How to Achieve a More Resource‐Efficient and Climate‐Neutral Energy System by 2030? Views of Nordic Stakeholders

Abstract

The Nordic countries pursue ambitious energy transition goals through national energy policies and in the framework of Nordic cooperation. We propose that the transition is realistic only if it involves the public, private, and nongovernmental organization sectors as regulators, innovators, and advocates of relevant policies and solutions representing the multitude of interests involved. We examine these interests through Q methodological experiments, where 43 expert stakeholders' rank-order statements concerning their preferred policy measures vis-à-vis the electric energy system. Factor analysis of these subjectively held views produces three distinct views. The first two enjoy strong inter-Nordic support. The first view prioritizes market and grid development, and the second view prioritizes electric transport, and solar and wind power. The third, "Finnish" view seeks to enhance security of supply, also via microgrids, and prioritizes biofuels over electric transport. Examining the common ground among the three views, we find that enhanced cooperation requires reinforced stakeholder interaction and policy coordination. Views of Nordic Stakeholders ¿Cómo lograr un sistema de energía más eficiente en el uso de recursos y de clima neutral para el año 2030? Opiniones de los interesados nórdicos:Los países nórdicos tienen ambiciosos objetivos de transición energética a través de políticas energéticas nacionales y en el marco de la cooperación nórdica. Proponemos que la transición será realista solo si involucra a los sectores público, privado y de las ONG co mo reguladores, innovadores y defensores de políticas y soluciones relevantes que representan la multitud de intereses involucrados. Examinamos estos intereses a través de experimentos de metodología Q, donde 43 partes interesadas expertas clasifican las declaraciones de orden con respecto a sus medidas de política preferidas en lo que tiene que ver con el sistema de energía eléctrica. El análisis factorial de estas vistas sostenidas subjetivamente produce tres vistas distintas. Las dos primeras gozan de un fuerte apoyo inter-nórdico. La primera vista prioriza el desarrollo del mercado y la red, y la segunda, el transporte eléctrico, y la energía solar y eólica. La tercera, la vista 'finlandesa' busca mejorar la seguridad del suministro, también a través de microrredes, y prioriza los biocombustibles sobre el transporte eléctrico. Al examinar el terreno común entre los puntos de vista, encontramos que una mayor cooperación requiere una interacción reforzada de los interesados y la coordinación de políticas. PALABRAS CLAVE: Palabras Clave: energía, cambio climático, países desarrollados, medio ambiente About the AuthorsSarah Kilpeläinen is a doctoral student in the Faculty of Management and Business at Tampere University, Finland. She works on energy policy and sustainable energy transitions.Pasi Toivanen is a doctoral student in the Faculty of Management and Business at Tampere University, Finland. He works on energy policy and sustainable development.Pinja Leh...

Developing Nordic Cooperation in Renewable Electricity Policy: Exploring Views from Finland and Sweden

“…Respondents saw the development of transmission infrastructure and the permitting processes as the main bottlenecks in further developing Nordic cooperation. This is in line with previous research (Kilpeläinen et al, 2019;Tenggren et al, 2016, stakeholder reports (Statnett et al, 2016, and the national bottlenecks identified by the respondents in the interviews.…”

“…While the national interest in companies was highlighted, the overall benefits were seen to outweigh the concerns about national industries (FI07). Previous research also pointed to disagreement among the Nordic countries over the issue of bioenergy, with Finland being the Nordic country where support for bioenergy, especially in the transport sector, is more pronounced than in the other Nordic countries (Kilpeläinen et al, 2019). However, in the present study, these points of disagreement did not emerge in the interviews, instead, the focus of the discussion on biofuels was on it being a potential area of common interest and cooperation.…”

“…The phasing-out of the subsidy schemes in Finland and Sweden is expected to positively impact investment security, as it ensures that investors can rely on the market prices of emissions and electricity (FI02), reflective of the preference for a market-based approach. This preference has also emerged in previous research on Nordic stakeholders as a cornerstone of developing the electric energy system (Kilpeläinen, Aalto, Toivanen, Lehtonen, & Holttinen, 2019).This contrasts with research more critical of market optimism, instead arguing that market-based incentives need to be better supported by strong policymaking (Moe, 2015;Mundaca & Markandya, 2016).…”

The Potential of Biomethane in Replacing Fossil Fuels in Heavy Transport—A Case Study on Finland

“…They can generate observations to be subsequently explored in other typical cases [31]-in this context, heavy transport intensive countries with a relatively high biomethane potential, of which there are many in the EU. As suggested above, Finland is a somewhat difficult case in this group owing to the dominant role of the forest industry and, hence, a vested interest in liquid biofuels [45], while the widespread use of truck-trailer combinations curtails the prospects for electrification and necessitates considering several options, including biomethane. In other words, if biomethane solutions are found to be readily applicable in Finland, it is reasonable to expect the same for other cases in this group of countries.…”

Deciphering the Effectiveness of Humic Substances and Biochar Modified Digestates on Soil Quality and Plant Biomass Accumulation

“…[2]. Low (neutral)-carbon agriculture (LCA) [3] strategies and environment-friendly agricultural practices [4] are examples of those approaches that focus, among other things, on balancing labile and stable soil organic carbon (SOC) in the soil [5]. Regarding organic-based fertilizers with conventional production technologies, there is still potential for further study and adoption of new types and combinations of organic sources in agricultural soils [6,7].…”