In comparison with American politicians, Danish politicians and government officials usually seem straightforward, reasonable, and pragmatic. But sometimes they make mistakes, suppress information, and get caught lying or making embarrassing denials.

Sludge dumped in the Sound. Photo: Klimabevægelsen © Klimabevægelsen

Lynetteholm (DK) is one of the largest construction projects in Danish history. It is intended to create a new district of Copenhagen on an artificial peninsula in the harbor. Extending from the island of Amager across the canal from the city center, it would accomplish several things: give the city a barrier against violent weather caused by climate change, provide housing for 35,000 people, and improve transportation with a metro line and a tunnel. It is to be completed by 2070 at a cost estimated at DKK 20 billion ($3 billion), which is supposed to be recouped by the sale of property.

The project was first proposed in 2018 by the preceding, right-wing administration and finally approved by a large majority of Parliament in June 2021. The By & Havn (City & Harbor) construction company, which is owned mainly by Copenhagen Municipality, began work in January 2022 with Minister of Transportation Benny Engelbrecht presiding at the launch. The event was met with protests from boaters, fishermen, and environmentalists.

NIMBay

The project requires that 2.5 million cubic meters of sludge from the harbor floor be dug up, and it was to be dumped in Køge Bay in the Sound between Denmark and Sweden. The sludge contains heavy metals and quicksilver, but its sponsors maintained that the toxic elements didn’t exceed the recommended limits. Nevertheless, critics took the Transportation Ministry to court because the environmental consequences had not been fully addressed in the projections. The project also requires that 80 million tons of earth—2.5 million truckloads—and 28 million cubic meters of sand be driven through Copenhagen to the site.

On March 29 of this year, the Danish Broadcasting Corporation (DR) reported that in early May 2021, Sweden’s Minister for the Environment, Per Bolund, had written to the Danish Transportation Ministry about the project. Bolund had protested strongly against the dumping of sludge so close to Swedish waters and asked for further studies of its effects.

“Everything on the table”

Engelbrecht and Minister of the Environment Lea Wermelin never told Parliament about Boland’s letter. But at parliamentary hearings on the project (DK) on  May 27, 2021, both ministers said, in almost identical phrasing, that the administration “is a proponent of putting everything on the table so that we can make the most informed policy decision.” A week later they met with Bolund, who repeated his objection and request. They still refrained from informing the Danish MPs of Sweden’s position, and the next day Parliament voted to approve the project.

When the news of the Swedish criticism of the project broke, Danish opposition MPs were outraged that they had been misled. According to Peter Pagh, Professor of environmental law at the University of Copenhagen, the Danish ministers’ withholding of the information appeared to be a breach of EU rules that would disqualify the project’s approval. Meanwhile, the sludge was being dumped in Køge Bay. Benny Engelbrecht was no longer Transport Minister, and his replacement, Trine Bramsen, could not comment on what happened last year. Wermelin declined to be interviewed.

Support from Texas riverbeds

That wasn’t the only glitch. A month after the Swedish protest letter surfaced, DR reported that the environmental justification for the project came from an American article (DK) from 1981. The study purportedly showed that dumping the sludge ”would result in only an insignificant effect on waterways.”  Besides being dated, the article concerned conditions much different from those entailed in Lynetteholm and had little relevance for the current project. The author of the American report, Fred Lee, said he “didn’t understand how the organization behind the project could use our data to come to the conclusion that there is no significant environmental effect.”

Bramsen and Wermelin couldn’t answer questions about the article. They referred DR to By & Havn, which in turn referred DR to Rambøll, the engineering consulting firm that had prepared the environmental impact report. Rambøll didn’t respond either immediately but later released a statement saying that it had also used other research besides the 1981 article.

A nose for pollution

On May 4, Bramsen announced that the dumping in Køge Bay would stop and that she would commission a new study on alternative methods for disposing the sludge. Shortly afterward, the two ministers each received a næse (nose), or formal censure (DK), from Parliament’s Transportation Committee for withholding information. Since Engelbrecht was no longer transportation minister, he couldn’t be censured, so the distinction was assigned to Bramsen, the current officeholder. Parliamentary censure has no concrete consequences.

Sweep it under the rug

On June 2, a large majority of Parliament agreed on a new solution (DK) for the disposal of the sludge. It will be built into the foundation beneath the artificial peninsula.  “Reason has finally prevailed,” said Henning Urban, Mayor of Stevns Municipality, which lies south of Køge Bay. The new plan will entail extra costs, of course, which one party transportation spokesperson compared to an extortion sum that biker gangs demand for minor offenses or negligence.