Electricity enables the green transition, economic growth, and security of supply

A key issue is not only how much electricity is used over a year, but how much is needed at the same time. The grid is dimensioned for peak demand. This means even moderate growth in total consumption can still strain the system if demand concentrates into the same hours. In practice, ‘energy’ and ‘power’ are very different challenges. 

Finland has made strong progress in electricity network reliability. Investments over the past decade have significantly improved the grid’s ability to withstand storms and disruptions, which was clearly demonstrated during the Hannes storm in 2025, when the system remained far more stable than in the past. As a result, Finland now has one of the most reliable electricity networks in Europe. 

However, the nature of the challenge is changing. The key question is no longer only whether the grid provides a steady power supply, but whether it can deliver sufficient capacity, fast enough, to support rapid electrification. 

At the same time, electricity networks are no longer just technical infrastructure, rather they have become critical to national security and emergency preparedness. As societies become more dependent on electricity, power grids are increasingly exposed not only to storms and equipment failures, but also to cyberattacks, sabotage, and other deliberate disruptions. 

The pressure to increase grid capacity is already visible. Distribution networks have recorded new peak demand levels, with multiple municipalities reaching record highs in early 2026. Several trends are converging: heating is being electrified, industry and data centres are expanding, large heat pump plants are being deployed, cities are growing, and electric vehicles are spreading rapidly. 

In a more uncertain operating environment, grid capacity can no longer be scaled only for normal conditions. The system must also be able to withstand sudden interruptions, power outages, damage, and exceptional situations without compromising the functioning of society. In practice, resilience means not only protection, but also spare capacity, backup connections, and the ability to restore electricity quickly after disruptions. 

At the same time, price-driven automation is synchronising electricity use. When prices fall, systems often activate simultaneously, charging batteries, heating water, and charging vehicles, which creates sharper peaks. Managing this increasingly complex system depends on better data, forecasting, and digital tools, including real-time visibility and more advanced control systems. Looking ahead, AI-driven optimisation and improved forecasting are likely to play an increasingly important role in balancing the system. 

Electricity production is also evolving. More renewable generation is being connected to local networks, while traditional combined heat and power is declining in many growth areas. This shift increases weather dependency and variability in supply. As a result, the need for adaptability and flexibility is growing, along with the importance of coordinating the system as a whole, rather than optimising its individual parts in isolation. This requires closer integration between production, transmission, distribution, as well as end users, supported by data sharing and secure system operation. 

Constraints are not limited to local networks. Bottlenecks can also emerge upstream in the transmission grid. Even if a distribution network has capacity, new connections may be delayed if the higher-level network is constrained. This is particularly important for large industrial projects, data centres, and electrified heating solutions, all of which require significant new capacity. Constraints already identified in parts of Finland’s transmission network indicate that this is not a distant risk. Impacts are often regional, with high-growth areas facing the tightest limitations. 

Experiences from elsewhere in Europe illustrate how quickly this can become a real constraint. In the Netherlands, grid congestion has significantly delayed new industrial projects and connections. Denmark has also faced situations where parts of the grid are effectively full.  

Finland is not in the same position, but the lesson is clear: if electrification outpaces grid expansion, capacity can effectively hinder economic growth and risk energy security. In practice, permitting and planning processes are often among the slowest parts of grid development, and delays risk becoming a structural chokepoint. 

So, what needs to happen? No single solution is enough. In practice, three elements must work together: investing in grid capacity, reducing peaks through tariffs that reflect system stress, and enabling smarter electricity use through flexibility solutions such as demand response and storage. A resilient power system depends on both physical infrastructure and operational preparedness, from spare parts to training staff and employees for various scenarios. 

Even so, flexibility cannot solve a situation of structurally rising peak demand. It depends on functioning markets and incentives, as well as aggregators to combine smaller loads, pricing that reflects local constraints, and mechanisms that reward consumers and businesses for shifting demand. Without sufficient investment, the system risks shifting from enabling growth to managing scarcity. 

Time is one of the most critical constraints. Grid projects often take significantly longer than industrial investments, largely due to permitting and planning processes. This creates a structural mismatch, where demand can grow quickly while supply infrastructure takes years to develop. Closing this gap requires stronger long-term planning across the entire value chain. While targets such as Finland’s carbon neutrality goal for 2035 are important, grid planning must extend further, towards 2040, to align industrial development, generation, network expansion, and flexibility solutions. Faster and more predictable permitting processes will be critical. 

• Ventilation: Helps reduce gas concentration but does not eliminate explosion risks. Different levels of ventilation – basic, preventive, casualty – are recommended. 

• Deflagration panels: These are designed to lessen the impact of explosions, with effectiveness dependent on covering sufficient surface area. 

• Fire suppression systems: Water-based systems provide long-term cooling and can reduce explosion pressure. Gaseous systems can help if gas concentration is maintained at a sufficiently high level.