SuomiAreena2026: Winners and Losers of the Energy Transition
July, 2026
Henna Longi
A view of the SuomiAreena Rantalava in Pori.
The resourcefulness of a grandmother from Pihtipudas was placed alongside the capabilities of an engineer from Espoo as a panel discussion organized by the JUST ENERGY programme at SuomiAreena explored the winners and losers of the energy transition.
The energy transition is both timely and essential for mitigating climate change. At the same time, it represents a profound societal transformation involving much more than technology or energy sources alone.
“This is about the economy, fairness, everyday life, the security of society, and the theme of SuomiAreena 2026: trust,” stated Juha Peltomaa, Programme Director of the Just Energy project at the Finnish Environment Institute, as he opened the panel discussion on the Paviljonki stage in Pori on 23 June.
Programme Director of the Just Energy project Juha Peltomaa
opened the panel discussion.
The panel featured Lasse Peltonen (Professor, University of Eastern Finland), Enni Ruokamo (Research Professor, Finnish Environment Institute and University of Jyväskylä), Sini Numminen (Academy Research Fellow, Aalto University), Aaron Michelin (Entrepreneurship Counsellor, Corporatum Oy), and Juha Beurling-Pomoell (Secretary General, the Finnish Consumer Association). The discussion was moderated by Minna Näsman from the JustH2Transit project and the University of Oulu.
For some Finns, the energy transition brings new opportunities, investments, jobs, and competitiveness. For others, it means rising costs, uncertainty, and the need to adapt to change. The discussion explored the impacts of the transition on households, individuals, municipalities, and Finland as a whole. Without the energy transition, Finland would in many ways be worse off than it is today. Yet as we build a low-carbon energy system, we must also consider who bears the costs and who benefits the most.
Electricity Prices Catch Winter Consumers Off Guard
The discussion began by examining the effects of the energy transition on consumers and citizens. These include financial difficulties arising from fluctuating energy prices, as well as questions related to fairness and justice in the transition.
The energy crisis has introduced volatility and sharp increases in electricity pricing. Consumers are often surprised by electricity bills, particularly during winter, and some groups are more vulnerable than others. According to Academy Research Fellow Sini Numminen, it is already possible to speak of Nordic energy poverty when households are forced to cut other expenses because of high energy costs. Not everyone has the same capabilities or opportunities to adjust their energy use in ways that would help keep costs under control.
According to surveys conducted by the Finnish Consumer Association, energy costs are one of the most significant causes of financial hardship alongside food expenses, confirmed Secretary General Juha Beurling-Pomoell. Energy prices have a major impact on both households’ financial resilience and their subjective experience of economic strain.
Research Professor Enni Ruokamo pointed out that the energy transition also offers solutions, such as more diverse heating systems. These provide households with greater choice and flexibility. According to Ruokamo, there are winners as well: Finland is among the frontrunners in the adoption of new technologies in households, including heat pumps.
Panellists at the Paviljonki stage (from left): Juha Beurling-Pomoell, Aaron Michelin, Sini Numminen, Lasse Peltonen, Enni Ruokamo, Minna Näsman.
Who Can Afford to Invest—and in What?
However, not everyone has the opportunity to invest in new solutions. The discussion raised the question of whether issues of fairness could be addressed through simple measures related to building efficiency and energy use in homes, thereby enabling households with different financial circumstances to participate in the transition.
The panel also discussed the respective roles of social policy and energy or climate policy. Enni Ruokamo noted that social policy and social security systems can intervene and provide relief in the short term, but long-term solutions must come from energy policy. When designing such policies, it is also important to consider the consequences of failing to make investments.
Energy policy can enable sufficient energy efficiency and appropriate heating systems in homes. These measures strengthen households’ ability to respond to fluctuations in energy prices while simultaneously reducing emissions.
The panellists agreed that, viewed from a short-term perspective, the energy transition may create tensions. Despite these challenges, consumers, municipalities, policymakers, and investors alike must be able to make decisions that benefit society in the long run. Without a stable, predictable, and ambitious operating environment, the transition cannot progress.
Regional and Local Divides in Electricity Transmission
Professor Lasse Peltonen examined the impacts of the energy transition at the municipal and regional levels. He highlighted the importance of new electricity transmission infrastructure and the significant land-use changes associated with its construction.
These developments create a variety of regional and local impacts that can generate tensions—not only among local interests, but also in relation to national climate objectives. Peltonen emphasized that understanding these tensions is essential for ensuring the acceptability of the green transition and for managing it effectively.
Peltonen also noted that Finland is currently divided between east and west in terms of renewable energy production. Eastern Finland faces particular challenges related to national defence considerations. While individual wind power projects exist in the region, large-scale development has not emerged in the same way as in western Finland, where wind power construction has expanded rapidly.
As major industrial projects that rely heavily on electricity tend to locate near renewable energy production, the benefits of the energy transition are currently distributed unevenly across Finnish regions.
Entrepreneurship Counsellor Aaron Michelin explained that low electricity prices attract new electricity-intensive industries, while higher-priced regions tend to attract new electricity generation projects because of their greater profitability. As a result, development does not occur everywhere simultaneously.
Over time, however, new industrial demand raises electricity prices in areas where prices are initially too low to encourage new generation investments. Additional generation then lowers prices again, attracting new investments that consume electricity. Michelin therefore encouraged stakeholders to consider what kinds of energy solutions would be suitable for Eastern Finland, including from the perspective of the Finnish Defence Forces, and what incentives might attract investment to the region.
Aaron Michelin, Sini Numminen, Lasse Peltonen, and Enni Ruokamo.
Energy Networks Connect Industry and Households
According to Peltonen, it is also important to understand how industrial energy demand can affect consumer electricity costs through limitations in grid capacity. Consumers can compare electricity suppliers and influence parts of their energy bills, but transmission charges are far less flexible.
The discussion explored various options for making transmission pricing more equitable, such as tariffs linked to electricity consumption or network load. The panellists noted that further research is needed on this topic.
The dissemination of research-based knowledge also plays an important role in the acceptability of the energy transition, the panellists agreed. Peltonen pointed out that unfamiliar technologies such as hydrogen and small modular nuclear reactors can be challenging for citizens to understand, particularly when projects are planned near their own communities and surroundings.
The discussion revealed tensions linked to the energy transition both between different groups of citizens and between regions. A central question emerged: should change be designed around the needs of the most vulnerable or the most active drivers of change? Should the terms of the transition be dictated by a grandmother from Pihtipudas or an engineer from Espoo?
Whichever path is chosen—or whatever balance is found between the two—the panellists agreed on one thing: if the transition is perceived as unfair, it will slow down.
The full discussion is available for viewing on MTV Katsomo.