This thesis is based on a case study of a planned wind power park in Vindafjord municipality in western Norway. It seeks to understand how the stakeholders involved in the plan talk about the proposed wind power park, especially the involved environmental issues. It incorporates both the global environmental arguments (wind power can contribute to mitigate current climate change) and the local environmental arguments (wind power includes vast interferences in the local nature at Døldarheia). This thesis employs a discourse analysis to detect the shared meanings in the stakeholders’ arguments in relation to the planned park and the environmental issues involved. There are two main discourses in the case of Døldarheia: the win-win discourse and the nature conservation discourse. Both discourses claim to represent the interests of the environment, but do this on two different levels. The win-win discourse attempts to represent the global environment by emphasizing that wind power at Døldarheia will help mitigate current climate change. Conversely the nature conservation discourse attempts to represent the local environment by arguing that the interference in the landscape, and the flora and fauna it contains, at Døldarheia is too significant. Both discourses argue that the opposing discourse is mainly concerned with interests other than environmental concerns, and both discard basic elements in each other’s environmental argumentation. My findings show how actors positioned within both discourses use environmental arguments to build legitimacy around their stance towards the planned wind power park. This implies that arguing for the “interests “of the environment is perceived as something fundamentally positive. This thesis also emphasizes the importance of understanding the context for wind power parks, which allows a proper examination of environmental arguments regarding wind power.