Today’s energy choices redraw the landscape of the future

The question of how the energy landscapes of the future should be shaped is far from simple. The energy transition involves not only new technology, but also new areas of conflict.

Anders Larsson, lecturer and researcher at SLU with long experience in energy issues, argues that Sweden’s energy debate is characterized by rapid shifts and strong polarization:

“One week solar and wind power are pointed to as the solution, the next week it’s nuclear. It’s a struggle that has become unnecessarily ideological.”

He calls for greater energy neutrality in decision-making and a willingness to see how different energy sources can complement one another:

“You don’t have to be against solar and wind just because you support nuclear. We could probably rely on a couple of generations of solar power before new nuclear is ready to be used. But in all likelihood, the new nuclear power will be significantly more expensive by then.”

Biogas and rewetting: an underused potential

After years of debate about nuclear, solar, and wind, Anders Larsson believes that the Swedish energy discussion often forgets about solutions already close at hand.

Looking at our southern neighbor, Denmark, they have a significantly larger production of biogas. Sweden, Larsson argues, also has the potential to scale up – not least at farm level.

“By growing cover crops, farmers can not only create an additional income source but also increase carbon sequestration in the soil and contribute to energy supply during crises. Biogas is a sustainable, local form of energy that doesn’t require large amounts of rare earth metals or imported technology.”

Significant investments are also being made in Denmark in carbon sequestration through so-called rewetting projects. Their largest project covers 900 hectares. In Sweden, comparable projects are about 10 hectares. The difference between the countries, Larsson says, has more to do with political will and state financing than with natural conditions.

“We see the same thing in the EU’s nature restoration regulation, where Denmark’s national plan includes 400,000 hectares of farmland to be turned into nature and climate projects, of which 100,000 hectares are dedicated to wetlands. Sweden’s plan for rewetting projects lands at 1,600 hectares. The government has really set itself at a minimum level.”

A wasteful Society

Larsson has what he himself describes as an unpopular idea that contrasts with the prevailing debate. Instead of only discussing how to produce more energy, he believes we should look at how to save energy.

To illustrate, he offers a drastic example:

“If the people of Skåne lived as densely as in the most populated district of Hong Kong, they would all fit on an area the size of SLU’s Alnarp campus.”

He elaborates:

“The society we’ve built is based on the fact that we have a large land area, few people, plenty of money, cheap energy, and cheap land. We have among the highest amounts of asphalt per capita in the world. Beyond the emissions from the cars that drive on these roads, they cost money to build and maintain.”

Central to his argument is the concept of urban sprawl – how we spread out in the landscape. When urban areas become more dispersed, car dependency increases, travel distances grow, and municipalities are forced to invest in more roads, water systems, electrical grids, and services – all of which are energy-intensive systems. The result is a society in which both everyday life and public infrastructure require more energy than any energy source, renewable or not, can supply without major consequences.

Often, he says, densification is confused with exploitation:

“Densification is not about paving schoolyards or building over green spaces. It’s the opposite. We should use land more efficiently so that we can bring more nature into and around cities. Instead of building shopping centers, parking garages, and solar panels separately, we integrate them into the same building.”

Why isn’t this discussed more? 

“Measures focused on savings are not as interesting as those focused on expansion.”

Toward a more long-term energy landscape

The land areas required for renewable energy make the problem even more visible. Supplying Stockholm with the energy it consumes using only wind power would require around 3,600 wind turbines. The energy transition Sweden faces is therefore not only technical but spatial.

In the 1990s, Larsson lived in a house in Switzerland designed to be climate-neutral. Traditional fired brick and optimal solar exposure made the homes energy-neutral throughout the year.

“Back then, I thought that energy would never be a problem in the future.”