PROACT ICELAND
Keep up the pressure
Home | ALCOA'S REPLY | NEW INITIATIVE | THE WILDERNESS | Profit/Loss Analysis

Proact hasn't finished with Norsk Hydro yet. It's nice to see them picking up the gauntlet though ;-)

The predictable corporate arguments trotted out by Norsk Hydro can, and should be rebutted. More importantly we have now smoked them out and they have entered the debate. In addition they have named their 'front men' in Iceland. See...

The Iceland Connection - Reydaral


... and the political and business carreer of one of the key Icelandic players (PDF file) is worth more than a cursory glance...

Interesting Connections!



But tabs are being kept on the worldwide activities of Norwegian firms - and there are no shortage of reports on Norsk Hydro...

NorWatch



Keep up the pressure by sending the letter below to Norsk Hydro [and Reydaral*] - the news media in Iceland and Norway, as well as Proact, are included as adressees - please move them to the cc. box of your mail programme.

email to Norsk Hydro and Reydaral

[*Reyerdal mail address, as given on the website, removed as it is rejected!?]

Cut and Paste from here
-----------------------

UNCONVINCING ARGUMENTS AND CONTRADICTIONS



The Managing Director
Mr. Eyvind Reiten
Norsk Hydro ASA
N-0240 Oslo
Norway

Dear Mr Reiten,

It is at least a hopeful sign that Mr. Thomas Knutzen has replied on your behalf to a small selection of the hundreds of messages sent to you on the Karahnjukar power project. For those not fortunate to have received a direct reply a copy has been posted on the internet.

Your arguments are not only predictable. They are also unconvincing and contradictory.

1. De-coupling of the power and aluminium smelter projects.

You are putting up a lot of smoke here in trying to convince your critics that "...development of the power plant ... is an entirely Icelandic project". Who are you trying to fool? Without the power requirements of the smelting plant there would be no need for this gargantuan hydroelectric project; nor would it be in any way financially feasible. There must be a lot of hidden calculations to make the books balance even as currently planned. What aren't you telling us?

2. Hydro do not intend to interfere with the public debate in Iceland.

Other than the fact that Reydaral (in which you have a 50% interest "..partly owned by Icelandic investors and Hydro.." is unbecoming modesty on your part) is in the centre of the public debate. At the very least your role might be described as playing Pontius Pilate in the affair. It would be interesting to know who the Icelandic investors are. It is interesting that the political lobby is so strong and well-positioned.

3. Sustainable use of aluminium; and other environmental concerns.

All very laudable; but fewer cars are even better than lighter cars and produce even less harmful emissions. You neglect to mention the scourge of the modern world - the throw-away drinks can. We could do with fewer of these too.

We are sure that your planned smelting plant would be 'squeaky-clean' and will meet all the legal environmental requirements.


4. We can still avoid a planned natural catastrophe.

You miss the message though. An increasing number of people, in Europe and elsewhere, would far prefer to preserve one of the few large-scale, intact and bio-diverse landscapes left in Europe untouched by ANY form of human intervention. Flooding this unique landscape, and destroying the habitats of numerous species of flora and fauna FOREVER, would amount to desecration of a common natural resource which belongs to us all; and not just to those who believe they can buy and use the planet to make even more profit.

We are pleased that you have now at least recognised your responsibility by no longer avoiding discussion on this matter and copies of this reply will be sent to the news media in Iceland and Norway to keep them informed too.

We hope that you will now give full consideration to pulling out of this project; thereby avoiding treating an unique wilderness area to the extreme environmental abuse which, in view of our dwindling natural planetary treasures, should be a thing of the past in a civilised and educated society of which you no doubt consider yourselves to be a part. Far from influencing the public debate in Iceland, which your plans triggered off in the first place, now is your chance to use your 'modest' influence and interest to prevent a "planned natural catastrophe".


Yours sincerely,

(Name and address)

Click on the Arctic tern for more info on Proact...


Proact Team

Proact/Birding in Europe David Conlin 2001