A common criticism of heat pumps is that they do not work in cold weather.
However, the Nordic region – particularly Sweden, Finland and Norway – offers a rebuttal to this assessment, as our research at the Regulatory Assistance Project (RAP) shows.
These three European countries have the highest heat pump sales per 1,000 households in the continent.
Sweden, Norway and Finland also have the coldest climates in Europe. In all three countries, there are now more than 40 heat pumps per 100 households, more than in any other country in the world.
At RAP, we have analysed the driving factors that led to this Nordic success story, as part of the development of our heat pump policy toolkit, which we launched at the COP27 climate summit in Sharm el-Sheikh last year.
Heat pump market growth
Installations of heat pumps in the Nordics rose quickly after 2000 and, despite a slowdown in 2012, again continued to surge after 2015.
Heat pumps work like an air conditioning unit (or a fridge) in reverse, to concentrate heat energy from the outside air – or a water or ground source – into building interiors.
The most common are “air-to-air” units, meaning they take heat from the outside air to blow warm air inside, whereas air-to-water units make hot water. Heat pumps are the “central technology” for low-carbon heat, the International Energy Agency (IEA) says.
Norway has the highest penetration of heat pumps worldwide, most of which are air-to-air systems. By 2020, there were 60 heat pumps installed per 100 households in Norway. Most of this happened after 2001 when the heat pump market grew significantly from a low base of around 2,000 units per year to more than 155,000 units sold in 2022.
Similarly, in Finland, before 2000 only a few hundred units of heat pumps were installed per year. From the mid-2000s onwards, the country saw a rapid growth with cumulative installations now exceeding 1m units.
This can be seen in the chart below, which shows annual heat pump sales in Finland, Norway and Sweden from 1990 to 2021.
Because heat pumps use electricity that increasingly comes from low-carbon sources they lead to carbon emission reductions overall. Cumulatively, the heat pumps sold over the past 30 years contributed to a -72% drop in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from heating in Finland, -83% in Norway and -95% in Sweden.
In addition, recent RAP analysis shows that heat pumps, even at temperatures sub-zero, are two- to three times more efficient than fossil-fuel heating systems.
This rapid reduction in carbon emissions from heating cannot be attributed to heat pumps alone — district heating, also known as heat networks, has become less carbon intensive and buildings have been built and retrofitted to a higher fabric efficiency standard over time. However, heat pumps played a key part.
Achieving heat pump leadership
The Nordic countries were previously heavily reliant on heating oil to keep warm, a result of the absence of a widespread gas grid.
They – Finland, Norway and Sweden (Denmark uses district heating as its main source of heating, with two-thirds of homes relying on it) – made an early decision to move away from heating oil following the energy crisis in the 1970s. This had seen the oil price rocket by almost 300% due to an oil embargo by the Organisation of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OAPEC).
This crisis led to a widely supported goal to become independent from fossil-fuel imports, perhaps most starkly evident with the creation of a Commission for Oil Independence in Sweden in 2005.
Despite changes in political parties over time, this has remained a constant focus in national energy policy across these countries – and explains why fossil fuels make up a low share of heating fuels in Finland (22%), Norway (less than 1%) and Sweden (3%).
The decision to move away from oil heating provided an important stimulus for research and development of heat pump technology, followed by various promotional government programmes, including information campaigns and grant payments.
For Norway, specifically, it also had a large share of homes using electric heating. Converting electrically heated homes to heat pumps provides significant reductions in electricity demand and running costs because heat pumps are, typically,about three times more efficient than direct resistance heating.
More recently, regulations, such as the complete ban of using heating oil in buildings for heating, have come into effect in Norway. In June 2018, the government adopted a regulation banning the use of mineral oil (fossil oil) for the heating of buildings from 2020. The ban covers the use of mineral oil for heating in residential buildings, public buildings and commercial buildings.
Historic household electricity prices in all three countries were also relatively low compared to many other European countries with about €0.17 per kilowatt hour (KWh) in Finland and Norway and €0.20/kWh in Sweden before the price crisis.
Carbon taxation
Carbon taxation has played a key role in making heat pumps economically competitive in all three countries. In 1990, Finland was the first country in the world to introduce a carbon tax, which currently stands at €53 per tonne of CO2 (tCO2) for heating fuels.
Shortly after Finland, Sweden adopted a CO2 tax in 1991. Since its introduction, it has increased from €21/tCO2 to €102/tCO2 in 2022.
Norway also introduced a carbon tax in 1991, which reached €76/tCO2 in 2023. The government’s white paper on energy policy announced that the tax would rise to €196/tCO2 in 2030, which would be one of the highest levels in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
Many other countries across Europe have addressed imbalances in taxation of heating fuels to encourage heat pump uptake, including the Netherlands, Denmark and Germany, according to RAP analysis.
In Denmark, electricity used for heat pumps in homes is exempt from energy taxes to the minimum amount allowed under EU law. In Germany, levies have been shifted from bills to the public budget.
Air-to-air heat pumps
It is notable from the RAP data presented above that two-thirds of the heat pumps sold in the three countries are air-to-air heat pumps. This differs from other major European heat pump markets, such as Germany and Poland, where the majority of heat pumps are air-to-water.
The reason for this is that, in many cases, heat pumps replaced electric resistive heating with no hot water running through radiators.
Furthermore, the architecture in the Nordic countries tends to be more open plan compared to other European countries. This makes the application of air-to-air a more attractive proposition, without the need for extensive ducting or multiple individual fans.
In addition, air-to-air heat pumps are lower cost compared to air-to-water heat pumps, according to the IEA.
Air-to-air heat pumps can also be used for cooling. However, the Finnish Heat Pump Association estimates that air-to-air heat pumps used for cooling account for only 10%-15% of the market, with the majority being used for heating only.
In some cases (although, according to the Finnish heat pump association, this is a small minority) more than one heat pump is installed in a single building and heat pumps are also often operating with a second heat source being present.
Many homes continue to use wood stoves after having installed a heat pump as a study from the Oslo Centre for Research on Environmentally Friendly Energy (CREE) on heat pumps shows, albeit less frequently. This resulted in about a quarter less wood being used for heating in 2021 compared to 2010. The continued use of wood is at least in part a result of aesthetic and cultural preferences.
In Finland, heat pumps are often installed as an additional heating system complementing mainly electric heating.
Nordic clean heating lessons
RAP’s analysis has found that the success of heat pumps in the Nordics is not accidental.
Instead, it is the result of a mix of policy instruments working in concert, such as carbon taxation, government incentives, regulations, quality standards, consumer protection for example through the creation of bodies to deal with complaints and offer redress, and information campaigns.
The natural efficiency of heat pumps has also helped their deployment.
The key takeaway is that there is no single policy that can deliver a mass market for heat pumps. A well-designed policy mix of economic instruments, financial support and regulation, underpinned by coordination and engagement, turns out to be the most effective recipe for scaling up heat-pump deployment, according to RAP’s research.
The experience in the Nordic countries illustrates not only what can be achieved in just two decades, but how to do it.
Policymakers in countries where heat pumps are still in their infancy do not have to start from scratch, but can learn from – and build on – the heat-pump success story in Norway, Finland and Sweden.
The post Guest post: How heat pumps became a Nordic success story appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Özgür Özel is the leader of Turkey’s main opposition “New Party” and a member of parliament from Manisa.
The world is running out of time to deliver on the Paris Agreement. The UN Environment Programme’s latest Emissions Gap Report concludes that the chance of keeping warming below 1.5C without overshooting it is gone. Even if every country delivers its current national pledges, the planet is heading for about 2.6C of warming this century.
This is the backdrop as governments and their leaders gather in Antalya for COP31, ten years after the Paris Agreement took effect. Turkey lies in the Mediterranean, one of the regions most exposed to climate change, and hosting the summit is a real opportunity.
It is also a responsibility, and that responsibility begins at home. The world does not lack targets. What it has lacked – almost everywhere – is delivery. If Antalya is remembered for anything, it should be for shifting the focus from what countries promise to what they actually do.
For many people in Turkey, the climate crisis is already part of daily life. In 2021, forests in Manavgat, a district of Antalya, burned for more than a week. Last year, wildfires forced more than 50,000 people from their homes around the western coast city of Izmir. This October, Istanbul had its heaviest rainfall in more than 80 years, with the floods killing at least eight people.
COP31 Briefing: What to expect from the Antalya climate summit?
Electrification, the fossil fuel transition, adaptation to rising impacts, climate science and trade are key themes as governments gather for COP31 in TürkiyeBrazil’s fossil fuel roadmap sketches out first global timetable
The COP30 presidency’s voluntary timetable asks countries to plan first, then build up clean energy – only turning to oil and gas supplies from 2031
Measurable outcomes
Two weeks of climate negotiations cannot deliver everything that is needed to resolve the crisis, but COP31 can push for a few things that can be measured. The first is a voluntary fossil-fuel transition roadmap, with national milestones for 2030 and 2035 reported in the same format every year.
The second is a stronger commitment to protecting forests, with progress tracked over time. The third is yearly reporting on progress towards the agreed $1.3 trillion a year in climate finance by 2035, backed by a financial roadmap.
On adaptation, the indicators agreed in Belém should become funded national plans. By COP32, we should be able to see how many countries have an adaptation plan and the financial commitment behind each one.
Regional resilience partnership
The summit also has an unusual shape. Turkey hosts, Australia leads the negotiations, and the Pacific island nations play a central role. Climate diplomacy now sits at the centre of energy security, trade and development, and Turkey, which bridges developed and developing economies, is well placed to help build consensus between them. The lasting value of its presidency will depend on the practical partnerships it leaves behind.
One such partnership could connect two very different regions. On a map, the Mediterranean and the Pacific seem to have little in common, but their problems look similar: eroding coastlines, salt creeping into aquifers, failing harvests, fishing towns with fewer fish.
Turkey and Australia could launch a Mediterranean–Pacific Climate Resilience Partnership, linking coastal cities, scientists, institutions including development banks and island governments. It does not need a new bureaucracy. It can start with a few projects: shared satellite data and early-warning systems, better coastal flood defences, and trials of water-saving farming in the communities most at risk. What matters is visible results on the ground, not a ceremony.
Turkey’s track record
Turkey does have progress to point to. It has committed to net zero by 2053, and its solar and wind capacity has grown fast. The sunshine, the wind and the industrial base are all there. But the long-term direction of the energy mix is still unclear.
Turkey also signed the Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forests and Land Use at COP26, pledging to halt and reverse forest loss by 2030. With four years left, COP31 is a chance to show how that promise will be kept.
COP30 roadmap says faster use of existing tools can halt forest loss by 2030
And while the summit celebrates zero waste, Turkey took in more than half a million tons of European plastic waste last year, much of it bound for Mersin and Adana. On November 21, the day after COP31 closes, an EU ban on plastic-waste exports to non-OECD countries takes effect. Turkey, as an OECD member, is exempt. That should worry us more than it seems to.
None of this will carry much weight unless Turkey’s own record holds up. A leadership at odds with its own environment and its own citizens will struggle to inspire global confidence in its commitment to protecting the planet.
Threat to local climate action
Cities are where adaptation happens. Water, flood protection, waste and urban planning fall largely to municipalities. That is why the imprisonment and removal of more than 50 elected opposition mayors, including the mayor of Istanbul, matter for environment and climate policy, as well as for democracy.
When local leadership is disrupted, investment plans stall and work on flood defences and water supplies loses continuity. As a result, local governments are left paralysed.
Comment: From Australia to Chile, our cities are driving a green investment boom
Inconsistent policymaking when it comes to the environment and climate deepens the problem in Turkey as it does in other countries. A few practical steps would make a real difference.
Set out a gradual, well-planned energy transition. Stop new construction in streambeds and drinking-water basins and put zoning maps online. Inspect every imported plastic shipment and cap total imports. Hold public hearings on environmental impact assessments before permits are issued, not after. And publish an independently audited climate scorecard each year covering emissions, renewables capacity, forest loss and adaptation spending.
This could set an example beyond Turkey. Many emerging economies are trying to cut emissions while protecting jobs and keeping industry competitive. Digital tools and artificial intelligence are already available to help forecast wildfire risk, reduce grid losses and track water use.
With the 1.5C limit now set to be breached, Antalya’s success will be measured by the greenhouse gases avoided, the investments delivered and the forests still standing in the years that follow. It is our responsibility to watch closely and see whether those commitments are delivered, transparently and in line with international standards.
The post Turkey must make COP31 a turning point for global climate action appeared first on Climate Home News.
Turkey must make COP31 a turning point for global climate action
As oil companies pull out of Argentina’s oil heartland in the Patagonian province of Chubut, workers and communities are struggling to secure their future, with little say in the decisions being made about it.
“The impacted are fragmented, the exploiters organised,” said José Glinski, a member of parliament from the province.
In Comodoro Rivadavia, where Argentina’s oil industry began in 1907, those words carry particular weight. For nearly 120 years, oil has shaped the city’s economy and that of Chubut province, which helped power Argentina for decades. Now the companies that built their fortunes there are shifting their investments elsewhere, threatening an economy that has depended on oil for generations.
Argentina’s national oil company, YPF, whose roots lie in Comodoro Rivadavia, is selling off its mature oilfields in the region to concentrate investment in the shale oil and gas reserves of Vaca Muerta, further north. According to Glinski, around 10,000 direct jobs have gone in Chubut, and unemployment has climbed from 2% to 10% in a single year.
“And this while all remaining companies have kept extremely high levels of profit,” he said.
COP31 Briefing: What to expect from the Antalya climate summit?
Glinski blames government policy as much as the companies. “Companies are choosing to leave and the government lets them do so, while weakening tax and environmental regulations, leaving the city without the necessary income to organise the transition.”
Nobody has yet worked out who will clean up the old fields and more than 6,000 wells, look after the workers who remain, or pay for whatever comes next.
Comodoro Rivadavia is not alone. From Mejillones and Tocopilla in Chile to La Guajira in Colombia and Appalachia in the United States, from Scotland to Mpumalanga in South Africa and East Kalimantan in Indonesia, places built around fossil fuels for generations face some version of the same problem. As investment moves elsewhere, plans to protect workers, support communities and repair damaged land often lag far behind, if they exist at all.
Building an economy beyond fossil fuels
In Comodoro, as locals call the city, the community has not been passively waiting for oil to run out.
“We have looked into multiple alternatives for the territory, including building on geothermal capacity, an agricultural programme that could reinforce food security and focus on cultures that are not too water dependent, and exploring also aquaculture built on local species,” explained Ruben Zárate, who heads Comodoro Conocimiento, a public agency created by the municipality to develop economic opportunities. “The only alternative is economic diversification.”
But having ideas is one thing. Finding the money and securing the political support to put them into practice is another. In many countries, decisions that shape a region’s economy are made in the capital or in company boardrooms, and local authorities have little say, and few resources, when a major employer pulls out.
Glinski points to deals struck at the national level that leave communities without a meaningful say in decisions affecting their future.
“Some of the barriers relate to the absence of regulation of private actors which have negotiated conditions at the national level that prevent provinces or territories from capturing benefits that could be useful to fund the transition,” he said. “Comodoro had no voice in these deals.”
One example is Argentina’s Large Investment Incentive Regime, known as RIGI, which offers substantial tax benefits and regulatory guarantees to major investors. Argentina’s Fundación Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (FARN) has warned that this regime could also give large projects preferential access to water and energy at the expense of local communities and businesses, making it harder for regions to diversify their economies.
At root, it’s a question of power: who controls the money and the decisions, and whether the people who kept these industries running for generations have any control over what comes next.
“Comodoro, like most territories that developed around fossil fuels, is heavily dependent. Everyone knew the oil business would end, but none planned for it,” said Antonella Risso, a climate expert and community member. “Comodoro deserves a bright future. Its people have the capacity to chart a future for its next hundred years – a real Just Transition”.
What COP31 could do
Last year in Belém, governments agreed to develop a Just Transition Mechanism. At COP31 in Antalya they will negotiate how it should work, and civil society is pushing for a strong Belém-Antalya Mechanism (BAM) that can help channel resources for action on the ground.
Camila Mercure, a climate policy officer with FARN and a coordinator of CAN’s Just Transition working group, said, “For a city like Comodoro Rivadavia, the BAM could mean support to develop diversification plans, assess viable alternatives, and access public, grant-based finance to put them into practice.”
“Workers and communities must have a meaningful role in shaping these plans, building on local knowledge and priorities. The aim should be to create decent livelihoods beyond fossil fuels and avoid alternatives that reproduce the same economic dependence, inequalities and environmental harm,” she said.
Why COP31 needs to start talking about just transition finance
The BAM could also put regions in touch with each other. Officials in Patagonia, northern Chile, Mpumalanga or East Kalimantan are wrestling with many of the same questions, and sharing what has worked would spare them from starting from scratch.
Then there are the companies. Fossil fuel producers should not be able to walk away from their workers, their environmental obligations and the towns that depended on them. The BAM could help regions share experiences and develop ways to hold companies accountable, ensuring they plan ahead and pay their fair share of the transition costs.
In Comodoro Rivadavia, the transition has already begun, without the community’s consent and with little support. COP31 is a chance to help places like it plan ahead, before the last company leaves rather than after.
The post When the oil companies leave, who pays? appeared first on Climate Home News.
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2026/11/05/when-the-oil-companies-leave-who-pays/