Required as well as continued support for phasing out

required as well as continued support for phasing out fossil fuels. Within
the Nordic countries the main barrier to continued improvement in
energy efficiency is the slow rate of turnover of the building stock, as
well as the difficulty in improving energy efficiency (space heating and
cooling) of older buildings. For example, the turnover rate of building

stock has been slow in Denmark, which has, in turn, slowed down the
improvements in energy efficiency. Because new buildings are in
general much more energy efficient than older buildings, more
emphasis should be given to retrofitting older buildings. The Swedish
Million Programme offers a summary of the possible difficulties in
improving the energy efficiency of buildings. Initially, the programme
was set up by the Swedish Parliament with the goal of building 100 000
dwellings per year between 1965 and 1974. These buildings need to be
retrofitted due to their age and could provide an opportunity for further
energy savings. However, various barriers exist preventing this from
happening. Energy efficiency improvements do not reduce the operating
costs of these buildings and, therefore, rents must be raised. These
apartments are in low-income areas and the residents might not be

able to pay the higher rent. It is, therefore, very hard for the housing
companies to reduce the energy consumption in their buildings, while at
the same time maintain the bottom line (Swedish Association of Public
Housing Companies, 2011). Therefore both financial and social factors
can sometimes prevent energy savings. Another barrier is the lack of
awareness about efficient technologies. Homeowners and firms may
simply not be aware of energy efficient technologies nor the financial or
environmental benefits they can bring. Governments can increase
awareness through campaigns and by publishing reliable information.
Nordic countries are similar in many ways, but differ particularly in
terms of access to energy sources. Iceland, for example, has access to
geothermal energy and Norway has historically used a higher share of
electricity than other countries in the region due to its abundant

hydropower resources and low electricity prices. The buildings stock is
also quite different among the five countries. Consequently, critical
challenges differ depending on the different resources available and
characteristics of the building stock. Chapter 7 Nordic Energy
Technology Perspectives Chapter 7 Conclusions 149 © OECD/IEA, 2013.
Conclusions The Nordic Energy Technology Perspectives (NETP)
describes three possible scenarios for the Nordic energy system in 2050,
each of which is greatly decarbonised, more efficient and has a high
share of renewable sources. All three scenarios describe a region that is
a significant electricity exporter and carbon capture and storage (CCS)
practitioner, and has a completely revolutionised transport sector. Key
Findings ■ The NETP scenarios provide a valuable context to assess the
potential of current national targets. The Carbon-Neutral Scenario (CNS)

offers a cost-effective pathway to an energy system with no net