FINNISH ENERGY DEVELOPMENTS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 18
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 25, 2010
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: November 4, 1983
• Content Type: MEMO

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
I I
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20505
4 November 1983
MEMORANDUM FOR: Mr. Stephen Griffith
Office of Technical Cooperation
25X1 International Affairs
Department of Energy
Chief, German Nordic Branch
European Analysis
SUBJECT Finnish Energy Developments
In response to your 28 October telephone request, attached
are papers on recent Finnish energy developments and current
energy problems facing the government.
Attachment: As stated
25X1
E U R 83-102
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
 I L ': 1 I I- I! ^in i. ,,,
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
25X1
1 - Addressee
1 - DDI
1 - ADDI
1 - OD/EURA
2 - EURA Production staff
4 - IMC/CB
1 - Branch file
1 - Division file
1 - Author
EURA/WE/GN (4Nov83)
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3 .... ,,...,.
 - I i .! I i 'i i i in w iirnw?I1n~ .1 I ii t. iuL.u l1L~
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
4 November 1983
Finland: Future Energy Needs
Natural Gas Pipeline Extension
Finnish officials are wrestling with the question of whether
to extend the existing Finnish-Soviet gas pipeline westward to
allow for greater consumption of Soviet natural gas. Sweden is
also considering the feasibility of buying Soviet natural gas
through a further extension of the pipeline. The key issue has
been the pricing formula for the Soviet gas. The Soviets are
pressing the Finns to buy the gas, arguing that it would help
close the bilateral trade gap
Finnish imports of Soviet natural gas grew throughout the
1970s, but more recently high prices have forced the Finns to cut
back on purchases. Thus far in the 1980s, the Finns have been
importing only 700 million cubic meters (mcm) of gas per year
compared with one'billion cubic meters (bcm) in 1979. The 1983
Finnish-Soviet Trade Protocol calls for an annual import level of
1.4 bcm, but Finnish imports are running well below that level.
25X1
A Ministry of Trade and Industry report completed last
ummer recommends increased natural gas purchases primarily for
'commercial-political" reasons. The report concludes:
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
 I I I I I I' I i' 11'I 1111 IIi11111111?1111 I I II 11 I _ I -Ems 11P
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
-- Increased Soviet gas imports would further diversify
Finnish energy supplies and foster bilateral trade with
the USSR in the long run.
-- Although political, commercial, and environmental
factors favor increasing Finnish use of Soviet gas, the
companies will have to commit about $140 million to
extending the line to Helsinki. If the line is
extended to the West Coast for Sweden's use, the
pipeline cost would rise to $270 million.
-- Cheaper alternative fuels make Soviet gas less
attractive. In any case, Soviet gas prices should be
related to the price of coal.
-- Gas would be a practical substitute only for heavy fuel
oil. The total potential demand in the Helsinki
metropolitan area would be about 1 bcm of gas. The
greatest potential for expanding gas consumption is in
industry rather than residential heating.
-- An increase in natural gas imports from the USSR should
not replace the constr~~~t i on of a fifth nuclear power
25X1
plant.
Bilateral negotiations so far have not produced a solution
that would make it economically feasible to increase Finnish gas
purchases from the USSR, nor does Sweden appear to be in a rush
to make a decision. Helsinki may have to take a position on the
pipeline extension issue that would be based less on economic
factors than on broader considerations of trade policy. The gas
issue will no doubt be on the agenda at, the meeting of the
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
 `_ _ ._ _ ___ l__ _l. _ 1. I I I I II !I II II I I!I'iIII Ill IIfl1!_ 1 I I.ll I I ^IU JIII III R
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
Finnish-Soviet Joint Economic Commission which meets this month,
and we expect the Snniets to push for a final decision on Finnish
25X1
plans.
Fifth Nuclear Power Plant
The government-controlled electric company, IVO, published a
report in August that claimed a 1,000 megawatt plant would be the
best alternative for the 1990s in terms of Finnish energy policy,
industry, national economy, and environmental protection. IVO is
also studying t25x1alternative of building two smaller nuclear
plants.
Finnish industry launched a campaign in September in support
of nuclear power. The Confederation of Finnish Industries is
demanding a favorable decision on a 1,000 megawatt nuclear power
plant before the end of the year. The Confederation describes
the new plant as the inevitable choice because the real price of
electricity must be reduc2sX1to ensure the competitiveness of
Finnish industry
Any decision on the fifth plant, however, may be delayed
until next year while the government decides between coal and
nuclear power. The political parties are undecided about the
fifth nuclear power plant. Various environmentalist groups in
Finland oppose construction of a new nuclear power station. In
June, Prime Minister Sorsa intervened to discourage several
members of Parliament from signing a petition that would have
called for a resolution against a possible fifth nuclear power
plant.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
 I 11 I I! 111 1 1 III IP'NIIIl11111111 I I I 111: 11 1 ^11111L1IL
-1 I Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
The Ministry of Trade and Industry has drafted a legislative
proposal that is scheduled to be introduced during the current
session of Parliament that would transfer decision-making power
for ordering new nuclear power stations to Parliament. The
proposal includes a system for distributing nuclear waste
disposal costs and provisions for strengthening the inspection of
nuclear plants. Trade and Industry Minister Lindblom anticipates
problems with the bill and has suggested that it might have to be
treated as a constitutional bill, which would require approval by
two successive sessions of Parliament.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
 _L____l l ( l 1 I I I ! I I I I I l l l l 1111111111111 111 I I !- 1L 1 VIII II 111 1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3 CIAL
. . Lun%o VIM il?l'TIMES
ENERGY
PROFILE
Managing Editor FT Energy Newsletters:
Bruce Andrews
FINLAND
'RADE IMBALANCE CREATES DELICATE ENERGY RELATIONS WITH USSR
C
Finland's success in cutting its energy use was accelerated last
year by a downturn in industrial activity. But this success has
also presented Finland with a delicate problem - balancing its
trade with the USSR. Finland, with a highly-developed manufacturing
base, has a population of only 4.8m. Domestic demand is far from
sufficient to support its industry.
Thus export markets are vital to the well-being of the Finnish
economy - and the USSR is the Finns' biggest, most reliable such
market. The USSR is also Finland's biggest energy supplier.
Finland's exports to the USSR have gone a long way towards
insulating it from the full effects of the West European recession.
In return, the USSR traditionally underpins these industries by
providing energy - mainly oil but also coal, gas and electricity -
at favourable prices under long-term agreements.
Diversify But Finland's energy policy over the last few years has been to
supplies diversify its energy supply sources and to shift consumption away
from oil to, mainly, nuclear power. Success here has significantly
cut the relative value of its energy imports from the USSR. Whereas
energy last year comprised over 90% of Finland's exports from the
USSR, it comprises only 80% under the 1983 trade agreement.
However, Finland's long-term trade agreements with-the USSR are
based on a balanced trade by value. Any cutbacks in energy imports
from the USSR or any cut in prices should reduce Finland's export
ceiling to the USSR.
Because of such cutbacks in the last two years, Finland achieved a
$2.7m surplus in its trade with the USSR in 1981, against a $l.lbn
deficit with the OECD, and a $700m surplus in 1982. That has not
pleased the Soviets, who are now forced to pay interest on the
excess amounts.
Published by The Financial Times
Business Information Limited,
Registered Office,
Bracken House, 10 Cannon Street,
London EC4P 48Y
Tel: [phone] Telex: 8954871
Representatives in the USA
FT Publications Inc,
75 Rockefeller Plaza
New York. NY 10019,
Tel: [phone]
Telex: 23423025
O The Financial Times
Business Information Limited 1982
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
 I I L i I IL 1 1 11 1 I 1 1J1111. 1L_lllllIII1II!I _ I I III II 1 1 ^181L III L
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25 CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
FINLAND
FINLAND: TOTAL PRIMARY ENERGY REQUIREMENTS (million tonnes oil equivalent)
Solid fuels
8.36
6.54
5.50
-15.9
Oil
12.99
11.64
10.02
-13.9
Natural Gas
0.88
0.80
0.76
-5.0
Nuclear
1.75
3.65
4.28
+17.3
Hydro & Geothermal
2.49
3.33
3.50
+5.1
Net electricity imports (+)
0.05
0.19
0.13
+31.6
TOTAL
26.52
26.15
24.19
-7.5
Source: International Energy Agency
t e Finnish energy department.
In order to maintain its export level to the USSR, Finland has
been forced to:
* EEP estimate based on IEA data for first half 1982
NB: This table is provided only for purposes of comparison on a uniform basis
with other IEA countries. Analysis in the profile is based on data supplied by
h
? Increase imports of Soviet coal, oil and gas in 1983.
? Reverse its policy of cutting oil consumption.
? Cut oil imports from non-Soviet sources.
? Increase re-exports of oil and oil products.
? Increase its purchase of other Soviet products.
Falling Finland's energy imports bill FINLAND: PRIMARY ENERGY CONSUMPTION
import bill fell by 10.75% last year from 1981/82 (million tonnes oil equivalent)
FM18.6bn ($3.4bn)to FM16.6bn,
due to cuts in both the quantity 1981 1982 %
slightly from 25.1 tonnes of
equivalent (toe) in 1981 to
25mtoe.
and price of imports. The cnange
biggest percentage drop in value oil 10.7 10.4 -2.8
was a 16.7% fall in the hard Coal 1.8 1.9 +5.6
coal bill from FM1.8bn to FM1 5bn Natural gas 0.6 0.6 0.0
power Nuclear 3
.3 '?" +14.s
followed by a 12
6% fall i
th
crude oil bill from FM15.lbn in electricity 0.6 0.6 0.0
1981 to FM13.2bn. Crude oil Hydro power 3.4 3.2 -5.9
imports fell by 13.1% from 10.7m Black and sulphite
liquors 1.6 1.7 +6.3
tonnes (t) to 9.3mt, while hard Industrial waste wood 0.9 0.9 0.0
coal imports fell by 12.7% from Fire wood 1.1 0.7 -36.4
5.5mt to 4 . 8mt . Peat 0.5 0.6 +20.0
.
n
e
Net import of
Against the background of a GDP
growth of just 0.6% in 1982 and
a 0.6% fall in industrial output
(compared with a 3.2% growth in
1981) primary energy use fell
Other domestic 0.4 0.4 0.0
CONSUMPTION BY SECTORS IN 1982
% mtoe
oil
Industry
47
Transport
13
Space heating
24
Other
16
11.6
3.1
6.0
4.1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
 I I IL 11.191111111111111 Iillllllillill111I I. - I III ! II 1 l 1^11 11 111 1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3 =
FINLAND
Problems
unresol ved
Falling
share
However, the government's aim of
reducing the share of imported
energy in total consumption to
65-7010 by the mid-1990s
stumbled a little last year. In
1981 Finland managed to
increase the contribution of
domestic fuels in total primary
energy use from 6.8mtoe in 1980
to 7.9mtoe and, simultaneously
to cut the use of imported fuels
by 0.6mtoe. Together these
moves brought the import share
down from 72.1% of total
consumption in 1980 to 68.5%.
But last year an increase in
nuclear power on the import side
and a slight fall in hydro power
and firewood on the domestic
side pushed imports' share of
total consumption back up to
70%.
fewer oil
grounds.
transport
viability
customers.
Moreover, Finland has entered
1983 with major energy problems
unresolved. A decision is
needed on whether the next
power station should be
nuclear or coal-fired.
Government is keen to use more
Soviet natural gas allowing
FINLAND: ENERGY CONSUMPTION FORECAST
(mtoe)
Oil & natural gas
L 9.4
8.1
H 10.5
9.3*
9.5
Coal
L
3.8 '
4.4
H
4.9
5.1*
6.3**
Nuclear
L
3.4
3.4
H
3.4
3.5**
4.9*
Hydropower
L
3.1
3.1
Peat
L
1.7
2.2
H
2.0
2.7
Other domestic
L
3.5
3.6
H
4.0
4.2
Total import
L 17.6
16.9
H 19.8
20.3
Total domestic
L
8.3
8.9
H
9.1
10.0
Source: Finland's energy department
L - Low growth (27/yr gdp)
H - High growth (3'/yr gdp)
* Additional power plant capacity to be
nuclear _
** Additional power plant capacity to be
coal-fired
imports, but potential consumers are opposed
No overall agreement has yet been reached on the best
system for internal coal distribution - essential to the
of the new coal ports and the fight for new coal
Nor are decisions likely to be taken until mid-1983 at the
earliest. With parliamentary elections set for March major
political decision-making has now been frozen.
Oil's share of Finland's total primary energy use fell again last
year to 41.6%. While energy use fell by 0.4% from 25.lmtoe in 1981
to 25mtoe oil use fell by 2.80 from 10.7mtoe to 10.4mtoe. As a
result crude oil imports fell yet again to 9.3mt from 10.7mt in
1981.
On the surface this looks like success for the government's aim to
cut oil's share of oil of energy use to some 30% or 7-9mt by 1995.
But Finland also had a policy of diversifying its sources of supply.
It somehow overlooked the fact that rapid cuts in consumption,
coupled with increased buying from other suppliers, would
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
 I I I II I! L LIILLLL1illl_JIE1llhJIllt11@I I I Ill .1L 1 ?IIL I L1 0
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
FINLAND
adversely affect the major oil
supplier (the USSR) in turn upsetting FINLAND: CRUDE OIL IMPORTS 1982 ('000
the trade balance between the USSR tons)
and Finland.
The shock result of a trade surplus
with the USSR in both 1981 and 1982
brought about a sharp change in
strategy, if not in policy. In
1981 Finland imported nearly a
third of its crude oil from non-
Soviet sources. But in 1982 the
government started promoting oil as
an alternative to electricity in
the winter months and backed up the
programme by tariff incentives and
oil price cuts. It also increased
oil imports from the USSR and cut
back imports from other sources to
1.8mt (see table). Thus, while the
aim is still to cut overall oil
consumption there is now a
concerted effort to increase
consumption of-Soviet-oil.
USSR
8,000
Saudi Arabia
700
Qatar
200
England
250
Norway
100
Iran
350
1981
19
Crude oil (m/t)
USSR
7.3
7.5
Saudi
Arabia
2.4
1.5
Other
1.0
0.3
Total,
crude
10.7
9.3
Middle distillates
USSR
its trading activities in crude and refined oil products. The
latest step in this approach was the opening of a London office.
Neste denies that its expansion of crude oil trading has been
forced on the company by the need to maintain Soviet crude oil
imports. It argues that the vast majority of oil to be traded will
come from the North Sea, and points out that the first
consignment through the new office came from that source.
However, it is also true that the second consignment traded
came from the USSR and that at least a third of the 3mt traded
last year came from the source. Also, of course, it is increased
imports from the USSR which have forced Neste to cut back on
imports from the North Sea.
With a further rise in oil imports from the USSR planned for next
year, it seems likely that imports from other sources will have to
be cut back even further and that Neste's new crude oil trading
company is in for a busy time.
high oil imports from the USSR
against falling demand at home has
forced state company Neste OY, the
sole crude oil importer, to increase
This need to maintain relatively USSR
Natural gas, all imported from the USSR, presents a quandary for
Finland. On the one hand, substitution of oil by gas could enable
Finllnd to maintain the value of its overall imports from the USSR
e
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3 - -
FINLd
Prices
rocket
C
Significant
contribution
D
Cost
m FM
Average price
FM/1000 m3/0oC
Consumption
m toe
1974
412
(466)
105
254
3.94
1975
670
(761)
169
252
6.53
1976
817
(892)
207
253
7.66
1977
759
(902)
211
278
7.78
1978
902
(981)
262
290
8.44
1979
924
(986)
265
287
8.49
1980
905
(927)
488
540
7.92
1981
718
(736)
545
759
6.29
1982
694
(715)
513
739
6.00
1983
na
900*
whilst enabling a cut in oil imports and further diversification of
energy sources. On the other, the importer, state oil company
Neste Oy, faces falling consumer demand through uncompetitive
pricing and inadequate distribution.
Natural gas importspfrom the USSR peaked in 1979 when a total of
924m m3 (at 0?C) was imported at an average price of FM287 per
1,000m3. But in 1980, the average price leapt to FM540 and
imports fell to 905m m3. By 1982, imports had slumped to 694m m3
but the average price per 1,000m3 had risen to FM739. Under the
long-term agreement with the USSR, however, Finland should have
imported some 900m m3 (lbn m3 at 20?C).
The major natural gas user in Finland is industry, where it has to
compete in price with coal, heavy fuel oil and domestic fuels like
peat and wood. But the USSR prices gas sales to Western Europe to
compete with light fuel oil. The effect of this relatively high
price, coupled with falling prices for competing fuels and a
generally lower demand for fuels by an industry moving into
recession, has been to slash natural gas imports from a peak of
924m m3 at 0?C (986m m3 at 20?C) in 1979 to 694m m3 (715m) last
year.
Under these agreements with the USSR, however, Finland should have
3
imported lbn m
(at20?C)in 1982 and
1981 and its failure to do so has
made a significant contribution to
its embarrassing trade surplus. This
year, Finland has agreed to raise its
natural gas imports to 900m m3 (at
20?C) in its effort to reduce its
surplus.
Proposed Soviet Gas Pipeline
This leaves Neste with a chicken-and-
egg problem. To import 900m m3 it
will have to increase consumption.
However, consumers say they will
not buy more gas until the price
comes down. The Soviets are ready to
f~al Potion. amper4, Lappeenranta Irn ,a
LahtiKOU"Ola
.00. f61'0`
Lluik USSR
~_ -~- Hameenlinna _?' !%Hamma
- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
 I I I I I I IT I !I!I I I IllI li!11111119?11BI I 1 I III II 11 ^Ill .iI 1119
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
FINLAND
make significant cuts in their prices (a figure of 20% has been
mentioned) but are not prepared to do so until Finland's imports
reach at least the level specified in the trade agreement.
Yet another hurdle is the inadequate distribution system. The
present pipeline can only serve the extreme south east corner of
the country. To bring gas to new consumers will require a
pipeline extension plus the development of a distribution network
to other areas.
Extension to With this in mind, Neste is arguing for an extension of the
Helsinki pipeline to bring natural gas within reach of Helsinki. This
would bring a whole new set of industries into the gas catchment
area and, possibly, the Helsinki conurbation as well. The city
is currently assessing its future energy needs and gas, along
with coal, is under consideration. But, price could be the critical
factor, with potential gas consumers talking of a 25% cut in
current gas prices before its use can be considered. C
There is political
pressure for the pipeline. Trade and industry
minister Esko Ollila and a majority in parliament are arguing for
the pipeline as a means of increasing gas imports from the USSR
to ease the embarrassing trade surplus. Also, the concept of
extending the pipeline across the Gulf of Bothnia to Sweden could
give a major boost to gas consumption by making it available right
across the southern half of the country. A decision on either or
both of these schemes should be made shortly after the general
elections in March.
Soaring
stocks
Lack of infrastructure, the continuing recession and a related
downturn in industrial output are the problems Finland faces as it
tries to diversify its fuel base and sources through increased
coal use.
Despite a fall in hard coal imports of 12.7% last year - from
5.5m tonnes (t) to 4.8mt - coal use rose from 2.6mt to 2,7mt;
Finland is still importing far more coal that it needs. And coal
stocks, which increased by 3mt in 1981, grew by a further 2.lmt
to bring total stocks to over 5mt - or one year's imports - by
year-end.
ItL
Coal's 7.6% share of 1982 total primary energy consumption, although
a rise on 1981's 7.2%, is significantly below the 15.4% share in
1980. The fall is almost wholly due to the increased share taken
by hydro and nuclear power, and to increased electricity imports
from the USSR. All of these have outstripped the pace at which
coal can be developed as an alternative fuel for industry and the
municipalities.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R00050 200002-3
The bulk of these stocks Finland: Coal consumption
have b
b
ee"
uilt up by
Neste and the power
companies like Imatran
Voima. Neste hac
developed its own coal
port at Porvoo and
started international
coal trading from
C
C
January 1 this year. ;971
197? 1979 19?0 19?1 10?7
Falling coal prices
encouraged stockpiling. The average imported coal price fell from
FM345/t ($62.7) (at coast) in October 1981 to FM316/t a year later,
and was FM320 at the start of 1983. Thus, although hard coal
imports in 1982 were 12.7% down on 1981, the value fell by 16.70
from FM1,8bn to FM1.5bn.
To maintain anything like current import levels, Finland's coal
traders will have to find new consumers. With little scope for
significant expansion in primary energy production, sights are set
on the municipalities and industry.
With the falloff in coal use for power generation, from 3.6mt in
1980 to 0.48mt in 1981, combined heat and power is now the largest
coal consumer at around 1.2mt, followed by industry at around
0.9-lmt.
To increase consumption significantly beyond these levels will
require an improved distribution system to move coal beyond the
coal-burning municipalities and industries of the southern
industrial belt to the central and northern parts of the country.
But that process has been complicated by Finland's successful
efforts to diversify its coal supply sources.
Reducing dependence on traditional suppliers like the USSR and
Poland was already an aim before the collapse of the Polish coal
industry in 1981 accelerated the process. Prior to 1980, Finland
imported about two-thirds of its coal (some 4mt a year) from
Poland and nearly all the rest (0.7mt/year) from the USSR. In 1981,
however, imports from Poland fell to 1.4mt. To compensate, imports
from the UK were doubled to l.lmt and imports from the US quadrupled
from 0.5mt to 2.3mt. Imports from the USSR remained steady at
0.7mt.
Despite the recovery of the Polish coal industry in 1982 and
strenuous marketing, Finland increased its purchases only slightly
to 2mt. Imports from the UK rose slightly to 1.2mt but imports
from the US were slashed to 0.9mt. Imports from the USSR remained
at 0.7mt.
But Finland's decision to procure nearly half of its coal from non-
Baltic Sea suppliers has demanded major investment in port
facilities. 'It does not have ports suitable for the large coal
carriers used in ocean trade.
To cope, the Finns have expanded the southern port of Inkoo to
take full Panamax size vessels (60-80,000dwt, 13-metre draft).
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
!1MLANU
Finland: Peat consumption. million m'
million m'
But increasing coal use in north western Finland will require
further port expansion at Tahkolouto near Pori. At the moment,
Tahkolouto is a 10-metre draft port without cranes. By 1985-86,
it is to be expanded to cope with 15.3-metre draft, 100-160,000dwt
carriers, the size most economically operated from the US.
But that is not the end of the problem. On the southern coast,
some 10 ports will have to be able to take feeder coal; on the
western coast about nine. Many of these ports are without cranes.
But the decision on the size and type of carrier fleet needed,
particularly for serving the West Coast port, has not yet been
taken.
Canal Another proposal for internal distribution northwards is to
transport transport coal via the canal in Soviet Karelia through to the big
lakes where it can be carried in the same barges up to Kopiu and
Varkaus.
Last year, Finland
overtook Ireland as the
world's second largest
peat producer after the
USSR. Production
jumped by over 300% from
3.9m m3 in 1981 to 16m
m3. The share in total
consumption also rose
from 1.9% (25% of
domestic fuels) to 24%
(320o of domestic fuels).
Peat use rose to 0.6mtoe
(7m m3) last year from
0.5mtoe (9m m3 in 1981).
1979
The government aim is to increase peat's share of energy to 6-8%
of total consumption by the end of this decade. Eventually a share
of 10% is anticipated. Increased use is being helped by moderate
increases in the market price of milled peat This rose to FM48
per MW;'h last year against FM42 per MWh in 1981.
14 17, =T I n-
Already With virtually all potential hydropower capacity already harnessed,
harnessed significant changes in hydro output are determined by water
availability. In 1981, for example, unusually heavy rainfalls
pushed hydro consumption up by 32% to 3.4mtoe. More normal
conditions in 1982 pulled the figure back to 3.2mtoe. Average
consumption is around 2.6mtoe.
But while hydro's share of domestic fuels use has remained fairly
stable, its share of electricity generation has fallen markedly
with the commissioning of the nuclear power plants. In 1976, the
e
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
FINLAND
C
Primary
position
year before the first
nuclear station came on
stream, hydro power
comprised 12,000 Gwh or
370/10 of total electricity
supply. Last year,
hydropower was 12,983 Gwh
but only 31.1% of the
total.
electricity generation fell:
hydropower by 4% from 13,518 Gwh
to 12,983 Gwh, back pressure
power by 5.7% from 9,463 Gwh to
8,923 Gwh, and conventional
condensation power by 25.8% from
2,299Gwhto 1,705 Gwh.
Nuclear electricity generation
rose from 13,825 Gwh in 1981 to
15,922 Gwh last year.
Electricity imports also rose in
1982 to 2,266 Gwh from 2,244 Gwh.
Electricity is imported and
exported through the Nordic
system and imported from the
USSR.
1979 1980 1981 1982
Gross
:onsumption
Nuclear power confirmed
its primary position in
Finnish electricity
production last year with
a 15.1% jump in output
against a rise in gross
electricity consumption of
1.1%. All other forms of
, '
'
1978
FINLAND: ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION BY
SECTOR (Kwh)
Industry 23.8 22.9
Public and private 12.1 12.8
Space heating 3.4 3.6
Losses 2.3 2.5
Source: Finnish Energy Department
Prices of electricity fell for all
categories of user in 1982.
industries, which were paying 19.6p/per
unit at the beginning of the year were
paying 17p at the start of 1983. Price
fall for other sectors were - small
private consumers from 26.1p to 24.9p,
large private consumers from 39.5p to
38.8p.
figure of 41,359. Of this, nuclear power provided 38.1% (33.5% in
1981), hydropower 31.1% (32.6%), back pressure power 21.3% (22.9%)
conventional condensation power 4.1% (5.6%), and net imports 5.4%
(5.4%).
Gross electricity consumption
last year totalled 41,799 Gwh,
a 1.1% increase on the 1981
f:1T!~?T17
Nuclear power has become a major success story for Finland, with
load factors far outstripping original projections.
Finland now has four nuclear power stations in operation - two
privately operated and two in the state sector. The state sector
reactors, Loviisa I and II, on the island of Hastolmen about lOOkms from
Helsinki, are operated by the State power company Imatran Voima.
Both are Soviet-designed VVER 440MW pressurised water reactors (pwr).
80
Meavy fuel oil
60
40
Milled peat
20
~
I I
Hard coal
1" 7
T
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
FINLAND
Although planned to produce 440MW overall, they are actually
producing about 465MW, enabling a full 440MW to be delivered to
the national grid.
The private sector nuclear plants are operated by Teollisuuden
Voima Oy. Owned approximately 50:50 by the state and Finland's
industrial giants, Teollisuuden Voima was set up to provide power
at cost through two Swedish-designed 660MW boiling water reactors
located on the island of Olkiluoto in the Gulf of Bothnia.
Load In 1981, the Loviisa I reactor had a load factor of 80.6% and
factors Loviisa II, in its first full year of operation, 70.5%. Last year,
Loviisa I had a load factor of 84.2% and Loviisa II of 77.701. The
lower figure for Loviisa II reflects a recent large-scale survey,
done every two years; because of this, the reactor was not
operating for two months.
These results, plus a similarly good performance from the Olkituoto
reactors, have pushed nuclear's share in Finland's primary energy
consumption up from 1.7mtoe or 7.9% of the total in 1980 to 3.5mtoe
or 13.9% in 1981 and to 4mtoe or 16% in 1982.
The major question hanging over the nuclear power industry now is
whether or not the government elected in March this year will plump
for coal or uranium for Finland's next power station.
If a new reactor is chosen it will most likely be in the 1,000MW
range; both Soviet and French designs are under consideration. But
a major factor will be the question of fuel supply and waste -
disposal.
Under the agreement with the USSR, the Loviisa reactors receive
their fuel in ready-to-use form with supplies guaranteed for the
life of the reactors. Even more importantly, the nuclear waste
has to be stored for just five years - after which it is returned
to the USSR for reprocessing or long-term storage.
But the Swedish-built reactors do not have this advantage. The
long-term storage of spent nuclear fuel they imply has been a
matter of controversy. TVO has now put forward a scheme to bury
high-level waste in Finland at a cost of some FM3.2bn. Sending
this waste abroad for reprocessing could cost an estimated FM6bn.
High-level Under the proposed scheme, high-level waste will be sealed in
waste copper drums and placed in temporary storage on the surface until
an underground depository is built. This will be a man-made
cavern with capacity of 90,000m3, capable of housing an estimated
1,200 tonnes of high-level waste. Final disposal would begin in
the year 2020 and the cave would be sealed once and for all.
To carry out the scheme TVO will have to find reserves covering
future costs from this year on. The plan has yet to be approved
by the Ministry of Trade and Industry, but most observers believe
it will go ahead because of the lack of any real alternative. All
the same, many Finns, perhaps even a majority, clearly do not want
any further spent nuclear fuel depots. That must make the USSR the
strongest contender for the country's next nuclear power station.
C
r
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
 c
I 1 I 111 T I 19 1 ll u l 1IL1111ll11MlINl I I Ill .IL 1 ?Ia R 11L
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
FINLAND
Finland is one of the
world leaders in the use
of district heating (DH).
About 80% of Helsinki's
homes and a third of all
Finnish homes are DH-
linked. Electricity
utility sources see the
national figure rising
to 50% by the end of the
century. Production of
district heat more than
doubled between 1973 and
1981 (the latest year for
which data is available),
from 7,355GWh to 15,740
Finland: Prices of heating fuels, FIM/MW.
.!MW,. FIMMW..
I
Dir
I
ect electric heating
District heating
lII' fight fuel oil
....
Fire wood
GWh. About 55% of output Source Finland Energy Department
200
in 1981 came from combined heat and power plants, the rest directly
from heat-only boilers. Consumption of district heating increased
again last year from 14,252CWh in 1981 to 14,500GWh.. Coal
replaced heavy oil as the major fuel with a consumption share of
40% against 37% in 1981. Heavy oil consumption comprised 3811 (447
in 1981) and peat 14% (130). Other fuels, about half natural gas,
provided 8% (6% in 1981).
Power (MW)
electricity/
district heat
Commissioning
Vanaja
(Haemeenlinna)
20/80
Jan 1983
Kristiinan Kaupunki
222/-
1983
Salmisaari
(Helsinki)
II
30/62
1983
Jyvasyla
75/180
Spring 1986
Joensu
Kouvola
Remarks
coal-fired.
oil-burning boiler replaced by
coal boiler. Electricity
production only.
new coal-burning station to
replace existing Salmisaari I.
peat-fired. 120W of heat for
district heating, remaining
40MW as process stead for
paper mill.
peat-fired
Cutting specific consumption and diversifying the fuel base is now
well-established Finnish policy, prosecuted with the aid of tax
incentives or disincentives and subsidies. It is also backed up by
an intensive R&D programme and general information service designed
to make Finns "energy conscious". Total expenditure in this area
last year was budgeted at FM900m, including the research programme.
Of this, some FM17m was spent on the information programme and
FM145m on energy saving in households.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3
FINLAND
JACOBSTAD
Arctic Ocean
Barent Sea
SWEDEN I I A U S S R
NORWAY
I )
TAMPERE
NAANTALI
INK00
Vyborg
LOVIISA .'
NESTE-PORVOO
Ladogo
LENINGRAD
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/25: CIA-RDP85T00287R000502200002-3