D4.3 Finland – National Stakeholder Meeting Report

This project is funded by the European Union The sole responsibility of this publication lies with the authors. The European Union is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.

Agriculture and Energy Efficiency

2

D4.3 Finland – National Stakeholder Meeting This project was funded by the FP7 Program of the EU under Grant Agreement Number 289139 Project Deliverable 4.3

Authors: Hannu J. Mikkola

© 2013 AGREE

University of Helsinki

Agriculture and Energy Efficiency

3

Contents 1.

Participants ................................................................................................ 4

2.

Progression of the workshop ................................................................. 4 2.1.

Opening ................................................................................................................................... 4

2.2.

Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 4

2.3.

The process .............................................................................................................................. 5

2.3.1. 2040

Step1: Definition of words or short phrases describing energy efficient agriculture in 5

2.3.2.

Step 2: Barriers on the way to energy efficient agriculture in 2040 ................................ 5

2.3.3.

Step 3: Opportunities to realize energy efficient agriculture ........................................... 6

2.3.4.

Step 4: Prioritizing ............................................................................................................ 7

2.3.5. Step 5: Making a short list of the barriers and the opportunities and definition of players who can overcome the barriers or initiate the opportunities ............................................. 7

3.

Conclusions ............................................................................................... 7

List of Tables Table 1: Participants ................................................................................................................................ 4 Table 2: The top four barriers and player(s) who can overcome them. .................................................. 7 Table 3: The top four opportunities and player(s) who can overcome them. ......................................... 7

Agriculture and Energy Efficiency

4

1. Participants Participants of the workshop were invited with personal emails on 17 January 2013. An invitation was sent to 28 experts from 22 different organizations. Twelve of them were able to participate in the workshop. The invited experts were from administration, education, research, advisory and consultancy services, farms and farmers’ union, energy industry, agricultural machine industry, animal feed industry, fertilizer industry, and The Finnish Association for Nature Conservation. In addition to invited experts four persons from the University of Helsinki participated in the workshop as organizers. The names and the employers of the participants are listed below and the status of their employers is given. Table 1: Participants

Name Jukka Ahokas Anni Alitalo Jussi Esala Aki Finér

Employer University of Helsinki Agrifood Research Finland - MTT Seinäjoen AMK Raisioagro Oy

Lea Gynther

Motiva Oy

Petri Hannukainen Tapani Jokiniemi Eerikki Kaila

Valtra Oy University of Helsinki TTS - Työtehoseura

Jyrki Kataja Hannu Mikkola Seppo Mikkonen

Jyväskylän AMK University of Helsinki Neste Oil Oyj

Antti Peltola Mari Rajaniemi Veli-Pekka Reskola Winfried Schäfer Taija Sinkko

Hämeen AMK University of Helsinki Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Agrifood Research Finland - MTT Agrifood Research Finland – MTT

Status of the employer University Research institute University of applied sciences Agri-trader of animal feed and farming supplies Expert company promoting efficient and sustainable use of energy and materials Tractor manufacturer University Research, development and training institute University of applied sciences University Refining and marketing company of liquid fuels University of applied sciences University Administration Research institute Research institute

2. Progression of the workshop 2.1.

Opening

Professor Jukka Ahokas from the University of Helsinki opened the workshop and welcomed the participants. He introduced shortly two other projects of the University of Helsinki related to energy use in agriculture i.e. Energy Positive Farm – ENPOS, and Agricultural Energy Academy.

2.2.

Introduction

Hannu Mikkola from the University of Helsinki presented shortly the AGREE project and defined the goals of the workshop. The goals were: 1. To identify and to prioritize possibilities and barriers which are on way to energy efficient agriculture, 2. To work out a common vision about energy efficiency development in agriculture. Results of this workshop present the Finnish view of the workshop assignment.

Agriculture and Energy Efficiency

2.3.

5

The process

The process of the workshop followed the principals of the Goal Oriented Project Planning method (a GOPP workshop). The steps of the workshop and their outcome is presented below. 2.3.1.

Step1: Definition of words or short phrases describing energy efficient

agriculture in 2040 The participants discussed for five minutes in pairs in order to define two words or short phrases describing energy efficient agriculture in 2040. After five minutes these words were collected one by one on the board so that they were visible all the time of the workshop. Words or phrases describing energy efficient agriculture 2040:  Energy management (measuring, monitoring)  Sensible farm structure (more reasonable location and size of fields than today)  Modern technology in use  Renewable, local energy  Meters, energy measuring  Small robot machines  Crops having more efficient photosynthesis than C4 crops have today  Energy self sufficiency  High energy price  Consumers appreciate energy efficiency  Energy know how  Transparent, product specific energy inspection  Biological nitrogen fixing  Taxes for fossil energy  Effective nutrient use and recycling  Use of waste heat  Automation  Energy quality system  Optimized fertilizer use  Energy labels  Minimized losses 2.3.2. Step 2: Barriers on the way to energy efficient agriculture in 2040 The participants were asked to think over for two minutes which are the most important barriers on the way to energy efficient agriculture. The goal of the workshop was to list at least 20 barriers. Barriers were written visible on the board. A long list of the barriers, the number of votes given is in the parenthesis:  Lack of indicators (7) and data (5), total (12)  Low level of skills and know-how (10)  Counteractive subsidies in energy and agricultural sector (9)  Values and attitudes (7)  High costs of energy efficiency (EE) measures (5)  Complexity of energy issues (5)  Low marginals (4)

Agriculture and Energy Efficiency

              

6

Administrative barriers, and barriers between production sectors (4) Energy efficiency solutions are farm specific (3) The volume of agricultural production should be maintained (3) Consumers´ expectations (3) Geographical segregation of animal and arable farming (2) Lack of simple technology (2) High prices of electronic components (2) Low return on capital (2) Legislation (1) Low appreciation of agriculture (1) Problems caused by climate change (0) Inefficient use of renewable energy (0) Long (transportation) distances (0) Small family farms (0) Lack of energy efficiency services (0)

2.3.3. Step 3: Opportunities to realize energy efficient agriculture In the same way as barriers, the participants were asked to think for two minutes which are the 20 most important opportunities to realize energy efficient agriculture and the opportunities were written on the board. During the lunch break the participants were asked to prepare to prioritize the barriers and opportunities in the next step. A long list of opportunities, the number of votes given is in the parenthesis:  Development of measuring technology and technology in general (12)  Education (9)  New energy efficiency inventions (9)  Recycling of materials and plant nutrients (8)  High energy price (taxes)(6)  Smart machines (6)  Legislation (5)  Subsidies (4)  Minimized losses (4)  Increased enterprise (3)  Smart electricity net (sophisticated measuring/monitoring) (3)  Consumers’ expectations (2)  Climate change (1)  Better availability of supporting services (1)  Unused inventions (1)  Change of generation (0)  Cost effective energy efficiency measures (0)  Long time needed for planning investments (0)  New finance sources (0)  Energy crisis (0)  Outsourced energy service (0)  Gene manipulation (0)

Agriculture and Energy Efficiency

 

7

Better appreciation of agriculture (0) Global market (0)

2.3.4. Step 4: Prioritizing After the lunch every participant got five green stickers (for voting opportunities) and five red stickers (for voting barriers) and they were asked to give their votes to the most important barrier/barriers and opportunity/opportunities. They were allowed to give all their five votes to one barrier/opportunity or they could also divide their votes to more than one candidate. 2.3.5.

Step 5: Making a short list of the barriers and the opportunities and definition

of players who can overcome the barriers or initiate the opportunities The final step was to elect the 3 – 4 most important barriers and opportunities and to define player(s) who can overcome the barriers or initiate the opportunities. Table 2: The top four barriers and player(s) who can overcome them.

1. 2. 3. 4.

Barrier Lack of indicators and data Know-how Policy Values and attitudes

Player(s) able to overcome the barriers Researchers in research institutes and in industry Education, communication National and transnational administration, organizations Schools, academies, communication, social media

Table 3: The top four opportunities and player(s) who can overcome them.

Opportunities 1. Technical development, innovations 2. Education, communication 3. Policy 4. Recycling

Player(s) able to initiate the opportunities Researchers, industry Schools, advisory organizations, administration National and transnational administration, civic organizations, research Farmers, researchers, ministries, industry

3. Conclusions The main conclusion of the workshop was that a lot of responsibility was laid on research and education in developing energy efficiency in agriculture. The structure of energy consumption and reasons for variation in energy consumption should be understood better. Key figures and indicators for energy consumption should be defined to facilitate benchmarking. Reliable, cheap and easy to use technology is needed for measuring and monitoring of energy consumption. Schools, advisory organizations and universities have a responsibility to take this knowledge as a part their education and advisory material. Expectations were placed on technical development and new inventions. The development of sensor, measuring and control technology makes it possible to design intelligent machinery, which can utilize both the direct and indirect energy inputs more efficiently. In crop production this can mean for example optimized utilization of fertilizers, crop protection agents, and fuels in field operations. In animal husbandry the new intelligent technology can be used to optimize feeding, ventilation and lighting systems. Farm subsidies and climate change, for example, were seen both as barriers and as opportunities for energy efficiency at the same time. Well subsidized farmers don’t have economic pressure to realize energy efficiency investments but on the other hand subsidies allocated to some energy efficiency measure can encourage executing these investments. Climate change can reduce food production

Agriculture and Energy Efficiency

8

capacity in some parts of the world and in other parts it should be increased whether it is energy efficient or not. Change from fossil energy to renewable was not in the actual core of the workshop though reduction of GHG emissions is one target of the AGREE project. However, a note was made that increasing energy efficiency is important whether fossil or renewable energy is used. Change from fossil to renewable alone doesn’t necessarily mean better energy efficiency. Policymakers can promote energy efficiency by means of legislation. Making energy wasting expensive and energy saving profitable gives a clear signal of the desired direction of policy. Financial support for energy saving investments is one administrative measure, taxation is second, and taking energy efficiency as one term of agricultural subsidies is third. Though better energy efficiency is one important target in agriculture there are problems such as nutrient and pesticide emissions to waters, soil fertility conserving, animal welfare, and biodiversity which wait for solutions. Broadminded surveys are needed instead of partial optimization and in these surveys energy efficiency can be a subject of compromises, too.