The Nordic Low-Carbon Transition:

Implications and Insights for

Researchers and PractitionersInvited Keynote Address to the Energy Cultures Conference

“Sustainable Energy Figures: Understanding Behavior and

Supporting Transitions,” Wellington, New Zealand, July 6-7,

2016

Benjamin K. Sovacool, Ph.D

Professor of Energy Policy Director of the Sussex Energy Group

Director of the Center on Innovation and Energy Demand

Primary data sources:

The need for better

energy systems

Global Final Energy Consumption, 2012

Amount = 5,600 mtoe Amount = 22,000 TWh Amount = 89 mbd

Renewable energy is largely the “other”!

A diversification challenge

Major Global Energy Reserves for 16 Leading Energy

Nations, 2012

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Bill

ion

Bar

rels

of O

il Eq

uiv

alen

tShale Gas

Uranium

Coal

Natural Gas

Oil

A geopolitical problem

Life Expectancy of Proven Fossil Fuel and

Uranium Resources, 2012

9

Proven

Reserves

Current

Production

Life Expectancy (Years)

0% Annual

Production

Growth

Rate

1.6%

Production

Growth

Rate

2.5%

Production

Growth

Rate

Coal 930,400

million short

tons

6,807

million short

tons

137 85 61

Natural

Gas

6,189 trillion

cubic feet

104.0 trillion

cubic feet

60 42 37

Petrole

um

1317 billion

barrels

30.560

billion

barrels

43 33 30

Uraniu

m

4,743,000

tons (at

$130/kgU)

40,260 tons 118 67 56

A resource depletion problem

An environmental challenge

Are there any young children

in the room?

An environmental challenge

The Nordic perspective

Nordic Energy Flows

Primary energy production in Nordic countries;

share of production by fuel, 2011

The four pillars of the Nordic

energy transition

#1: Renewable electricity

(but mostly bio-energy and

hydro)

Primary renewable energy production in

the Nordic countries, 2011

Nordic total primary energy supply in the

Carbon-Neutral Scenario

The import of a diversified, services-oriented

portfolio

#2: Energy efficiency in

buildings

Energy intensity in the Nordic region, and globally

Final energy consumption per capita, Nordic countries and

OECD average

Buildings need energy efficiency

improvements

Buildings need energy efficiency

improvements – how?

Buildings need energy efficiency

improvements – how?

Buildings need energy efficiency

improvements – how?

Net zero homes and energy efficiency

The first ZERO+ house in Denmark to produce more

energy than it consumes.

#3: Transportation

(hydrogen, biofuels, and

EVs)

Nordic energy use in transport

2050 energy use in transport

EV share of total Nordic (passenger) car sales

Sønderborg’s leadership

#4: Carbon Capture and

Storage (CCS)

Carbon capture and storage is key

“Carbon capture and storage (CCS) represents the most

important option among new technologies for reducing industrial

CO2 emissions after 2030. Currently, great uncertainties exist as

to how to deploy CCS, and therefore both CCS demonstrations

and closer Nordic collaboration would be needed to overcome

the barriers.”

CCS utilization in industry by 2050

Five implications for

analysts

#1: The transition won’t be rapid

• It will still take

decades (until 2050)

for the Nordic region

• These are courtiers

are already anomalies

• Relatively small

• Wealthy

• Strong

environmental

ethic

• High fuel and

electricity prices

#1: The transition won’t be rapid

• It will depend on

technological

breakthroughs, but these are

not necessarily obvious:

• Bioenergy

• Hydro

• CCS

• EVs

• (conventional) Nuclear

power

• Energy efficiency

• Energy storage

• Political goals may not be

achieved due to lack of

technological innovation

#2: Even for Nordic countries, the

transition is contingent

Sketch of the Norwegian hydropower

system Sira-Kvina

… and, even political goals can rapidly

change (“allies” vs. “interests”)

• It will involve not only changing technical systems, but also social attitudes – the

human software along with the technological hardware, the notion of a

“seamless web” from Thomas P. Hughes

#3: The transition is socio-technical

#4: If true, we need a better understanding of energy

behavior and consumption, or “EUED”

User motivations are complex and

heterogamous

Stern, Paul C. and Elliot Aronson, Energy Use: The Human

Dimension (New York: Freeman & Company, 1984).

• The investor regards energy as a cost that is carefully considered in

making purchases such as equipment and capital, and views energy

technologies as durable ways to recover costs over their useful life.

• The consumer thinks of their homes and automobiles as consumer

goods that provide pleasures and necessities.

• The conformer sees energy technologies as a way to belong to a

particular social group or attain status.

• The crusader sees energy use as an ethical issue and conserves

energy as an expression of self-reliance and environmental

stewardship.

• The problem avoider treats energy as no more than a potential

source of annoyance or inconvenience, doing nothing about it until

technologies break down and services cease.

User motivations are complex and

heterogamous

User motivations are complex and

heterogamous

User motivations are complex and

heterogamous

User motivations are complex and

heterogamous

User motivations are complex and

heterogamous

(1) User-producers create new technical and organizational

solutions

(2) User-intermediaries shape the needs and desires of users as well

as products, infrastructures, and regulatory frameworks

(3) User-citizens engage in politics of regime shift lobbying for a

particular niche

(4) User-legitimators shape the values and worldview of niche

actors

(5) User-consumers appropriate products and services and thus

producing meaning and purpose, and testing new systems

• The blueprint will

most certainly not

be adopted globally

• United States

and its partisan

politics?

• China and its

energy

scramble?

• India and its

energy poverty?

• It only gets us

partway where we

need to go

#5: The transition won’t be universally

replicated

Phases of decarbonization (from IIASA)

In sum, even the Nordic energy transition—

perhaps the exemplar for the world—is

politically contested and technologically

contingent

Contact Information

Benjamin K. Sovacool, Ph.D

Professor of Energy Policy

University of Sussex

Jubilee Building, Room 367

Falmer, East Sussex, BN1 9SL

UK: 01273 877128

International: +44 1273 877128

B.Sovacool@sussex.ac.uk