Carbon neutral municipalities – An innovative Finnish approach

1. Carbon neutral municipalities –An innovative Finnish approach Alec Estlander & Kaarina Toivonen Finnish Environment Institute SYKE September 2010

2. Carbon neutral municipalities (CANEMU)Five Finnish municipalities act as laboratories by working to curb their carbon dioxide emissions ahead of schedule(-80% 2020/2030)with SYKE (and TEKES) support

3. ”Let’s make the impossible possible” • Something should be done to mitigate climate change! • Climate change mitigation can also offer possibilities • Active individuals can generate change! • The initiators below (Prof. Jyri Seppälä, SYKE and CEO Jari Raitanen)

4. Actors • Steering group • Project group in SYKE • Over 40 national technology companies • Support group in the Parliament • Municipal actors: municipal government, local companies, organisations, residents, summer residents

5. Municipalities Uusikaupunki: 16 000 inhabitants, 502 km2 (land), a small coastal town, industry, wind energy Mynämäki: 8 000 inhabitants, 522 km2, a largely agricultural locality, wind energy Kuhmoinen: 2 700 inhabitants, 937 km2, forest resources, summer residents Padasjoki: 3 600 inhabitants, 731 km2, forest resources, summer residents Parikkala: 6 100 inhabitants, 761 km2, farming, forest resources, SMEs

6. Process Commitment - versatile communication about possibilities, measures and benefits -> “we are doing together” Practical measures in the early stage of the project - visible results important for the credibility of the project - focus on the strengths of the munipalicities Determination of short-term (2-5 years) and long-term (6-20 years) targets - e.g. 20% reduction by 2012, 50 % reduction by 2020, 80 % reduction by 2030 Implementation - voluntary schemes and demonstration based on business practices - research and development projects, pilot scale trials - close collaboration (researchers, public sector, residents, business) Monitoring and evaluation system - to show results and development - to gather materials on good practices and to analyse cost-effectiveness

7. Actions in municipalities • Calculation of emissions • Calculation of emission reduction potentials • Commitment of municipal governments • Support to local companies, organisations and residents • Pilot projects, surveys • Communication, media • Climate and energy strategies

8. Greenhouse gas emissions 2007 CO2 eq./inhabitant/year (tonnes) Transport Building heating Other electricity cons. Other fuel cons. Waste management Agriculture (KASVENER model)

9. Possible actions to reduce emissions • Energy efficiency in energy production • Energy savings in households, industry and public properties • Urban planning • Forest energy • Energy from agricultural by-products • Wind energy • Solar energy • Geothermal heat pumps • Buildings: insulation, ventilation, heat recovery, passive solar energy • Transport planning, public transport • Walking and cycling • Public procurement • Decreased use of fertilizers • Changes in consumption patterns • Etc.

10. Case: District heating with wood chips • District heating plant • Possibility to produce electricity and heat (CHP) • Efficiency up to 90 % • In Finland about 50 % of buildings are connected to a district heating system, in Helsinki about 90 % • Possible fuels: wood chip, wood pellets, other biofuels, (coal, natural gas, peat, oil)

11. Media and communication • A lot of national and local media attention obtained • New emission calculator for citizens developed (below right) • “Climate diet” TV documentary series

12. Key factors in promoting climate-friendly solutions in municipalities • The municipal management and administration see climate change mitigation as a possibility • The municipality promotes awareness of climate change and motivate citizens through their own example • Different actors form networks work together to find innovative solutions and support • The municipality and local companies work together • The media highligts successful local examples • Motivated people in the municipality give their time and effort • Different target groups are supported in getting started

13. Please, visit our website: www.ymparisto.fi/canemu THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION ! Alec and Kaarina

14. EXTRA SLIDES

15. Examples: Implemented measures and decisions already made in Uusikaupunki • Use of process heat from a fertliser manufacturing facility • Installation of two 1.3 MW wind turbines • Biodiesel from fish processing wastes • Video conference facilities made available for local firms to hire • Flaring of landfill gas • Construction of passive houses • Manufacture of heat-storing fireplaces • Energy efficiency agreement • Involvement in ICLEI's "Cities for climate protection" campaign • Internet interview survey of local residents (1,000 respondents) • Online poll for summer residents regarding e.g. heating • Real time metering of energy and water consumption • Renovation and energy audit of the municipal kitchen • New locations connected to the district heating network • Meetings between the municipality and 30 local companies about CO2 emission reductions and the effects of the CANEMU project ETC.

17. Potential in renewable energy sources Wood chip Straw, reed canary grass Biogas (dung, vegetal waste) Wind energy Hydro power Solar energy

18. Steering group Erkki Eskola, ministerial advisor, Ministry of Employment and the Economy Jarmo J Heinonen, head of technology, Tekes Anne Heusala, head of municipal council, Kuhmoinen Heikki Jaakkola, head of municipal council, Padasjoki Saara Jääskeläinen, senior inspector, Ministry of Transport and Communications Leena Karessuo, director, Association of Finnish Local and Regional Authorities (chair) Lea Kauppi, director general, Finnish Environment Institute Kari Koski, head of municipal council, Uusikaupunki Hans Olander, head of municipal council, Parikkala Hannele Pokka, permanent secretary, Ministry of the Environment Jari Raitanen, managing director, Devoi Oy Risto Savolainen, sales manager, St1 Oy Mikko Talola, development manger, Lassila & Tikanoja Oyj Anne Vehviläinen, senior environmental inspector, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Helena Vänskä, senior adviser, Confederation of Finnish Industry Seija Österberg, head of municipal council, Mynämäki

19. Project group in SYKE Head of project with overall responsibility, Professor Jyri Seppälä Project Manager: Jyrki Tenhunen Senior Engineer: Alec Estlander Communication, media: Ulla Ala-Ketola Research Engineer: Jarmo Linjama Specialist researcher: Ari Nissinen Main researcher: Olli-Pekka Pietiläinen Senior Adviser: Pirke Suoheimo Researcher: Kaarina Toivonen

20. Companies involved HK Ruokatalo Innotek Oy Kalliokaivo Oy Kemira Water Kuusakoski Oy Lassila & Tikanoja Microsoft Muovitech Finland Oy MW Power Naps Systems Oy Nokia NordicAC/Hi-Log Oy Oras Ltd Oversol Oy Oy WindsideProduction Ltd Paroc PricewaterhouseCoopers Oy ABB Aina Group Airwecare BaseN Oy Benviroc BIOvakka Oy Deloitte DevoiCircle Eagle Tuulivoima Oy Ekovilla Elintarviketeollisuusliitto Energiateollisuus Enespa Fortum Raisio RemoteMx Schneider Electric Skaala ikkunat ja ovet Oy Solutions Space St1 Suomen lämpöpumpputekniikka Vacon Oy Vahterus Oy Vapo Oy Vattenfall Veikkaus Oy Winwind Oy WSP Finland Oy YIT

21. Support network in the parliament Tarja Tallqvist, Uusimaa, Christian Democrats in Finland Timo Kaunisto, Varsinais-Suomi, Centre Party Petteri Orpo, Varsinais-Suomi, National Coalition Pary Christina Gestrin, Uusimaa, Swedish People’s Party Miapetra Kumpula-Natri, Vaasa, Social Democratic Party of Finland Pentti Tiusanen, Kymi, Left Alliance Heli Järvinen, Etelä-Savo, Green League

22. Noted challenges • Economic recession has caused some difficulties for authorities to spend their resources to the project • There is a need to increase “face to face” guidance for all target groups • It has been difficult to obtain exhaustive data about the measures of residents • How to get investments for many new plans of technical systems with effective mitigation potential in the near future?