Will Fossil-Free Energy Turn Finland’s Economy Toward Growth?

One of the biggest international goals is to phase out fossil energy. That’s why it was interesting to note that 95 percent of Finland’s electricity production was based on fossil-free energy sources in 2024 — including nuclear, wind, hydro, and solar power, as well as renewable fuels.

Last year also marked a milestone: wind power surpassed hydropower to become the second largest source of electricity production. The only larger source is nuclear energy, which accounted for 38 percent of Finland’s electricity supply.

This development is not only excellent for climate action but also because fossil-free energy gives a competitive edge to investments that consume a lot of energy. For this reason, Finland is expected to attract a wide range of international investments in the coming years — from various data centers to fossil-free hydrogen production.

If and when these future promises are fulfilled, Finns will have reason to expect the national economy to finally embark on a path of growth. At the same time, Finland’s public finances could move toward balance — especially since the Finnish government has promised to implement reforms that support economic growth over the next two years.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Green Movement is Withering – And That’s Not a Bad Thing
The difficult times for Finland's economy are coming to an end
Towards green energy despite serious drawbacks

Finland Shifts Stance on EU Joint Debt Amid Growing Defense and Ukraine Support Needs

As the United States grapples with the turbulence following the rise of a new administration, the European Union's role in supporting Ukraine is becoming increasingly significant. For this reason, the Finnish government is shifting its stance on EU joint debt, becoming more favorable toward it—provided it is used specifically for aiding Ukraine and strengthening collective defense.

As a sign of this shift, Prime Minister Petteri Orpo (National Coalition Party) reiterated this position on Monday upon arriving at an informal EU defense meeting in Brussels. According to him, the guiding principle of joint debt should be that investments in defense must be based on necessity and threat assessments.

To clarify his stance, he stated that “those funds should be used where Europe is being defended. In that case, Finland must clearly be among the beneficiaries.”

Additionally, Finland, along with nearly all EU member states, proposed that the European Investment Bank (EIB) should increase its financing for the European defense industry. In practice, this would mean reassessing the EIB's so-called "excluded sectors" list to align with the EU's current political priorities. This adjustment would allow the EIB to finance traditional defense industries in the future.

One point of contention has also been where defense procurements should be made. As always, France—keen to favor its domestic industry—wants EU defense acquisitions funded by joint resources to be sourced from European markets.

However, Finland’s prime minister noted that Europe’s defense needs are so vast that there will be enough demand to support both France’s and Finland’s defense industries. Furthermore, he emphasized that it would neither be reasonable nor even possible for the EU to detach itself from the United States, given that American defense systems are highly advanced and will continue to be necessary.

It remains to be seen whether Orpo’s well-argued positions will gain traction within the Union. At present, Hungary and Austria oppose them, and many other countries—such as France—are waiting for more details before taking a final stance.

That said, Europe does not have the luxury of time. Decisions must be made immediately regarding Ukraine and, as soon as possible, to enhance the EU’s overall defense readiness. At the same time, efforts must be made to prevent the trade war threatened by Donald Trump from disrupting transatlantic economic and technological cooperation—or, more critically, NATO’s ability to operate effectively wherever necessary.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finland and the USA: Strong Allies with Shared Interests or a Trade Dispute?
Finnish Minister Riikka Purra: “Putin Is a War Criminal, an Aggressive Imperialist”
From Finland to Olaf Scholz: The Imperative of Supporting Ukraine's Independence instead of its Finlandization

The Green Movement is Withering – And That’s Not a Bad Thing

The Green movement has gained strength since the 1970s in many countries. At the same time, it has transformed from an environmental movement that defied the traditional left-right classification into a broadly left-wing radical movement.

In many countries, this development has led to a decline in support for Green parties. For example, in Finland, the party reached its peak popularity in August 2017, with as much as 17% of eligible voters backing it. Today, however, its support has dropped to just 8%.

This has resulted in the rise of less left-leaning figures within the party, who continue to advocate for environmental issues but are more cautious toward far-left ideologies. An example of this is when three Green politicians – including the party's relatively new chairperson – proposed investing in Finland's defense industry.

This immediately sparked a backlash, casting doubt on the party's future. The Green youth organization declared that the defense industry does not represent Green values or "jointly agreed" policies.

The chair of the youth organization further stated that "sustainable, just, feminist, and human rights-based foreign policy is the core of Green security policy. Therefore, we are deeply disappointed with the party leadership's statement and do not support it."

Since the future of established parties – such as the Finnish Greens – is always reflected in their youth organizations, it seems that the fate of Finland's environmental movement will be to wither away along with other far-left movements. This is not a bad outcome for ordinary Finns or even for the environment.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Are Finns pragmatic and practical people?
Finnish Society Adopts Medieval Characteristics
The Green Movement of Finland is Lost

Ukraine can and will stop Putin

Finnish President Alexander Stubb said yesterday, during the NATO summit, that Ukraine will leave the meeting satisfied. One reason for this is that the United States, Germany, Romania, and the Netherlands confirmed in a statement released at the NATO summit that they are providing Ukraine with Patriot air defense systems.

This comes at a more than opportune time, as Russia has shown that it aims to destroy the entire Ukrainian society instead of just the Ukrainian army by launching missile attacks on a children's hospital. This is, of course, such a war crime that overlooking it with a shrug would be almost a crime against humanity in itself.

This was also noted by US President Joe Biden, who stated that "Putin wants nothing more than the complete defeat and erasure of Ukraine from the map." Additionally, he was pleased to note that NATO countries have invested more in their defense forces in recent years.

However, the most important outcome of the meeting was the agreement to grant a 40 billion aid package to Ukraine for next year. It is hoped that this will help Ukrainians protect themselves from Russia's war of destruction against civilians and, at the same time, turn the tide of the war permanently against Putin's army.

Biden also believed this, stating that "Ukraine can and will stop Putin."

Aiempia ajatuksia samasta aihepiiristä:
Finnish military intelligence: the Russian army is at the limits of its operational capability
Finnish weapons are being tested against the Russians in Ukraine
Technically backward, miscellaneous group of gunmen

Towards green energy despite serious drawbacks

Finland is currently building a nuclear plant, which was expected to be ready by year 2009. According to the most recent news a new problem was noticed in the plant, and therefore its addition to an electricity network will be delayed even more. 

In spite of the huge delays - due to uncompromised safety needs - it is probable that the plant will be in full operation during the coming spring. And lifts the country to a self-sustainability in electricity. 

One of the solved problems in Finland is the final disposal of nuclear waste. That makes a distinction to all other countries in the world and gives the northern country a relative benefit in the people´s acceptability of nuclear power compared to other nations.  

In addition to nuclear power, Finland invests considerably in windmills. Their number has increased in few years so much that in January they produced almost equal amount of electricity as the nuclear plants (four old ones, and the one cited above, which is in test use). 

Therefore it can be expected that Finland will become a net producer of energy in near future - most of which will be green (composed of nuclear energy, wind power, bioenergy and hydropower). That should open a new avenue to the northern country to gain economic investments. And to increase the standard of living of its inhabitants in a sustainable way. 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Reducing taxes, enhancing export and paying the governmental debt
The reasons behind the fall of Nokia´s cellphone business
They want to wipe out from Finland what is good for Africa

A Finnish Professor would raise inheritance tax up to 65 percent

Professor Heikki Hiilamo of the Helsinki University proposed that inheritance tax should be raised up to 65 percent. He justified that by the inequality of people, which reduces the chances of poor people to succeed in the society. He also noted that it takes a lot of education to allow them a chance to prosper, which is expensive and not possible in a highly unequal society. 

I just wonder how would such a high taxation of inheritance affect the motivation of elder people to work - and pay taxes - when their offspring would inherit only a third of their fortune and property? And how would that affect the accumulation of funds for investments in private companies owned by single families? 

And ultimately, how would such a high taxation finally affect the living standard of poor people in a free world, where rich ones always have a chance to find a new home in a country, where the taxation is reasonable and hard working is encouraged by a possibility of transferring its outcome to offspring?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
International Master´s degree is an opportunity to be used
A nurse´s question: who deserves health care, and who does not
Misuse of taxpayers´ money in Finland