zlacker

> Finland achieved energy self sufficiency last year thanks to a good combination of nuclear + solar + hydro.

Energy means, well, energy. Finland still drives combustion vehicles (a lot of them, last I was there they drove some of the oldest cars in the EU on average due to high taxes for buying new ones) and probably mostly heat with energy not originating from the trio you mentioned.

I think you meant electricity, which is a great milestone on the way but not yet the destination.

Electricity used to be about 10% of a rich country's energy consumption, of late I think it's closer to 20% as some early adopters and new buildings have made the switch, but that still leaves 80% of your energy generated from oil and natural gas

>>Aachen+(OP)
Let’s also not forget another human activity, also a kind of energy consumption, but in a more direct way, aka eating. Livestock produces around 15% of global greenhouse emissions according to my quick Google search. And I am sure some Finns like to eat meat.

>>Ludwig+i7
And "making things" while we're at it, as Gates calls it. Right. I forgot about those :/

>>Ludwig+i7
How much greenhouse emissions does wildlife produce?

>>ImHere+0a
Good question! Surprisingly, very little:

Livestock make up 62% of the world’s mammal biomass; humans account for 34%; and wild mammals are just 4%.

https://ourworldindata.org/wild-mammals-birds-biomass

And add to that the fact that cow flatulence is very rich in methane (much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2) because of poor diet in industrial agriculture.

>>krasta+Da
Thanks for the data. Fantastic reply.

>>Ludwig+i7
Agriculture in general is less than 15% of the US and the US likes to eat meat. Agriculture including farming plants in total is 10-11%. https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emis... If the plant farming was higher than animal farming, would you suggest they not farm?