Sweden and low-carbon technologies and policies

Adrian Mohareb

To MSLS 2010, Karlskrona

16 March 2010

1

A bit about Sweden

• Area of 450,000 km2 (more than 3x the size of Southern Ontario)

• Population of 9.2 million (c.f. S. Ontario – 12.1 million)

• Emissions of 64.0 Mt CO2e in 2008 (down 11% from 1990 levels)

• Carbon tax instituted in 1991 – now equal to approximately $150/tonne

2

What does that mean? How is Sweden relevant to Canada?

• Sweden is very similar in many ways to Ontario and Quebec– Few energy resources, save

hydroelectricity• Half of power demand met by nuclear

– Similar climate and geography (a bit milder in winter, a bit cooler in summer)

– Excellent wood and mineral resources– Similar population densities

3

Differences between Sweden and Canada – taxes! (and public services)

• Sweden is different in some key ways– Carbon tax! SEK1010/tonne of CO2

– Income taxes• First to municipalities and counties• Then to national government; equalization

– Sales tax and property taxes to national government

– No social housing

4

Biomass District Heating

Karlskrona – 120 km of piping

5

Blekinge Tekniska Hogskola Connected to Karlskrona’s District

Heating System

6

Absorption Chillers at BTHUsing district heat... to cool in summer!

7

My home!

8

Other things in Karlskrona…Solar cells on the hockey rink!

9

Telenor Arena in Karlskrona

10

Biomass CogenerationVäxjö – district heating for 60,000 plus 38

MW electricity – over 90% wood-fired

11

But where’d they get all that wood?

Orkanen Gudrun (Hurricane Gudrun)

Green roofsVäxjö University (now Linnaeus University)

13

Limnologen – Växjö

14

Source: http://www.tu.no/multimedia/archive/00082/Limnologen_exterior__82852e.jpg

HydroelectricityAlmost 50% of Sweden’s power

15

Hammarby SjöstadIntegrated urban development

16

Hammarby Sjöstad

Glashus Ett – an information centre on the neigbourhood (in English and Swedish)

17

Hammarby Sjöstad – waste management

ENVAC system – three-stream (organic, paper, containers) waste vacuum systems

18

Hammarby Sjöstad – waste management

Waste is vacuumed to central collection site

19

Hammarby Sjöstad – energySolar panels on south-facing facades

20

Hammarby Sjöstad – Transportation

• Public transit integrated at time of development/ construction

21

Hammarby Sjöstad – Transportation

• Biogas pumps • Ethanol pumps

22

Why do people use E85 and biogas? Because it’s cheaper!

23

Transport – Bicycle Lanes

Bicycling paths are separated from roads (in this case, they’re curbed) and follow main, fast routes to get from point A to point B

24

Transport – curbed bicycle lanes

25

Transport - trains

26

Urban Form – Pedestrian Streets

27

Buildings – Turning Torso and Västra Hamnen

Renewal of industrial lands near centre of Malmö

28

Waste-to-energy cogenerationSysav, Malmö

29Source: http://www.noah.no/Portals/noah/Bilder%20NOAHs%20Ark/SYSAV.jpg

Wind power in Sweden

• A little behind– only 1,067 MW so far as of 2008, compared to 3,160 in Denmark

30

Wind power in Sweden

Lillgrund wind farm – 48 turbines x 2.3 MW

31

Conclusions

• Sweden has made a commitment to low-carbon fuels, especially biomass

• This commitment is manifested through a carbon tax that drives green energy

• Sweden has many key similarities to Ontario and Québec, though some differences

• Transportation planning and urban form offer more people the opportunity to live low-carbon lifestyles

32

Wind power – Samsø, Denmark’s Renewable Energy Island

33

34

Wind power – everywhere in Denmark!

Samsø

DenmarkWood/solar thermal district heating - Samsø

35

DenmarkEco-Industrial Park - Kalundborg

36

Denmark

København – Offshore wind turbines

37

Denmark – Cycling in Copenhagen

38

Geothermal Power

39

Geothermal Power

40

Deutschland!

41

Deutschland!

42

Hamburg

43

Hamburg – HafenCity

44

Türkiye!

45

Türkiye!

46

Türkiye!

47

Canada! Napanee!?!?

48

49

Volvo TrucksNot necessarily the greenest site visit – but

fun!

50