Sweden Raises The Renewable Energy Bar
by John Laumer, Philadelphia on 01.24.06
Sweden has the reputation among the world's most regulated industries as being annoying. The Swedish government has for decades argued for international policies that discourage the use of toxic and bioaccumulative materials, which fed into EU-wide interest in the "precautionary principle". And, as the picture symbolizes, the Nobel prize has been given for "green chemistry". Even Sweden's well known industries, Volvo for instance, seem to share the forward-looking culture. Years ago Volvo produced internal "grey lists" of substances that should not be used during manufacture and eventually shared the same expectation with their suppliers. Now this is a worldwide trend. By the early 1990's it had become obvious that you could see a major environmental managment trend coming by watching what happens after Sweden. As soon as a US broadcaster says "In Sweden today..." you know it's coming to California,... and so on. So, it was with great interest that we read this recent headline: "Sweden Plans on Being the First Country in the World to Be Free From Oil in 2020". Need we say more? Of course.
"Minister for Sustainable Development Mona Sahlin has declared that Sweden is going to become the first country in the world to break the dependence on fossil energy. Sweden will stop using oil by 2020 and eventually the energy supply of the country will be based on renewable energy only. The goal is to gradually rid the country of gasoline-run cars and oil-heated homes"
Characteristically, they have actually thought this out and have some mechanisms in mind. Here's the list so far proposed or partially implemented.
*Large-scale investments in renewable energy and in research.*Expansion of district heating initiatives (co-gen and use of waste industrial and utility heat for domestic needs) as was done famously in Denmark, and emulated in the US in a few rare instances.
*Not subjecting fuel that is free of carbon dioxide to the energy tax or the carbon dioxide emission tax.
*Exempting efficient vehicles from the congestion tax that will be introduced in Stockholm in January.
*Taxes on energy and on carbon dioxide emissions were raised, while other taxes, such as those on payroll were decreased by an equivalent amount.
*Municipalities receive grants to conduct long-term climate research and make investments in environment-friendly technology.
*There are interim objectives for each target, regional and local objectives to match, and an Environmental Objectives Council to monitor progress towards the goals.
*Progress is charted through 70 national indicators, which track results and verify whether the country is heading in the right direction.
As a supporting anecdote, we recently visited a Swedish home (suburban Stockholm) where they had switched over to a geothermal heating system and it didn't sound like it was anything unsual there (except for the fact that they had to avoid old Viking burial mounds around the house).
(also, I believe that the photo you have used is of the fellow who picked up the Literature prize for the ailing Harold Pinter -- here are some low quality shots of the chemists.)
I'm curious, I'm sure it's possible to be completely rid of oil for power generation purposes, but is it possible to be completely rid of oil altogether? I'd have thought lubricants and some plastics are still needed and they're made from oil...
and again the US and our lovely leaders looks like idiots next to the rest of the world!!
Moments like this make me proud to be Swedish.
Oh no! Not again! I'm tired of all these people around the world having this unexplainable belief in my country as some sort of messiah, which at every moment chooses the most ethical path and somehow will save the world. Ridiculous.
In fact, this unrealistic vision of ridding the country of oil dependency before 2020 has received almost no attention in the domestic press. Further, mentioning Mona Sahlin (the responsible minister) to a Swede will probably only provoke laughter, after all the little silly things she has said and done in the past.
Sweden is (nowadays) a European country like any other, with its fair share of unemployment, corruption, crime and environmental problems. Get over it.
When it comes to handling the global environment, progressive thinking is essential. You should be proud of living in a country that does just that, Julian.
Of course, the world is never black or white; nothing is perfect. But please don't complain, be proud!
/fellow Swede
Julian,
At least Sweden is going to try, if there is any credence to the report. All over the world you see governments taking an active role, agreeing that there is a problem with fossil fuels and taking steps to remedy it. Here, there is no leadership at the federal government level.
It's moments like this that make me wish I were Swedish. First Iceland, and now Sweden are setting themselves up to be totally fossil fuel free in the first half of this century. Yet here in Australia, along with the USA, China and India our politicians have shunned the Kioto protocol sighting that "renewable energies are not the way of the future". Not only that Australia have commited just 100 million dollars over the next 5 years to cleaning up our act, with the USA even worse spending just 52 million. So my request is could Sweden and Iceland please stop hogging all the politicians that actually have a clue and please share them with us? I want there to be a world left to be able to pass onto my children when I eventually have them.
I think I'm going to go throw up now. Then after I feel better, I'll take my F-350 Super Duty for a nice long joy ride. Ahh, 10 miles to the gallon. Great day huh?
Amazing! Sweden is trully leading the world in the right direction.
This is a bad joke, right?
==== author's response follows ====
Setting a long term goal is one good way to get people's attention. No one realistically expects to be 100%"oil free", but significant progress toward sustainablility can be made through radical innovation. The intermediate objectives look experimental. You go with what works and abandon the choices that turn out not to be cost effective. If that's funny than I guess it is a joke.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that America will reach the same conclusion as the Swedes have, especially after our oil hungry president leaves office.
NOTE ==== The closing paragraph of this comment was withheld If it had been left in we would need also to allow in the opposing points of view, and that would be a distraction from the topic at hand which is Swedish public policy towards renewable energy. It's not that we disagree with the edited statement, but that we do not wish this to become political blog per se.
hey if you're interested, here's the official press release
http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/3212/a/51058
I cant find a single reference to this in any Swedish news sites. On Digg.com, even Swedish nationals have yet to here anything about this. Why would such a monumental proclamation be hidden or not be front page news? Could this story be a lie? Has anyone else been able to validate this information from any other news source? Just a few valid questions.
=== authors' response follows ====
A previous commenter has provided a direct link to the government press release, which I read in full. Many more details are provided than mentioned here. Importantly, it appears that we have missed the usual news cycle: it was released back in October of last year!
The setting of a long term policy goal is generally considered a "ho hum" boring item, and it should not be surprising that print media editors would see it as a story not worth pursuing - ever. Keep in mind that, while several of the objectives listed are already budgeted for, the remainder are just a wish list until there is some sort of parlimentary concurrance and an approved budget. Not very news worth for most people then.
My own belief is that within the next 20 years that petroleum will become so valuable and necessary to conserve as a polymer feedstock (it's what all those plastic hybrid car parts and and wind turbine blades are made from) that burning it for heat value and for inefficient transportation will be consired not only uneconomic but generally a bad thing to do from a social standpoint. Giving some advance recognition to this predetermined future has ssurvival value, even if most people are in denial about the eventuality of it. My guess is they will be lucky to get half way, but will learn some valuable lessons from the effort.
Please! Sweden is a beautiful country. But we are NOT fanatics. Not in enviroment, (not in anything else either). BUT we do have a very small and very loud environmental organisation that is partly political. Thier influence in the political system has been greatly exaggerated. (Mostly because of their role as the "tip of the scale". Their voice is not our voice, and we are Not willing to pay the price for their dreams. Their sometimes referred
as the 1600-century party..
It will not happend in 15 years.. probably not in 30 either...
Sorry for all these articles... I guess I could just tell you about them in emails.
So what will happen to all the cars etc. that use oil type fuels in 2020
I've been living in Sweden for four years now, and I have to point out to those Swedes that are trying to tell everyone that Sweden is not as amazing as everyone thinks that they are wrong!
Swedes in general have no idea how absolutely amazing and fantastic their country is, low crime, lifelong free and quality education, excellent living standards, wonderful people, fantastic environment. Along with Norway they really do have the best standard of living in the world. And if any other country came out with something like this I'd laugh, but when Sweden does it I don't dismiss it so easily.
Vive la Suède!
I remember reading something about this when this was presented last year, so it hasn't been completly ignored by Swedish media.
However, as much as I'd love for this to be a solid concrete policy, I believe it's probably more like the Swedish vision of zero dead in traffic accidents "nollvisionen". A nice thought, but ultimately not possible to accomplish without a level of financial and political backing that seems highly unrealistic at the moment.
But it's a nice vision indeed...
I'll bet anybody a hundred bucks that 2020 will come along, and this renewable energy initiative will be a huge joke. Everybody will laugh at the stupid swedes for screwing up their economy.
Folks, get a clue. There is a reason the world uses fossil fuels. THEY WORK REALLY WELL.
Solar, Wind, and other renewables DON'T work very well at all. From a thermodynamic standpoint, they suck. They will never stop sucking because they are based on weak, intermittant energy sources like sun, wind, and waves.
Nuclear power will win. It's already staging a huge comeback in most of Europe where, unlike Sweden, people are paying attention to facts.
In 20 years you will all have forgotten your love of renewable energy and will be fans of nuclear. Mark this page.
=== author's response follows=====
Hydro-electric power is renewable. It may be, but is not necessarily, intermittent. It is already a very significant power source in northern Europe.
WIth regard to the passage of time: no one is able to predict thea single future with precision. It is, however, possible to posit several plausible future directions. A decision that is cost effective in all of several plausible outcomes is considered a "robust" risk management choice.
This commenter's vision of the future is every bit as plausible as the oil-free one envsioned by the Swedish government. We should ask ourselves how this government planning effort would look in retrospective, half-way through this century, if due to political upheavals and technical developments which are uncontrollable by the Swedes, there were massive global oil supply shortfalls. Conversely, we should ask ourselves how it would seem to the Swedes and to the world if supplies rebounded globally and prices were made stable. In which of these two scenarios would be the highest financial losses in total, restrictions to economic growth, and social upheaval? I think we are all able to guess the answer.
One more item that applies to all those commenters who have indicated that Sweden's goal is unpractical. The normal governmetnal planning method is to set a long range goal which is inspiring, attention getting, visionary, and by nature a "stretch". Goals are visions, not practical endpoints, in other words. The several supporting objectives for a long range goal are, however, meant to be practical and have budget related metrics attached to them so that there is transparency to the taxpayers.
Long range planning efforts typically include an objective of periodically re-assessing and revising the goal and supporting objectives. THis leads to re-allocation of resources amongst the objectives and possibly changes to laws. Most likely this re-assessment would occur at least every 5 years, or sooner if metrics are slipping badlyl. Several of the objectives may fall by the wayside long before 2020 is reached. Others may be added along the way.
If it turned out that the oili-free goal was never fully reached, it would represent an embarassment if many supporting objectives failed, or if other very cost effective objectives had been overlooked or neglected due to poltical conflict along the way.
The United States could never attempt something like this. Oil is more readily available to us, it can come in on barges any time of the year, from pipelines in alaska and mexico. I've seen how the swedes move oil in, with ice breakers through the baltic sea. We have a large oil infrastructure built up here and we pay lower prices, so renewable energy would be 2 or 3 times more money than oil, (despite any optimistic figures floating around). Imagine a time when countries like Saudi Arabia stop using oil. Gas is 10 cents per gallon in some parts of the world. Up north the geothermal heat pumps make a lot more sense, I looked into it where I live (Utah) and it would cost a lot and wouldn't work very well for me. Toward the northeast of America, a lot of people use heat pumps. I expect solar power will be breaking price barriers in the next few years, political crapola like this really SHOULDN'T get anybody's attention. Solar power could be massively widespread in 10 years without any government intervention. Some of you swedes appear to believe that we're all in the same boat as you.
I have been living in Sweden for 26 years now and I agree with Tomas, many swedes have no clue as to how wonderful their country is, compared to other countries. It is true that the Green party has pushed the minority government (Social Democrats) towards a more responsible path regarding the environment, but that is an effect of proportional representation and not a problem. Because of the real possibility for new parties to have a say in the governing of the country the swedes do well at learning from their mistakes. There is now a system of grants and rebates to aid people in converting from direct electric heating to waterborn systems. 30 years ago the rebates were aimed at getting people to use direct electric heating!
I understand Volvo will be issuing sails to protrude from sunroofs to catch prevailing winds.
Unfortunately the sails will be made in America by Ford and will be subject to high value added taxes. Also because of the shifts in wind conditions one might have to tack several times to reach a destination.
Good!!!
My former boss, who is a Swedish, would often tell me about eco-friendly things Swedes did that were not motivated by environmental awareness, but simply seen as the logical thing to do.
Swedes may be the closest thing to Vulcans you'll find in Humanity.
Will Sweden succeed in reducing their oil consumption to zero by 2020? It is entirely possible to build a house that use $100 a year to heat or cool it. The technology has existed for about 30 years. It is called Superinsulation. Using oil to produce electricity could be reduced greatly by using nuclear energy. France uses nuclear to produce about 80% of their electriciy. Liquid fuels should be reserved for transportation. Hybrid cars can cut oil consumption by about 50%, this is existing technology and in use today. Most people travel less than 50 miles a day and a hybrid car with extra batteries could travel about 25 miles on just battery power.
The cost of oil has been going up for many years. Just prior to WW II a barrel of oil was selling for between 15 cents and $1.00. By the end of the war it was $2.00 a barrel. The price continued to be $2.00 a barrel until the OPEC oil embargo of the 1970s. Then the price went to about $12.00. It is now about $65.00 a barrel. That means that the price has increased by about 6500% in about 60 years. Another increase of this amount would mean that a barrel of oil will be in excess of $3600. When that happens, most consumption of oil will be extremely limited. I do not beleive that the average person will have an increase in their income of 6500%. The Age of Oil is drawing to an end and we can either try to find a way to live without it or be prepared to fight many more wars for it.
This is indeed doable here in the States. Contrary to Thomas100, wind power continues to expand, solar energy-to-electricity factors continue to drop, and Peak Oil is just around the corner. (Expect both Saudi Arabia and Russia/former USSR to peak within a decade.)
Now, that said, can one be a responsible environmentalist and still preach nuclear? I believe so. To the degree that gasoline or other petrochemicals are still needed here in the U.S., possibly by 2020, probably by 2030 and certainly by 2050, coal gasification is going to be an important source.
Well, where do you get the electricity for that? You may be able to use a combination of wind and solar in the High Plains states where a lot of lignite coal is located. But, that still may not provide enough power.
Plus, as economies continue to get more "wired," electric energy demands will grow. Ultimately, I believe nuclear will have to be part of that.
I didnt read the official press release, but ethanol is going to be big in the future, turn grass or anything into ethanol... so maybe that is what they will also try...
I have read most of the comments below and feel that although Swedes don't find their country's actions to be amazing, there seem to be only a handful of countries moving in a truly sustainable direction and that should be applauded. If anything, intention is a powerful movement in the right direction. All we have in the US is a president who is so deeply ensconced in oil production and its profits that we will never see the light of day. Or at least not until he is out of office.
Good Step towards right direction......
Any move of the so-called "democratic government" will be possible if only the Big Money will permit this move.
This is not about the red or green or other political colors.
Do we really believe money-owners want oil-free future? And, if so, why?
The nordic countries have a strong awareness of the benefits of treating children with utter respect, and in considering the consequences of any adult behaviour or activity in that light. Respect dictates that the world is made as safe, and in environmental terms that means sustainable, for those future children as can possibly be. Given the sustainable nature of the earths biosphere in it's natural, innate state, any tampering with it is tampering with the future of the children. Logical. Practical. Possible.
All efforts in this deserve full support, as well as a contribution of time, talent and energy from all right thinking adults. Inaction in this respect is almost a crime, though strangely there is as yet no such law. Why no-one asks for such a law is a mystery to me. Does anyone know of such an initiative? I would like to hear of any.
Thanks god someone thinks about future of this world and people on it. There should be a law that will make all countries follow Sweden as an example at least there wouldn't be as many wars as we see now.
YES!!! I am so excited that somebody out there is actually paying attention to the crisis at hand and has chosen to act!
And I'm delighted that it is my grandfather's proud home of Sverige!
nay sayers suck hope is great and one day u all thought cars were dreams of loonies
now the world has to change and sweden is presenting tough goals to match but if no one does what than i say lets dream big and hope we can ask the right qeustion to get our little eden back again
oh yeah if u don;t do it someone else will
Yes, oil is often used for plastics and fertilizer, but no, it is not required. Anything which can be made from oil can be made from pretty much any plant waste. Oil happens to be concentrated and "pre-cooked", which makes it convenient, that's all. There is no reason the entire planet couldn't be oil-free within twenty years or so -- except for lack of the political will to make it happen.
"Folks, get a clue. There is a reason the world uses fossil fuels. THEY WORK REALLY WELL." - "Thomas100"
Really. Did you just figure that out? I think the rest of the world did a long time ago and took full advantage of it, which is why we are on the brink of a major shortage. Get over yourself! Sweden is really smart. No need to be jealous.
Actually it's amazing that in Sweden even the Volvo officials discuss preparation to the Peak of world oil production.