Finland Energy
Nuclear power plant at Loviisa (Lovisa) on the southern
coast, about seventy-five kilometers east of Helsinki
Courtesy Embassy of Finland, Washington
Even before the 1973 oil crisis, energy was a major
concern,
and Finland had started energy-saving programs meant to
cut
dependence on imports and to maintain export
competitiveness.
Nevertheless, the country had one of the world's highest
per
capita rates of energy consumption. The cold climate
required
that the Finns expend about a quarter of their energy
supply for
space heating, while the relatively long distances
separating
Finland's settlements required heavy fuel use for
transportation.
The importance of energy-intensive processing industries,
including not only the lumber, pulp, and paper sectors but
also
the minerals and basic metals sectors, further expanded
the
country's energy needs. In the late 1980s, Finland
consumed about
30 million tons of oil equivalent per year, distributed
among
solid fuels (15 percent), liquid fuels (40 percent), and
electricity (45 percent), which put annual per capita
consumption
at 0.6 tons of oil equivalent--about 50 percent higher
than per
capita consumption in the United States.
Domestic sources could cover only about 30 percent of
total
energy demand, and imported energy supplied the remainder.
In
1986 the government estimated that, even assuming
continued
efforts at conservation, energy demand would grow by at
least 1
percent per year during the 1990s and that demand for
electricity
would grow even faster. By the late 1980s, policy makers
faced
important choices in their efforts to maintain secure
supplies of
electricity and other forms of energy. Four major goals
governed
policy decisions: increasing the use of domestic energy
sources,
providing for possible import shortages, expanding
electricity
production, and improving conservation programs.
The state played a strong role in energy management.
The
government used state-owned energy enterprises and price
controls
to influence both production and consumption. The state
owned the
most important energy supply enterprises, including
Imatran
Voima, the largest electricity producer, which managed the
national electricity distribution grid; Kemijoki, a
hydropower
concern; Neste, which controlled the import, refining, and
distribution of petroleum and natural gas; and Vapo, a
producer
and distributor of peat and other domestic fuels. Another
major
policy tool was the control of energy prices, either
directly or
by means of taxes and tariffs.
Finland's main domestic energy sources were
hydroelectric
power, peat, and wood. By the late 1980s, the country's
large
hydroelectric potential had been thoroughly tapped, except
possibly for the rivers protected by environmental
legislation.
Nevertheless, hydroelectric production could still be
increased
by renovating existing installations and by building
additional
plants at secondary sites. Encouraged by investment
subsidies and
by the results of state-funded research, Finland had begun
systematic exploitation of its peat reserves. Peatlands
covered
more than one-third of Finland's surface area, but in the
mid1980s only about 5 percent of this area was being used.
The
government hoped to more than double peat output by the
year
2000. Wood was widely used for heating in rural areas,
especially
after the oil price increases of the 1970s; it was even
more
important for the forest industries, which used waste wood
to
supply about 60 percent of their energy needs.
Despite increased use of domestic energy sources, the
economy
depended on imports of petroleum, coal, natural gas,
uranium, and
electricity. Observers expected that this dependence would
get
worse in the 1990s and beyond as consumption increased.
Moreover,
the fall in world petroleum prices, starting in the early
and
mid-1980s, had made oil imports more competitive and thus
might
delay investments in domestic energy sources.
The Soviet Union was traditionally Finland's main
energy
supplier, providing petroleum, natural gas, electricity,
uranium,
and even nuclear fuel reprocessing services. Energy
products
played an important role in Finnish-Soviet trade,
accounting for
about 80 percent of Soviet exports to Finland. The decline
in
world petroleum prices in the 1980s meant that Finland had
to
increase the volume of petroleum imports from the Soviet
Union in
order to maintain the level of sales to the Soviet market.
To
respond to the resulting oversupply of crude petroleum,
Neste
began refining oil for export
(see Regional Economic Integration
, this ch.). Finland's imports of Soviet natural gas
transited a
pipeline to the southeastern part of the country, with
branches
leading to the Helsinki and the Tampere areas. In the late
1980s,
Finland participated in discussions regarding the
construction of
a Nordic gas pipeline network that was designed primarily
to
transport Soviet gas to other Nordic countries but that
might
also carry Norwegian gas to Finland.
The Finns reduced their dependence on Soviet energy by
patronizing other suppliers. For example, during the late
1980s,
the Finns began importing coal not only from Poland and
the
Soviet Union but also from the United States, Colombia,
and
Australia. Coal imports had declined in the late 1970s as
a
result of rapid increases in the generation of electricity
from
nuclear plants, but they rose again by the mid-1980s to
some 5
million tons per year. Finland also purchased electricity
from
Sweden, and the Finns were interested in finding other
sources
for electricity imports.
To reduce further their vulnerability to cutoffs of
foreign
energy supplies, the Finns also undertook an energy
stockpiling
program. Informed observers believed that the country
maintained
stocks sufficient to supply it for six months, which
compared
favorably with stockpiles held by other industrial
countries.
Experts predicted that Finland would face an
electricity
shortage by the mid-1990s, unless additional generating
capacity
came into operation by then. Electricity consumption had
grown
faster than energy use as a whole during the 1980s,
largely
because more and more households had switched to electric
heating. In the late 1980s, most observers expected that
demand
would rise by 2 to 3 percent per year until the year 2000.
Finland's growing needs for electric power spurred
attempts to
increase domestic generating capacity, which in early 1986
had
reached 10,700 megawatts. In the late 1980s, hydroelectric
plants
supplied approximately 30 percent of total electric power.
Finland produced about 41 percent of its electricity at
four
nuclear power plants built between 1977 and 1980: two
Swedishmade , 660-megawatt, boiling-water reactors on the island
of
Olkiluoto; and two Soviet-made, 440-megawatt,
pressurized-water
reactors at Loviisa. Conventional thermal plants accounted
for
another 22 percent of electricity production, and imports
from
neighbors covered the remaining 6 percent.
In early 1986, the Ministry of Trade and Industry
prepared a
plan for the 1990s that called for increasing installed
electrical capacity by about 2,700 megawatts by the year
2000.
About 1,200 megawatts of the new capacity was to come from
small
plants scattered around the country. Another 1,500
megawatts
would have to come from large plants--peat-fired,
coal-fired, and
nuclear. According to the plan, Finland could either
import
another 500 megawatts from the Soviet Union or further
expand
nuclear capacity.
In the spring of 1986, the Eduskunta almost approved
the
plan, including the construction of a fifth nuclear plant.
Public
reaction to the nuclear disaster at Chernobyl in the
Soviet Union
froze consideration of nuclear power, however, and induced
a
complete review of energy policy. Public pressure caused
the
government to replace the proposed plant with coal-fired
plants.
Despite this setback to the nuclear industry, informed
observers
believed it probable that Finland would increase its
nuclear
capacity in the 1990s, once public opposition had died
down.
Since the 1970s, the government has made considerable
efforts
to spur energy conservation. Domestic energy prices have
been
maintained at realistic levels--gasoline prices were among
the
highest in all European countries--encouraging the public
to
conserve. The government raised energy efficiency
standards for
home construction and renovation, cutting energy use for
heating
by 30 to 40 percent over a decade. Finland pioneered the
development of district heating, which used
otherwise-wasted
energy from power plants. Observers predicted that this
efficient
source of domestic heat would supply half the country's
homes by
the year 2000. Environmentalists believed that further
energy
savings could be achieved that would reduce the need for
building
more power plants, but mainstream opinion supported
continued
increases in energy production to support economic growth.
Yet no
matter how much Finland conserved, the country would still
need
to import large amounts of energy and would face difficult
tradeoffs between the benefits and the risks and costs of
various
energy options.
Data as of December 1988
|