We humans are fundamentally rational and empathetic, both as consumers and as business decision-makers. But why is it that so often we all opt for familiar, low-impact and safe solutions to problems that are, in principle, much bigger. Could this be somehow indicative of a time in which we live and at the same time are so comfortable that in the face of greater responsibility and problem-solving we throw up our hands or, worse still, point the finger elsewhere. I argue that this is not the case and I base my argument on some 700 different conversations with our potential clients over the last 14 months. I will open a summary of these conversations at the end of the article, but before that, let’s consider where we started from and why we, as a company, wanted to break away from the low-impact problem-solving and safe thinking world where each company can do little from its own perspective in solving scientifically identified and widely recognised problems.
Deep end
So as a company, we took a deep dive – the consumption of thermal energy in large buildings in Finland is a significant part of our total energy consumption. Reducing the energy consumption of these large buildings and above all switching to renewable energy sources has been declared a key part of Finland’s climate goals. In addition, reducing the use of wood fuels is explicitly mentioned in the targets. For example, 80% of district heat production is based on combustion and 48% on wood fuels. In Finland, we think of wood fuels as carbon neutral, when in reality their carbon neutrality depends on many factors, such as sustainable forest management. Another important issue is local emissions of fine particulate matter, but we will not go into that any further here. We want to solve the heating energy needs of large buildings in a decentralised and completely CO2-free way.
What does it cost?
Usually, as the discussions go further, the question for decision-makers is whether this is possible and whether the simulation calculations are correct. The next question (which is not the first question you dare ask) is how much more expensive will this be than our current energy? If I have the time to answer the question, and here in Finland those trips don’t usually take very long, my answer is that you will save about 65% on the price of energy with our power plant compared to today’s heating energy – that is, you will save! I cannot give a correct and exact final answer during a lift trip, but on average it is about 160 simulated different sites, that is the saving in energy prices. And the answer to the first question is equally simple – yes it is possible and can be demonstrated beyond doubt to customers based on the operation of existing power plants. So you can become a fully CO2-free heating energy user at a lower cost than today. The way we think about and produce renewable energy is unconventional in our industry, but perhaps that is what makes it work. We definitely want to solve a big enough problem as described at the beginning, while making a massive impact on the problem itself. We are not following anyone, we are creating a new market with customer focus at its heart.
The EU and the energy transition
The war in Europe has shown the vulnerability of centralised energy distribution. In Finland, centralised energy distribution has been the natural choice for a long time, but now the clock has changed and security of supply is also being considered from the perspective of decentralised energy production and distribution. In this respect too, we feel that we are an integral part of the solution to the problem by producing specifically decentralised, local and, once again, clean thermal energy for our customers. The first order for Germany has already been secured and interest in this market, which is based on fossil-based heating energy solutions, has been very strong. The most significant difference between Finland and Germany in terms of investment in CO2-free heating energy is the investment subsidy. In Finland, the subsidy is currently 0% and in Germany it is up to 35% depending on the state. In this area, our domestic politicians still have a lot to do if we want to achieve the targets and investments together with companies. Green MEP
Wrapping the sleeves
At the beginning of the article, I promised to return to the view that I do not see our common future or the future of our company in a very negative light. As I mentioned, in the last 14 months, we have dealt in one way or another with about 700 customers. We have had about 200 in-depth discussions about the functionality and suitability of our power plant for our customers’ property or properties. To sum up, I can say that Finnish companies and the people in charge of them are, almost without exception, very aware of and interested in their own operating environment and the importance of sustainability in the overall picture. We all still have a long way to go when it comes to concrete actions and the courage to take decisions based on our own and our companies’ values. Decisions based on personal and company values, whether they are written down or not, should not be as complex as they are at present. I am not talking about investments in power plants, but about all decision-making linked to responsibility and personal values. In general, the competitive factors of companies are always made up of many different elements, but none of them include trampling on one’s own values or avoiding responsibility. It is time to roll up our sleeves and get concrete in solving the problems we have identified. Often the payback period for these investments is very short or moderately short. We are customer-first and at your service for heating energy issues, please feel free to contact us!
Janne Ritakoski
Managing Director, Thermal Storage Finland Oy
