On my way back from Romania, I went through Copenhagen. It was a bit special for me to conclude my project with Copenhagen as it was partly because of the failure of the Summit of Copenhagen in 2009 that I wanted to leave and meet the non-politic stakeholders of sustainable development in the world. I only spent one week in Copenhagen. I met Peder Andersen, professor at the University of Copenhagen and researcher at the Institute of Food and Economic Ressources. I wanted to understand why Denmark has the reputation as being a model in environmental issues, and whether they deserve it. He talked to me about their tax system, their wind energy and the protection of their biodiversity.

Why is Denmark often considered as a model of sustainable development ? I’m already hearing you answering "wind energy". And it’s true, but not only, because to develop wind energy as they do, they need a certain legal and geographic framework. First of all, the tax system enables to subsidize renewable energy projects, mostly windmills, by taxing the most important polluters (like industries and cars). They have been developing wind energy this way for 20 years and Denmark is today one of the biggest producers of wind energy in the world. The share of renewable energy in their electricity mix is very high (30%). But Danish people are not the only ones consuming this energy : their neighbours from Norway, Sweden and Germany import it when it’s very windy, because then Denmark is overproducing energy. Sometimes, Denmark even pay them to export it because it costs when the electricity stays in the system without being used. So, with the ficklenesses of wind energy, Denmark needs neighboors to make the consumption of electricity match with the production, "to handle chances and demand", as explains Peder.

And to make their energy system even more flexible, Denmark has developed an idea that Claude Dumas, CEO of TM4 (Quebec company producing electric motors for cars and permanent magnet generators for wind turbines), had told me about last January : the complementarity of wind and hydro power (very flexible energy as it can be stored). Thus, when Denmark is in oversupply (when there is "too much" wind), Norway slows down the activity of its dams and imports some Danish electricity (and the exact contrary happens when there is no wind). And as the two countries are close enough, the two energies are substitutable. After the tax system, we see that the location is also a great help to the development of wind energy.

According to Peder, France could have the same share of wind power in its electricity mix as Denmark. "It’s just a question of your willingness to pay. We give a lot of subsidize and at the same time we have energy taxes that make it favorable to find alternatives." (what I don’t know is whether the price of electricity is higher than in France)

However, in addition to wind power, imported coal is used too ("and this is the worst thing we can do"). But, as in Helsinki, Peder guaranteed that the fumes were especially filtered to make them cleaner and less harmful. I looked for more information on internet about the Danish energy mix, and I read the following paper (publication of the french group Centrale Energies), I suggest you take a look if you can read french. And indeed we learn that with this important use of coal, the carbon emissions per capita are higher in Denmark than in France (we are helped with our nuclear power, do not forget). The difference is that renewable energy in Denmark is growing fastly, it’s not in France. The "climate committee set up by the government" has even set a goal of an energy mix with 100% of renewable energy by 2050.

Let me conclude this first part of the article about the Danish wind. It is said in the publication of Centrale Energies : "The excellent reputation of Denmark’s energy / climate is well deserved : it is the European country with the best performance in terms of energy efficiency per unit of GDP and has succeeded in increasing the share of renewable energies from 0% to 30% in its electricity mix since the 1970s. They started from a bad situation (99% fossil) and had refused the nuclear energy, so they are penalized in performance by its very carbon electricity, at least until their vision 2050 "zero carbon electricity" takes shape."

My first pictures of Denmark, crossing by ferry from Germany. Wind turbines, everywhere.

Now, a few words about some other assets, less known, of Denmark. The legislation is a second instrument (after taxes) used to take the country on a sustainable way. It really takes environmental impacts into account. Legally, they must be considered when a bridge is built (there is a project of bridge between Germany and Denmark), when a business is created or to build a new highway. In other words, the environmental impacts are taken into account in the "decision making process".

Agriculture is also strictly regulated to protect biodiversity and especially groundwater. The country wants to have a high quality drinking water that can come directly from the basement to the consumer. With this policy, drinking water is just filtered but not treated with chemicals.

Thanks to these various instruments used intelligently, Denmark has preserved its environment very well, according to Peder. Recently, three protected areas were created to preserve the nature. These are large areas where, for example, industrial development is very limited (or even forbidden, if I understood well) and everything is done to preserve biodiversity. These areas are used mainly for agriculture and tourism.

Eventually, Peder mentioned another Danish asset : its people. It seems that the Danes have some environmental awareness, and one of the consequences is the strong development of organic products and organic labels, especially in supermarkets.

When I asked Peder what might be the “lacks” of his country in climate performance, after having talked about the use of coal, he just explained to me the fields in which they could do a lot of progress (not that the country is behaving badly so far). They make progress to recover energy from waste, setting up central heating systems based on this fuel. Peder considers that there is still much to do in this area.

Much of the pollution comes from urban transport. Cars are taxed (up to € 3,300 / year for highly polluting cars, according to Centrale Energies) and the installation of a toll at the entrance of Copenhagen , as there is in Stockholm, has been in discussion but it was postponed. Peder still considers that the Danes could take even more the train rather than the car.

Energy efficiency, especially in buildings, is also a field where the potential gains are very important. "One of the problems today is that you get the energy when it’s windy, and also during the night when you use less energy”. So one of the ideas Peder involved in is that if people have incentives to do the dishwashing or the washing of the clothes and all that demand of energy during the night, then if you have a technical equipment, the only demand you have as a consumer is "I want it to be done between 8pm and 6am". And then, the system can switch on your dishwasher when there is an oversupply of energy, during this period." This idea reminds you something (I hope) ? Lyn Bartram, a professor at SFU in Vancouver told me about this idea, planned for Vancouver Greenest City . Once again, I found the same idea in two different places of the globe. I’m glad.

Next danish stop : Christiania.

See you soon, Be green, Ben