona Foundation

Cato Buch
executive officer,
Bellona Foundation

Introduction

The Bellona Foundation has monitored this case for some time and has submitted commentary to the proceedings on numerous occasions (see enclosure). Bellona is not in objection per se to the establishment of direct current (DC) connections with the Continent; however, the venture must be carried out in the best possible way with respect to the natural environment. The plans which were submitted to and ultimately approved by the Norwegian Water Resources and Electricity Administration (NVE) are unsatisfactory both with respect to environmental conservation and in view of the recommendations tendered by institutes of expertise and other consulted organisations. The Bellona Foundation is one of several consulted organisations that lodged objections to the proposed enterprise with the Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy.

In its appeal to the Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy, the Bellona Foundation has pointed out that the authorities would be in violation of Norwegian law if they permitted the plans for the cable connection to proceed in their present form. Bellona considered that this would also be in conflict with Norway’s international agreements. In the preamble of the Bern Convention, it is stated that states who have ratified the treaty commit themselves to conserve and to endeavour to protect endangered fauna and flora in their planning and development policies. In the following, Bellona will discuss the problems associated with the planned electricity cables in greater detail, showing how their manifestation will be in breach of several articles of the Bern Convention.

Summary of the case

On October 16, 1996, Statnett SF, Viking Cable AS, Eurokabel AS and Sira-Kvina power company submitted a joint application for permission, expropriation and pre-approval of DC transmission cables from Feda and Tonstad out to the base line. The application more particularly sought authorisation for the building and operation of two direct cable links between Norway and Germany (Viking Cable and Eurokabel) and a DC link between Norway and the Netherlands (NorNed). With the completion of the final power link in 2003, the three cables should be capable of transporting approximately 1800 MW. In 1993, 1994 and 1995, the Norwegian Ministry of Industry and Energy authorised the energy transfer agreements between Norway, Germany and the Netherlands which form the basis for these links. The application and its accompanying impact assessments were submitted for public hearings, with a deadline of September 1, 1997 for the local municipalities and June 1, 1997 for other interested parties. Over the course of 1997, several additional assessments and applications attendant to the main application were also submitted for public hearings.

Upon completing its evaluation of the commentary ensuing from the hearings, the Norwegian Water Resources and Electricity Administration in November 1997 granted permission to Statnett SF on behalf of the contractors to construct the three DC links between Norway and the Continent.

However, the defectiveness of environmental impact assessments in connection with the proposed cable lines as well as the lacking concern for environmental considerations in both the application and in the construction permission granted by NVE for the links to Germany, have given rise to profound reaction from both local and regional authorities, special interest organisations and elected officials. The Norwegian Directorate of Cultural Heritage (Riksantikvaren) and the Directorate for Nature Management (Direktoratet for Naturforvaltning) are also amongst those who along with Bellona strongly advised against the plans which have since received authorisation.

There is particular opposition to NVE’s having granted permission for the two German cables to be brought ashore over the landscape conservation area at Lista. The encroachment that these cables represent could adversely affect both the landscape, the natural environment and protected cultural relics. Especially in danger are certain vulnerable plants and bird species, and a particular marshy area which is protected under the international Ramsar convention will be also be affected.

Permission has furthermore been granted for the establishment of an electrode station with accompanying aerial cables in the middle of a natural landscape protection area that has been planned for Breivika in Flekkefjord. The facility could, depending upon how it is constructed and operated, lead to considerable environmental pollution through the forming of poisonous chlorine gas and low degradable organohalogenic toxic compounds in the sea. However, at the instigation both of Bellona and other concerned agencies, the Norwegian Pollution Control Authority (SFT) has established that such electrode stations are subject to licensing according to the pollution law, and adopts a strict approach in the processing of any emissions applications. Furthermore, the design of the facility has been altered such that any emanating pollution would be dramatically reduced as compared to the original plans. However, the aerial cable to the electrode station crosses Norway’s most important migration routes for predacious birds and affects other irreplaceable natural environments. Several endangered species of birds registered in Appendices II and III of the Bern Convention as strictly protected or protected fauna species range in the area.

Both the bringing of the cable ashore at Lista and the establishment of a electrode station at Breivika with its accompanying electrode cable come into direct conflict with the protection of endangered and vulnerable species, biotopes and habitats in Norway. Bellona has appealed (dated 10.01.98) NVE’s sanction to the Norwegian Ministry of Oil and Energy, and in its argument points out a number of procedural errors in NVE’s dealings in the case, including the omission of important environmental impact statements.

Environmentally better solutions are available

Bringing cables ashore across the Feda fjord instead of Lista

In the case of the NorNed connection, the cable will be brought ashore through the Feda fjord. Bellona have recommended that this solution should also be applied to the two German links (Eurokabel and Viking Cable), thereby sparing Lista. This solution is estimated by Statnett SF to require an increased investment of only 1-2% of the total budget for the entire project, but Statnett claims this is unacceptable expenses. Statnett SF also claims this solution will constitute an unacceptable risk for simultanous error in the three sea cable links. The Norwegian Ministry of Oil and Energy, which during the autumn of 1998 shall make the final decision concerning the appeals in this case, now (Sept. 98) considers to have the risk aspects of the Feda-alternative further deliberated. The Bellona Foundation have recently asked for such a thorough deliberation of this alternative, hopefully to reveal that acceptable reliability can be approached by taking the neccessary measures. The Feda alternative definitively is the environmentally least damaging, this is agreed upon even by Statnett.

Sea cables with built-in return conductor instead of electrode station and aerial cable

For the NorNed connection a flat bipolar cable with a built-in return conductor (delivered by the Danish company NKT) is decided used. Such cables with built-in return connectors makes electrode station, and followingly the connected electrode aerial cable, superfluous. For NorNed no electrode station and electrode air cable is thus planned. In view of the increased awareness and attention to pollution emanating from electrode stations, in May 1998, Alcatel Kabel Norway introduced a round sea cable with a built-in return line. This type of cable enjoys the same advantages as the Danish NKT flat cable planned for use in the NorNed link, but in addition has less risk of leaking cable oil into the environment. Since there are now two cable solutions available on the open market that obviate the need for an electrode station and accompanying aerial cable, it ought to be easier and cheaper to adopt this technology also for the links to Germany (Viking Cable and Eurokabel). The use of bipolar cabling with a built-in return connector for the links to Germany would eliminate both the encroachment upon the environment from the electrode station and the accompanying aerial cable. The conflict with Norway’s most important migration routes for predacious birds including several endangered species and the conflict with a planned natural landscape protection area will be totally avoided. In addition there will be no ensuing pollution that would otherwise necessarily arise from the operation of an electrode station. This solution would be far more consistent with the principles laid down in the Bern Convention for the «best environmental practice» and the «best available technology».

Continuation of the case

In this section, a short account is given first showing how the planned enterprise (as presented in the authorisation for the German links) violates the general provisions of the Bern Convention. This is followed by a more detailed explanation of the two most important threats to biological diversity posed by the German DC links:

1. The risk of migratory birds colliding with the long distance wires (aerial electrode cables);

2. The bringing ashore of electric cables over Lista, constituting an encroachment upon the natural environment that affects both the landscape, habitat and the unique natural heritage of Norway.

Bellona maintains that there are equally satisfying alternatives to the approved plans that would virtually eliminate the threat to plant and animal life and thereby no longer conflict with the provisions of the Bern Convention. In article 3, paragraph 2 of the Bern Convention, it states as follows: «each Contracting Party undertakes, in its planning and development policies and in its measures against pollution, to have regard to the conservation of wild flora and fauna.» As a party to the Bern Convention, Norwegian authorities must act in accordance with the convention’s principles which provide for the conservation of wildlife.

The alternatives, as described above, are using bipolar cables with built-in return lines for the German links (Viking Cable and Eurokabel) so that the electrode station and connecting aerial electrode cables is avoided, and bringing ashore the sea cables for these links (Viking Cable and Eurokabel) in the Feda Fjord instead of across Lista (similar solution is chosen for NorNed). A solution such as this would be in perfect compliance with the pertinent environmental principles with respect to «best available technology» and «best environmental practice». Furthermore, in addition to eliminating the need for electrode stations and electrode cables, the problem of magnetic fields along the cable and their potential disturbance of marine life would also be avoided by using sea cables with built-in return conductors.

General provisions of the Bern Convention

If the enterprise of bringing the cables ashore at Lista and establishing an electrode station at Breivika with the accompanying electrode cables should be carried out, there are essentially two main problems that could arise. First of all would be the danger of migratory birds colliding with the aerial electrode cables erected in their flight path. Furthermore, important natural habitats would be affected as a consequence of the venture’s being established at the specified locations. It should also be mentioned that many of the bird species that use the affected areas as resting places are registered as endangered species in the appendices of the Bern Convention as well as appearing on the Norwegian «Red List». This is likewise true of the underwater plant species water nymph which is a member of the Najas family.

Contracting parties to the Bern Convention acknowledge in the preamble that the conservation of wild flora and fauna should be taken into consideration by the governments in their national goals and programmes, and that international co-operation should be established to protect migratory species in particular.» Thus the preamble names in particular migratory species. In the case under consideration here, it is specifically migratory predacious birds that are particularly threatened, both because of the danger of collision with the aerial electrode cable, and because the choice of location for the various facilities could affect specific areas that the migratory birds utilise as resting and staging places.

The Bern Convention emphasises the protection of wild fauna and their natural habitats, especially those of endangered and vulnerable species, cf. article 1, paragraph 2: «Particular emphasis is given to endangered and vulnerable species, including endangered and vulnerable migratory species», cf. article 1, paragraph 1. While the particular area in question cannot directly be characterised as a natural habitat for all of the specified bird species, it is nonetheless a set point and resting place in their migratory flight passage.

Danger of collision with power lines for migratory bird species

Current plans call for the running of a power line (aerial electrode cable) to connect the electrode station to the existing network of power lines.

Migration of predacious birds

The migration of predacious birds over Flekkefjord is the largest in Norway, as well as one of the most significant in Scandinavia. Seen in a national perspective, the outer coast of Flekkefjord constitutes a unique area for predacious birds during their autumn migration with migratory flights occurring in a concentrated zone about two km wide. The important function this area plays may be explained in part by the area’s sheer geographical location: this area forms a corner between eastern and western Norway. Simultaneously the physical topography of the area in the form of a mountain chain running along the Flekkefjord coast reaches to the very edge of the sea, providing favourable conditions for bearing the migrating predacious birds aloft. This applies particularly to those bird species that utilise thermal currents.

The particular area in question is unique as the location in Norway that attracts the highest annual numbers and greatest variety in species of migratory birds. Amongst certain species, these numbers are also high from a Scandinavian perspective, particularly with respect to predacious bird species such as the marsh hawk (Cicus cyaneus), goshawk (Accipiter gentiles), golden eagle (Aquila chryseatos), Eurasian kestrel (Falco tinnunculus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus). Of the different species of birds that appear on the Norwegian «red list,» ten are listed as migratory. Amongst these, the marsh hawk, goshawk, golden eagle and peregrine falcon are particularly important in that they appear in relatively large numbers within the alignment (path) for the planned power line. In connection with the deliberation of the environmental impacts of the aerial electrode cable, an environmental impact study was carried out in the period from August 15 to October 15, 1997 (Grimsby 1997a) which showed that the number of observed birds in a specific danger zone (5 m above and below – 18 m altogether) was particularly high for these species (see table 3). For the most part, migration occurs in a west-north-westerly direction, with the exception of the opposite direction (east-south-east) in which case the predacious birds will encounter the proposed line trace across their path at a 90 degree angle. The number of predacious birds in the actual danger zone is spread fairly evenly throughout the entire line.

Upon the conclusion of the nesting season for predacious birds in Norway, most birds but especially young birds, will travel south to their winter quarters. The migratory route in Norway has not been completely charted, but besides the Oslo Fjord, the most important departure points in Norway include Lista and Jæren. The actual survey of migrating predacious birds is undertaken at several sites along the coast of western Norway, southern Norway and along the west side of the Oslo Fjord. The initial results from these surveys indicate a very clear accumulation of virtually all the predacious bird species within the western parts of Vest-Agder (the coast of Flekkefjord in particular). Observations indicate that a significant fraction of predacious birds migrate over a narrow area past Mønstermyr in Flekkefjord and over Jæren. The migratory route over the coast of Flekkefjord and past the electrode cable (proposed traces 2.0 and 2.1) takes place mostly towards the north-west, meaning that the birds follow the coastline in the direction of Hidrasundet. A typical migratory pattern is one whereby all of the birds come from the area around Framvaren in the municipality of Farsund. In all probability they cross the Lista Fjord such that they pass over the southern end of Andabelløyna. Thereafter they fly over the north-east side of Hidra roughly to about Lauvnes whereupon they cross over the mainland side of Flekkefjord. Thus the migratory route passes over the proposed trace alignment through a narrow zone from the coast inland towards Fidsel (approximately 2.5 km).

There are a number of factors determining how large a fraction of the predacious birds passing through the danger zone will collide with the proposed power line. Certainly visibility conditions during migration play a role, as well as wind direction and wind force. Migratory activity through the area can vary depending on wind direction and wind speed. A large fraction of predacious birds migrate at low altitude in active flight against the wind, especially when the wind is blowing from north to north-west. In such conditions, especially during strong winds, it appears likely that there would be only the shortest reaction time to avoid a given power line.

Particularly birds that utilise the thermals are at risk of collision. The term «thermal migration» is used to describe birds that make use of upwardly moving currents of air (thermals) in their annual migration. By circling with outstretched wings on these currents, the birds are carried aloft and thereby gain altitude. At the appropriate altitude, the birds then sail at a gentle slant downwards on their particular course (gliding phase), often attaining great speed. In a typical migratory pattern over the specific area under discussion, predacious birds will utilise the thermals (goshawk, sparrow hawk, buzzard, rough-legged hawk, golden eagle), often circling over Orreknuten before gliding downwards towards the north-west. The birds often fly at a considerable velocity, with the consequence that they are at great risk of colliding with the power line. Furthermore, because the power line appears to be camouflaged amidst the vegetation in the background, a large number of birds could consequently collide with it. On the basis of these factors, the findings of a 1997 study indicate that there is a very significant risk of collision.

In addition to being the most important area in Norway with respect to the autumn migration of predacious birds, it should also be noted that the entire proposed trace alignment falls within an outer coastal region of Flekkefjord that has also been specifically proposed as an object of landscape conservation. Part of the proposed trace alignment also transverses an area of Flekkefjord that has been expressly selected for biological diversity of both regional and national importance. For example, the marsh gentian (Gentiana pneumonanthe) may be found growing here (Grimsby 1997b), an endangered plant species that appears on both the Norwegian «Red List» and Appendix I of the Bern Convention.

Table 1. Register of predacious birds observed at Mønstermyr. Recorded by year for the period 1990-94 and indicating the maximum daily recurrence of a given species of birds (Mønstermyr lies just inside the power line trace; hence studies carried out in this location can be used for the purposes of gauging the actual number of birds in the actual line trace.) Source: Grimsby 1998

Table 2. Average annual numbers and median dates for Mønstermyr compared to Falsterbo (1990-94) and Mølen (1991-94). Source: Grimsby 1998

Table 3. Migratory predacious birds from the period 15 Aug. – 15 Oct. 1997, in relation to possible effect of power line. Source: Grimsby 1997a

Collision risk conflicts with provisions of the Bern Convention

The collision of predacious birds with the proposed electric power line would result in an increased mortality rate for several different endangered species. The marsh hawk, goshawk, golden eagle and peregrine falcon would be especially affected in that particularly these species make frequent use of Lista as a migratory area.

In Article 6 of the Bern Convention, the first sentence states that «each Contracting party shall take appropriate and necessary legislative and administrative measures to ensure the special protection of the wild fauna species specified in Appendix II.» Hence the question here is whether the «special protection of the wild fauna species specified in Appendix II» of the Bern Convention is sufficiently ensured in NVE’s authorisation of the plans in their present form. Grimsby (1997) points out that collisions with the power line will result in increased mortality rates for a number of endangered predacious bird species. Since the marsh hawk, goshawk, golden eagle and peregrine falcon are particularly known to use this migratory area, it is these species that will be most affected. These birds are listed in Appendix II of the Bern Convention as «falconiformes,» and are «strictly protected fauna species.» This essentially means that the authorities are obliged to take the necessary measures to ensure that these species are protected and shielded from all unnecessary danger. Consequently, utilisation of the alternative of laying bipolar cables with a built-in return conductor would eliminate the threat.

The provisions laid down in Article 7, paragraph 1 are essentially the same as the first sentence of Article 6. This article requires that the authorities must take «appropriate and necessary … administrative measures» to ensure the conservation of the species specified in Appendix III. In Appendix III it is evident that all bird species which are not specified in Appendix II are not subject to strictly protection, but is subject to protection. This implies that the bird species that do appear in Appendix III are also «protected fauna species.» This means that every other bird species in the area, that may be affected to the power line, also is protected by the convention.

Article 10 is a supplementary provision applying specifically to migratory species. In the first paragraph of this article the wording reads as follows: «The Contracting Parties undertake, … to co-ordinate their efforts for the protection of the migratory species specified in Appendices II and III whose range extends into their territories.» If the planned enterprise goes through in its present form, instead of protecting migratory species of birds, it is more likely to have the opposite effect.

Exceptions

Article 9 of the Bern Convention lists certain exceptions. The question here is whether the proposed enterprise falls under any of these exceptions. According to Article 9, paragraph 1, exceptions may be made for a proposed venture that conflicts with the preceding provisions of the Bern Convention only when «there is no other satisfactory solution and that the exception will not be detrimental to the survival of the population concerned,» and that this will preserve other vital and essential interest, cf. points of emphasis. As mentioned earlier, there is an equally viable alternative to using aerial power lines; furthermore, certain of the bird species affected by the proposed venture are endangered species in need of the best possible conservation measures.

Summary

There can be no doubt that the erecting of an aerial power line in the trace alignment as planned will increase the likelihood of collision and consequently mortality in a number of migratory bird species. Amongst these are several already endangered species of predacious birds which Norway, in accordance with its ratification of the Bern Convention, has committed itself to preserve. Consequently the plans in their present form for the two DC connections between Norway and Germany are in violation of a number of the convention’s principles. The approval of the proposed enterprise becomes even more questionable in consideration of the fact that a perfectly satisfying alternative exists in the form of utilising cables with a built-in return.

Bringing the cable ashore at Lista – conservation of the area for its function as a resting place for birds and for its flora

Lista is a peninsula in the southernmost part of Norway where many of the natural environments particularly unique to Norway are represented, from heathered moors to marshes and long shorelines. Due to the variety of natural conditions and Lista’s geographical position, Lista is an important habitat for bird life, and is noted as an important staging and resting place for migratory birds. Lista’s shorelines are almost unique in their formation, with cobbled beaches, sand dunes and wild, west-coast formations. Lista’s shores are full of cultural relics with over 1500 distinct historical sites and relics in the area. Not only are the cultural remains worthy of conservation in themselves, but Lista also has a distinct cultural landscape of its own.

The shores at Lista are of central importance as a staging and resting place for birds, especially for wading birds which require peace and quiet and a great deal of nourishment to sustain them on their demanding migratory flights. Various duck species also thrive in the favourable conditions along Lista’s shoreline. Over 335 different species of birds have been observed at Lista, the majority of which have been noted along the shorelines.

The cable will be brought ashore at Husebysanden and laid further towards Kråkenesvannet. This cable will pass through the single area in Southern Norway in which the highest concentration of flora appearing on the Norwegian «red list» may be found. In other words, the planned locations for the laying of the cable constitute a direct threat to a significant portion of Norway’s botanical heritage, including the underwater plant species of water nymph; Slender Naiad (Najas flexilis)(«mjukt havfrugress»), a very rare species of the Najas family. In Norway the plant grows only around Kråkenesvannet, in the very same location in which the new cable is to be laid. In order to lay the cable, a holding trench must be dug, and this in turn can affect the flow of water and consequently the natural habitat/life conditions of the actual plant. Statnett has made no study or description of what impact the laying of the electrode cable may have on the water nymph plant.

Water nymph also appears on the Bern Convention list of protected plant species.

Furthermore, Kråkenesvannet is declared a Ramsar-area due to its rich variety of bird and plant life.

Although the Bern Convention does not directly provide for the protection of specific areas, it is nevertheless stated in the preamble that authorities shall be «aware that the conservation of natural habitats is a vital component of the protection and conservation of wild flora and fauna.» This means in effect that the text of the Convention pledges governments to protect the natural environments that form the natural habitats of endangered species such that the survival of these species is thereby ensured. This intention is more clearly formulated in Article 1 paragraph 1 which states that «the aims of this Convention are to conserve wild flora and fauna and their natural habitats.» Hence the purpose of the Bern Convention is not only the protection of the species specifically named in the convention appendices, but of all «wild flora and fauna» in general.

Article 3, paragraph 1 rules that «each Contracting Party shall take steps to promote national policies for the conservation of wild flora, wild fauna and natural habitats, with particular attention to endangered and vulnerable species, especially endemic ones, and endangered habitats, in accordance with the provisions of this Convention» (our underlining). Furthermore, it is stated in Article 4, paragraph 1 that «each Contracting Party shall take appropriate and necessary … administrative measures to ensure the conservation of the habitats of the wild flora and fauna species, especially those specified in Appendices I and II, and the conservation of endangered natural habitats« (our underlining). Furthermore, in paragraph 2, it is stated that «the Contracting Parties in their planning and development policies shall have regard to the conservation requirements of the areas protected under the preceding paragraph, so as to avoid or minimise as far as possible any deterioration of such areas« (our underlining).

The provisions of the Bern Convention require governments to endeavour to protect those areas in which fauna and flora species as defined in this convention have their natural habitats. Secondly, the pertinent authorities are committed to take the necessary administrative measures to ensure the conservation of such areas. This holds true likewise for threatened natural habitats in general. Finally, Article 4, paragraph 2 sets the requirement that the contracting parties in their «planning and development policies», must endeavour to conserve such areas «so as to avoid or minimise as far as possible any deterioration of such areas.» In other words, the authorities of the signatory countries shall avoid the establishment to begin with of enterprises in natural environments where species such as those defined in the convention have their natural habitats. In such instances where enterprises in these areas are unavoidable, development can only occur in a way such that any detrimental effects on the natural environment are either minimised or altogether avoided. Consequently, in keeping with the spirit of the convention, the authorising powers must necessarily prefer genuine alternatives that do not encroach upon the pertinent areas. If encroachment upon a specific area cannot be avoided, the convention requires that the alternative leading to the least possible disturbance within the natural environment shall be selected, cf. the principle of «best environmental practice».

It is cause for serious reservation that Statnett SF has given no description of the implications and effects on the water nymph plant that may be caused by the laying of the DC cable. Laying the cable will require the digging of a trench which could affect the flow of water with possibly detrimental consequences for the life conditions for this water plant.

As mentioned above, the area is also a staging and resting place for certain bird species registered in Appendices I and II of the Bern Convention. Article 4, paragraph 3 in the convention states that «the Contracting Parties undertake to give special attention to the protection of areas that are of importance for the migratory species specified in Appendices II and III and which are appropriately situated in relation to migration routes, as wintering, staging, feeding, breeding or moulting areas» (our underlining). Norwegian authorities must ensure that the use of the area does not come into conflict with the birds’ use of the area as a resting place. The approval of governmental licensing authorities for the cable to be brought ashore at Lista will be in conflict with the wording of the Bern Convention. It should be particularly emphasised that there is a effective alternative available in the form of bringing the cable ashore in the Feda fjord.

Summary

In view of the preceding discussion, the authorities must not grant the authority to proceed with any enterprise that affects the shores at Lista. Should the plans for a DC connection between Norway and Germany be carried out as they are presently formulated, they will be in violation of the Bern Convention on several counts.

Both the bringing of the cables ashore at Lista and the electrode stations with their accompanying aerial cables could come into conflict with the preservation of endangered and vulnerable plant and animals species, Norwegian biotopes and Norway’s own international commitments to preserve biological diversity in the world.

Conclusion

The Bellona Foundation considers that the Norwegian approval of the cable enterprise for two the Norway-Germany connections in its present form would violate several articles of the Bern Convention. This is all the more unfortunate in view of the availability of a better, more environmentally sound alternatives which would eliminate a number of the indicated dangers as well as being fully viable from an economic perspective.

The running of aerial electrode cables through the proposed trace alignment would undoubtedly increase the likelihood of collisions and therefore mortality rates in a number of migratory bird species. Amongst these are several endangered species of predacious birds which Norway through ratification of the Bern Convention is committed to protect. The plans in their present form are therefore in violation of a number of Bern Convention provisions. The establishment of the electrode station and the accompanying aerial electrode cable is further subject to particular criticism when considered against the equally satisfying and genuine alternative of using a type of cable that eliminates the need for the entire electrode station and its cable.

The entire plan to bring the cables ashore at Lista and the establishment of the electrode station with its accompanying aerial electrode cable could come into conflict with the conservation of endangered and vulnerable plant and animals species, biotopes in Norway and Norway’s own international commitments towards the preservation of biological diversity.

Enclosures:

Bellona, Arbeidsnotat nr. 3-97: Bellonas høringsuttalelser i saken av 30.05.97, 18.09.97 og 24.10.97 samt brev til SFT av 10.04.97 (Bellona Working Paper No. 3-97: Consultative statements in the case of May 30, 1997 and October 24, 1997 including a letter to SFT on April 10, 1997 concerning the case).

Letter to the Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy, 28.09.98

Bellona’s most recent appeal

Map over the project

References

Andersen, Rolf Martin, Brev til OED av 15.12.97 med klage på NVEs vedtak av 24.11.97 (Letter to the Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy of December 15, 1997 in protest of NVE’s approval of November 24, 1997.)

Bellona, Arbeidsnotat nr. 3-97: Bellonas høringsuttalelser i saken av 30.05.97, 18.09.97 og 24.10.97 samt brev til SFT av 10.04.97 (Bellona Working Paper No. 3-97: Consultative statements in the case of May 30, 1997 and October 24, 1997 including a letter to SFT on April 10, 1997 concerning the case).

Bevanger, I., and Thingstad, P.G., 1998, «Forholdet fugl – konstruksjoner for overføring av elektrisk energi» (Birds versus infrastructure for the transmission of electric energy», Økoforsk, 1988:1

Grimsby, 1997 (a): «Elektrodeledning traseforslag 2.0 og 2.1 mellom Breivika, Flekkefjord og eksisterende 300 kv-ledning Feda – Åna – Sira» (Trace alignment proposals 2.0 and 2.1 for power lines between Breivika, Flekkefjord and the existing 300 kv cable Feda -Åna – Sira. Impact statement: The potential risk of collision between migratory birds of prey and power lines) Statnett/Viking Cable commissioned report.

Grimsby, 1997 (b): «Biologisk mangfold i Flekkefjord: registrering og forvaltning av nøkkelområder» (Biological diversity in Flekkefjord: registration and administration of key areas). Flekkefjord municipality report.

Grimsby, 1998, «Rovfugletrekket ved Mønstermyr, Flekkefjord kommune i perioden 1990-94» (The migration of predacious birds at Mønstermyr, Flekkefjord municipality in the period 1990-94).

Lundberg, A., and Rydgren, K., 1994: «Havstrand på Sørlandet. Regionale trekk og botaniske verdier» (The shores of Southern Norway: regional characteristics and botanical treasures), NINA research report 59:1-127.

NIVA, 1996, «Likestrømskabel mellom Sør-Norge og kontinentet» (DC cable between southern Norway and the Continent. Water circulation and anticipated chlorine concentrations at electrode station sites), NIVA report no. LNR 3485-96 (Golmen, L.G., and Nygaard, E.).

NVE, EK-paper no. 31/97, «Likestrømsforbindelser mellom Norge og kontinentet» (DC connections between Norway and the Continent.) Addresses licensing and the grounds for this, expropriation permits, approval of completed impact assessments and a summary of consultative hearings.

Pedersen, O., 1995: «Lundevågen fuglefredningsområde (Farsund, Vest Agder) – vurdering av naturvitenskapelige verdier og forvaltning». (Lundevågen bird preservation area (Farsund, Vest Agder) – an evaluation of natural scientific values and administration). University of Trondheim, Science Museum.

Statnett, Viking Cable and Eurokabel, 1996, «Likestrømsforbindelser mellom Norge og kontinentet: søknad om konsesjon, ekspropriasjon og forhåndstiltredelse for likestrømsforbindelser fra Feda og Tonstad ut til grunnlinjen (DC connections between Norway and the Continent: application for licensing, expropriation, and pre-approval of DC connections from Feda and Tonstad to the design line.) Application + 3 reports, October 1996.

Statnett SF et al, 1997, «Likestrømsforbindelser mellom Norge og kontinentet – Likestrømskabler inn Fedafjorden, – kostnader, – konsekvenser (DC connections between Norway and the Continent: DC cables into Feda fjord – costs and consequences.) February 1997.

Statnett – NorNed kabel, Viking Cable and Eurokabel, 1997: «Likestrømsforbindelser mellom Norge og kontinentet. Tilleggsutredning for flatkabel. (DC connections between Norway and the Continent; supplementary assessment of flat cables.) July 1997.