When comparing the results with those from the previous year, general stability as well as some noteworthy changes are observed. Interesting trends can be seen in the results over the longer term. Furthermore, the time series shows the seesaw nature of the popularity of various energy forms: when the popularity of one production method increases, the popularity of another or several others usually decreases. Once again, one of the most common features in the changes measured now is that attitudes towards fossil fuels are even more critical than before.

Attitudes towards coal have become increasingly negative over the years. The breaking of this trend, which was registered in the survey three years ago, proved to be a false alarm. The result of the last survey was the most pessimistic in the entire history of the survey. The current figures are practically as bleak as and clearly more negative than the lowest figures in the early 1990s (affected by the debate over forest death and acid rain at the time). Undoubtedly, the latest development in attitudes has been accelerated by the debate on climate change, in which coal has clearly been given much of the blame. With the commencement of emissions trading, coal as an energy source has become an outright outcast. It is evident that since 1986, when the use of coal was hoped to be increased rather than decreased, the support for coal has radically declined [Figure 2a.].

The approval of peat has slightly decreased when compared to the previous survey. The decrease in the previous survey was visible, and it was historic because the net figure for this form of energy is now negative for the first time as its opposition has exceeded its support. The development of the support for peat shows clear variation, i.e. gradual increases and decreases in approval. In recent years, attitudes have shown a declining trend, which was first slow but then started to decline more rapidly. The latest peak of support, at the turn of the millennium, is now well in the past. The long-term trend in the fluctuation in attitudes does not seem to be directly connected to the debate on greenhouse gas emissions. However, the attention that peat has received in connection with emissions trading is probably reflected in the figures for the previous years [Figure 2a.].

The popularity of natural gas is also somewhat more reserved than previously. The halt in the decrease that was visible in the previous survey has not been maintained, but the decreasing trend has continued. As a result of the change, the current distribution is by a narrow margin the most negative in the entire follow-up period. The figures in recent history are most probably a result of the attention given to certain international events. The recent policy of shutting off the supply of natural gas to those who voice unwanted opinions is also reflected in other indications which show a growing concern about the availability and price development of natural gas. In addition, the discussion on the construction of the natural gas pipeline in the Baltic Sea can be seen as reflected in the results. Altogether, the history of the opinions regarding this energy form is quite peculiar. Its permanent popularity in the early part of the follow-up period - the attitudes towards this energy form remained incomparably positive for sixteen years - turned into a visible downswing in the 1999 survey. After this quite surprising change, the figures became even more negative, as if they were seeking their correct level. The figures for 2003-2005 already indicated a stabilisation of attitudes, but after that period a new decrease was observed. It seems that there are several reasons for the development of attitudes. In addition to issues relating to availability and price, the decline in the environmental image of the energy form most likely added to reservations. Natural gas, traditionally considered environmentally viable, has been 'revealed' as a fossil fuel, not necessarily a good friend to the climate [Figure 2b.].

Attitudes towards nuclear power have remained on the same approving level to which they rose in the survey six years ago. The current distribution is practically the same as in the previous year. The relation between the shares of supporters and opponents of nuclear power has remained the same as previously (both being one percentage point greater than before). Also, a comparison with the previous results shows long-term stability, like a plateau in the support curve. Thus, the latest results also confirm the previous view: the trend in the popularity of nuclear power in the 2000s is a relatively permanent phenomenon and not a momentary swing in public opinion or a statistical error due to random fluctuation [Figure 2b.]. Attitudes towards nuclear power are also assessed later in connection with attitudes towards further construction of nuclear power plants (Chapter 2).

The development of support for hydropower shows a somewhat unexpected feature. There is a break in the extensive acceptance of this energy form that has remained steady for a significant period, and it might be difficult to provide an exhaustive explanation for the reasons behind this. Unless it is a question of the problems in the hydropower projects that have been visible in the media and the emergent scepticism arising from these, it may have to be concluded that, just like stock prices, support for forms of energy does not always rise. It must also be noticed that the distribution of attitudes is still clearly straightforward towards acceptance and as such overwhelmingly positive compared to other significant methods of electricity generation. When studied decade by decade, the development of the support of hydropower takes on a gradually rising curve: average opinions in the 1990s were more accepting than those in the 1980s, and the opinions in the new millennium (not including the newest result) are more accepting than those in the 1990s. The figures for the last survey represented the greatest - although the margin was extremely small - sympathies towards hydropower during the entire follow-up period The time series shows that support has increased 'almost unnoticed' for a long time, slowly increasing without any major leaps [Figure 2c.]. The firm support is, above all, a result of the Finnish origin of the energy source and its lack of emissions - rapids do not produce greenhouse gases. Attitudes towards hydropower have, however, shown a contradiction between support in principle and practical measures for a long time. Despite extensive support, the construction of new hydropower plants is shunned due to the disadvantages for the environment and the fisheries.

Wood and other bioenergy sources were as desirable as sources of energy for electricity generation as they were in previous years. Support is not only strong but also relatively stable. This fuel category has been included in the comparative series of questions in ten surveys, so it is not possible to give any description of a longer-term development for its support [Figure 2c.]. The other follow-up questions on the use of wood indicate, however, a steady trend of positive basic attitudes at all times. The role of wood in Finnish culture and its role in providing new jobs have been deemed the key factors in favour of its use as an energy source. Positive attitudes can also be seen in respondents' willingness to promote the use of bioenergy, even by means of tax relief. However, the idea of replacing coal with wood for heating Helsinki is still considered more unrealistic than realistic.

In the case of wind power, the survey also shows unambiguously high figures. Even though the share of those in favour of increasing its use is lower than in the two previous surveys, it still equals the average of the follow-up period and is also as such almost extremely high. The discussion on wind power, which is somewhat incisive every now and then - including the overall mockery on 'windmill idealism', does not seem to undermine the popularity of the production method. As is the case with wood, this form of energy was included in the comparison for the tenth time [Figure 2d.]. Even earlier, the popularity of wind power has been high nearly every time this question has been brought up in any form. Views on wind power are also studied in this survey under the subject of attitudes towards alternative energy forms (Chapter 5).

Oil - another more recent candidate in the comparison - is shunned in the same way as before. Attitudes towards the use of oil as an energy source in electricity generation (naturally, the principal uses of oil are elsewhere) achieved the lowest level reached last time, and the current figures are not much more comforting. Even though the trend in attitudes at the beginning of the 2000s indicated some easing of criticism, the latter time series indicates that this stage has come to an end and the trend has changed [Figure 2d.]. In addition to its poor image, oil is burdened by its fluctuating price, which is sensitive to changes in the global political situation.