Basic attitudes towards forms of energy were measured by asking citizens to which direction our country’s electricity generation should be developed with regard to various energy alternatives. The eight most important energy sources currently used in electricity generation and import of electricity from abroad were assessed. Each of these had to be weighted separately on a seven-tier scale ('increase considerably' – 'phase out completely'). This question has been repeated in a basically comparable form annually since the autumn of 1983. The survey is the twenty-fifth, which means that the opinions of Finns have been systematically monitored for a quarter of a century.

1.1. Present situation

The comparison of the percentages of people in favor of increasing or decreasing the use of various energy forms gives a simplified picture of the 'ranking' of these energy sources. Wind power (90% are in favor of an increase and 3% in favor of a decrease) as well as wood and other bioenergy (84% / 4%) proved to be by far the most popular forms of energy. Attitudes toward hydropower (69% / 4%) are also quite positive [Figure 1].

Nuclear power, peat and natural gas form a sort of an intermediate group of energy forms that are 'favored with reservations'. The respondents wanted to increase rather than decrease the use of these energy forms, but opinions are already indicating some division. A little over two-fifths (43%) are now in favor of increasing the use of nuclear power, and a quarter are in favor of its decrease (25%). Even though the result concerning nuclear power is by no means revolutionary, it should be noted that this form of energy is now as high as the fourth in the comparison for the second time. Nevertheless, peat receives almost as much support (39% / 24%). The distribution concerning natural gas is somewhat more reserved (32% / 24%).

Attitudes towards coal and oil are clearly the most negative. A clear majority of Finns (73% and 75%) would like to reduce their use. Every second respondent (51%) would like to decrease the share of the traditionally significant electricity 'production method', import from abroad. Only a few would like to increase import (8%).

The fact that so-called alternative forms of energy beat the conventional production methods is not surprising as such; similar results have been obtained in various contexts for more than twenty years. However, the current proportions of usage taken up by the energy forms under review should be taken into account in the interpretation. In the current production system, some are in the 'major league' and others are mainly challengers aiming to play a supplementing role. Therefore, 'a considerable increase of use' takes on a different meaning with regard to various energy forms. For example, if the production of wind power were to be increased tenfold, it would achieve a share of about two per cent of all electricity produced; however, with some other alternative, a smaller increase in capacity would put it in a dominant position.

When taking the intensity of opinions into account (response categories have been combined above), one can say that of all the alternatives, coal power has the most absolute opposition. About one in five respondents (21%) would like to reject coal altogether. The second highest figure (10%) was given to nuclear power. This information – the low level of the figures – indicates that, despite the criticism expressed, people want to retain the diversity of the production structure, and that when compared to international figures, the phase-out of nuclear power has few supporters in Finland. The difference between nuclear power and coal is noteworthy because as the follow-up study period has progressed, the energy forms have switched places. This is the fifth time coal was deemed the 'most dreadful alternative'. From 1983 to 2002 this position was always given to nuclear power (not included in the figure).