"Get power?"

As available oil supplies dwindle and demand for new sustainable technologies rises, the viability of energy resources has become a global concern.  There are many complicated steps that must be taken towards environmentally responsible energy production and though every country faces a unique host of obstacles, they also have their own artillery of resources and opportunities to excel at using them wisely.

I have been impressed by Finland’s dedication to energy sustainability throughout my time here.   This small but mighty northern country keeps a close eye on consumption in homes, agricultural production and industry. Although energy use per capita in Finland is a little higher than the European Union average, Finns still use 30% less than Americans.  There are a couple reasons why Finland uses more energy; the need for heat in the cold north and the powering of paper mills.  Industry accounts for about 50% of total consumption with heat taking about 20% from the total.  Finland has a colorful energy palate featuring 25% oil, 11% gas, 16% nuclear, 15% coal, 21% wood and 6% peat. A quarter of energy produced is renewable, mostly coming from industrial byproducts from saw mills, paper plants, thinned forests and waste water.  Most homes have wood stoves for heat we well as baking and many have wood fueled boiler systems that heat water and plates beneath the floors. There are almost no radiators in Finnish homes these days. Additionally, the Finnish government subsidizes green technology.  

On the topic of Finnish wood burning we had a teacher tell us once, "Finns love to burn wood... in the house, in the forest, in the sauna... everywhere except in the car."  A hilarious truth and outstanding quote.  

Efficiency is another strong focus in terms of environmental mindedness. Precision and tact in agriculture and forest production is a point of pride in Finns, as is the willingness to use new technologies that increase productivity. Feed efficiency for livestock is a true science analyzing nutrient utilization and perfecting the percent of feed that makes it to the final meat product.  This helps reduce wasted grain and grasses while ensuring the health of the animals.

Though I commend the way Finns regard energy use, there is one aspect I have a hard time wrapping my head around; the consideration of peat as a renewable resource. Peatlands are saturated bogs with dead organic plant matter and moss accumulated over thousands of years. Though these areas are not suitable for forest or agriculture production, they serve many important ecological and hydrological processes, provide habitat for sensitive species habitats, and sequester large amounts of greenhouse gasses that are released when the peat is dug up. Finland is about 1/3 peatland though about 55% of that has been drained for forestry and agricultural production, 12% is protected and less than 1% is used for peat production.  Impacts of mining peat can be costly and require extensive drainage ditches and sedimentation traps to mitigate the damage.  What’s more, it could take 1000 years to grow one meter of peat; not exactly renewable. I’ll be taking a closer look at the impacts of peat mining in my regulation post. Valerie and I have been asking around trying to find out how effective these mitigation measures are and what sorts of impacts peat mining has left on the Finnish landscape but it has been difficult to coax out the information we are looking for. California would treat peat mining so much differently than Finland, mostly because our strict land use policies.  On top of the weighty environmental impacts, simply the fact that peat can preserve ancient archaeological finds would turn production on its head.

It seems that Finland is starting to realize the implications involved with peat, though many people still see it as the golden ticket for natural heat and electricity. When you consider the alternative to peat, foreign coal, it’s difficult to say which is more costly.  Scientists are constantly playing cat and mouse with the learning curve. It seems every time we think we have found a more sustainable way to power our lives, further research puts us back at square one scratching our heads (see ethanol and the Prius for textbook examples). As consumers it is often difficult to tell whether something marketed as being ‘green’ actually is. One thing that kills me every time – water bottles that use 30% lest plastic. Just get a reusable water bottle. I’m surprised I hardly ever see them floating around Finland, probably because you can earn 20-40 cents by returning the empty bottle.  I’m also surprised by how often I see bottles and cans floating by the riverbanks along with other litter.  Yesterday at the train platform among a group of people waiting for the train, a man finished a Twix candy bar and nonchalantly dropped the wrapper on the ground. Forget the trashcan 20 meters away. I was floored.

If people won’t take the time to put their trash in a garbage can, how are we supposed to convince the public to support shifts towards environmental responsibility?  Social values hold a large stake in the way sustainability is navigated. Should we install a grid of wind turbines or is it not worth the damage to the scenery? Should we build a nuclear power plant down the road or would it be too large a human hazard?  I’m concerned that in America, unless the population shows its support for green efforts by voting accordingly, our politicians will continue to focus on other things.

Economic aspects also play a large role in the feasibility of applying new technology.  Systems that are more efficient must eventually pay for themselves if they are to be seriously considered by consumers.  The market potential for products is also a concern. In California, we have abundant wood resources and many forests that need thinning. However, obtaining a thinning permit makes pulling teeth look like a walk in the park and even if we started producing wood for bioheat or electricity, those systems aren’t very popular or readily available.  Considering how cheap electricity is we won’t be switching to biofuels for a long time.

 An area’s ecological potential for energy use is another determinant for production.  Coming from California, I’m impressed by the utilization of wood resources in Finland, but worried about the peat and confused about why a country with so many lakes and rivers doesn’t use more hydroelectricity.  In sunny California, solar panels are becoming more common but we still rely largely on natural gas and coal, most of which is imported from other states. Different landscapes also come with separate sets of natural disaster concerns that effect production. Finland often harvests tree stumps and root systems for bioenergy production in suitable areas. This would not happen in California for purposes of soil disturbances and potential for erosion on our mostly sloped forests.  What works well in Finland might not be as suitable in California and vice versa. I think there is a lot to be said about using what is feasible and readily available in the area. Isn’t that what being resourceful is?

It’s hard to fairly compare Finland and America. The Unites States is a world superpower federation that runs on a representative democracy and constitutional republic, hosting a wide variety of cultures and landscapes. Finland is a small but proud, subarctic country with a population less than 2% of America’s and it runs on a parliamentary republic with social democratic influences. Our governments have distinctive sets of proprieties and though the people are not all that different, I sometimes feel like we are focused on different things.  I hope in the future America might look towards its naturally available resources for energy use and seriously start considering ways to phase out fossil fuel dependence.  I’m also interested in seeing how peat production in Finland changes in future years, if at all.

A side note: I was trying to think of a catchier title for this post than "Energy Use" and I couldn't pass up another funny quote from my time here. When Valerie or I would ask Seppo, the very helpful man at the school's front desk, to unlock the gym he would hold up his arm as if flexing and ask, "Get power?" We loved it so much we're thinking about working it into a future Cal Poly Logging Team shirt design. It's also a great working title for this post. 

Finnish Energy Resource Use - Borrowed from a powerpoint by Jussi Esala,
a SeAMK Administrator and Energy specialist