Norway's Progress Party (Frp) has declared it will not support halting the controversial electrification of the Melkøya gas plant, arguing the project has progressed too far to reverse. This stance puts the party at odds with the socialist Red Party (Rødt) and creates a complex political calculus for Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre's government as it navigates energy security, climate goals, and soaring northern power prices.
"We will not support the Red Party's proposal to withdraw the license for the electrification of Melkøya," said Frp's energy spokesperson, Tor Mikkel Wara. "We still believe the project is a bad idea, because it is expensive and because it uses up electricity. But the project has simply come too far."
This position reveals a stark political paradox. The Frp, traditionally a champion of Norway's oil and gas industry, now finds itself advocating for the continued use of polluting gas turbines at the Hammerfest facility to free up grid power for other northern industries. The party argues that pulling the plug on the electrification plan, approved for state-owned Equinor in 2023, would waste billions in sunk investments and fail to address the region's looming energy crunch.
The Point of No Return
According to Frp, the Melkøya project is already half-finished. License partners have invested approximately ten billion Norwegian kroner and entered into a web of binding contracts. To revoke the electrification permit now, they argue, would be economically reckless and legally fraught. "Melkøya is a poor environmental measure, because it is too expensive," Wara conceded. "But we must simply realize that the train has left the station and make the best of it."
The project aims to replace the plant's existing gas-fired turbines with electricity from the mainland grid, significantly cutting CO2 emissions from Norway's single largest point source of pollution. However, this shift would draw a massive amount of power—equivalent to the consumption of a city like Trondheim—from a northern grid already straining under demand from new data centers, battery factories, and green industry.
A Northern Power Squeeze
The core of Frp's concern is a potential "power squeeze" in Nord-Norge. "We must avoid Northern Norway ending up in a power crunch," said Frp's representative from Nordland, Kristoffer Sivertsen. "Large amounts of power are being reserved for Melkøya, and there is great frustration in the business community that there isn't power for other ventures."
This frustration echoes from fishing towns in Finnmark to industrial parks in Mo i Rana. Local leaders fear that dedicating such a large block of renewable energy to an offshore gas facility will stifle other economic development and push consumer electricity prices higher. Frp is channeling this anxiety, positioning itself as a pragmatic defender of northern Norway's broader industrial interests, even if it means a setback for the region's climate ledger.
Prime Minister Støre has previously promised that an amount of renewable power equal to Melkøya's needs would be produced in Finnmark by 2030. Frp dismisses this pledge as unattainable. "They are nowhere near achieving that, and that is a problem," Wara stated bluntly.
Frp's Counter-Proposal: Gas Without the Tax
Unable to stop electrification, Frp is advancing an alternative. The party now demands that Melkøya's entire power demand be supplied by gas turbines equipped with carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology. Crucially, they also want such a plant to be exempt from Norway's CO2 tax, arguing it would be covered by the EU's Emissions Trading System (ETS) anyway.
"Now we are extending a hand to help the government with the power lift they have not managed to carry out," said Sivertsen. He described Frp's solution as "better, cheaper, and ready here and now." The party frames the choice for other political factions as a test of priorities: support expensive climate measures or help secure Northern Norway's power supply and economic future.
However, their proposal faces significant hurdles. While carbon capture technology exists, it remains prohibitively expensive and is not yet deployed at scale on a gas power plant in Norway. Sivertsen acknowledged that a gas-with-CCS solution would be "terribly expensive" and not commercially ready, a cost that would ultimately fall on taxpayers. This admission underscores the difficult trade-offs at the heart of Norway's energy policy.
The Political Calculus in the Storting
Frp's move reshuffles the parliamentary deck. The minority Labour-Centre government must now seek a viable majority for its Melkøya policy. The Red Party's push to cancel electrification entirely lacks broad support. The Conservative Party (Høyre) has historically supported electrification for its emissions cuts, but may be swayed by energy security arguments. The Socialist Left Party (SV) is a firm proponent of electrification as a climate necessity.
Frp's new stance creates a potential, though ideologically awkward, alliance with parties on the left who fear the impact on power prices. It essentially offers the government a way out of its renewable power promise, but at the cost of abandoning a flagship climate project. The government's response will signal whether its commitment to cutting industrial emissions can withstand the pressure of immediate economic concerns in the north.
The Bigger Picture: Norway's Climate Crossroads
The Melkøya debate is a microcosm of Norway's national dilemma. The country is a global leader in renewable energy production yet remains a major exporter of fossil fuels. It has ambitious domestic climate targets but its economy is deeply tied to oil and gas. The electrification of offshore platforms like Melkøya was a key strategy to square this circle—reducing the carbon footprint of hydrocarbon production while keeping the industry alive.
Frp's intervention suggests that this strategy is colliding with physical and political limits. The grid capacity in northern Norway is not infinite. The party is betting that voters and politicians will prioritize affordable power for homes and businesses over the carbon accounting of fossil fuel production. This pits two forms of green transition against each other: decarbonizing existing industry versus powering new growth.
As the debate continues in the halls of the Storting, the future of Hammerfest and the wider Finnmark region hangs in the balance. Will Norway choose the path of idealistic climate policy, or a pragmatic, if polluting, guarantee of energy stability? Frp has laid down its marker, forcing other parties to show their cards on an issue that cuts to the very heart of Norway's identity as an energy nation and a climate champion. The final decision will reveal much about what the country values most as it navigates an uncertain economic future.