What kind of biogas plants are being built in Finland?

Between 2021 and 2024, as many as 40 new biogas plants were built in Finland. Despite this, domestic biogas production has declined in recent years. What explains this contradiction? And above all: how can we achieve the target set already in 2020, which requires quadrupling production from the current level of approximately one terawatt-hour?

Why has production declined in recent years?

Since 2021, the number of biogas plants in Finland has increased by 44%, reaching 131 plants by the end of 2024. According to statistics, however, total biogas production has been declining since 2018. This contradictory development is explained by the fact that two-thirds of the new plants are small units processing side streams from a single farm.

As shown in Table 1, although the number of production units has increased significantly, biogas or biomethane produced by farms still accounts for only about 5% of Finland’s total production. At the same time, landfill gas production has declined sharply. The dramatic reduction in landfilling and its associated climate impact is a positive development, whereas the modest growth in biogas production is not?

Beneath the surface, however, momentum is building. Finland is currently witnessing the largest increase in biogas production capacity in its history. At present, three biogas plants with annual production exceeding 100 GWh are under construction. In addition, at least seven more large-scale production units are in the planning phase.

How do we compare with other Nordic countries?

When comparing the Nordic countries, Denmark can clearly be described as a biogas powerhouse. Denmark produces 9.2 TWh of biogas annually, while Finland produces just over 10% of that amount. Denmark and Finland have very similar population sizes, and the amount of arable land is also roughly comparable (2.4 million hectares in Denmark versus 2.0 million hectares in Finland).
However, the volume of manure from livestock production in Denmark is approximately double that of Finland. Combined with the fact that Denmark’s land area is only 11% of Finland’s, it is easy to understand why Danish biogas plants are on average more than six times larger than Finnish ones. Concentrated livestock production has provided a strong foundation for building large and efficient plants. This development has also been supported by an extensive natural gas distribution network and consistent government policy dating back to the 1990s.

Denmark is far ahead of the other Nordic countries, but the differences between Norway, Sweden, and Finland are smaller. Sweden produces 2.4 times more biogas than Finland, although the average plant sizes are closer to each other. Sweden began utilising wastewater for biogas production earlier than Finland, but both countries are now building large agriculture-based plants (with Sweden being a few years ahead).

In addition, Sweden currently offers high investment support for farm-scale plants. Alongside investment aid, Sweden also provides direct production subsidies, which Finland does not.

When examining Figure 1, it is important to note one feature common to all Nordic countries: production of liquefied biomethane is increasing everywhere.

Heavy transport and industry create demand for gas

At the turn of 2019–2020, the number of gas-powered passenger cars in Finland exceeded 10,000. Today, approximately 16,500 gas cars are registered. However, their era is coming to an end: new models are no longer being manufactured, and during 2025 only one new gas-powered passenger car has been registered in Finland.

There are several reasons for this, with EU emissions interpretations being the main—or one of the main—factors. Some gas conversions are still being made, but future passenger cars will not run on biomethane. This is unfortunate, as compressed biomethane production is feasible even at farm-scale plants and strongly supports local vitality and security of supply.

Local and regional buses also use compressed gas. In Sweden during the 2010s, gas infrastructure developed largely through gas-friendly procurement by municipalities, including buses, refuse trucks, vans, and passenger cars. In Finland, gas-powered waste collection vehicles are fairly widespread, and in bus transport the Vaasa region has for years been a pioneer in using biomethane produced from local biowaste and wastewater sludge.

The Joensuu region is another good example: as a result of local transport tendering, 15 gas buses now operate in urban local transport. A well-operated gas bus can replace approximately 50 passenger cars, giving it a significant impact on energy consumption.

For liquefied biomethane, heavy transport plays the most important role. The shift to gas is fastest in vehicles with a total weight exceeding 40 tonnes, as urban distribution traffic can be efficiently handled using electricity. The popularity of gas is also evident in Table 2: while passenger cars are electrifying, gas-powered trucks are growing at a similar pace—already 8% of trucks registered in 2025 run on gas.

The statistics are somewhat misleading, as in Finland vehicles with a gross weight of 3.5 tonnes (including pickup trucks and vans) are also classified as trucks. If only heavy-duty vehicles were considered, the percentage would be significantly higher.

Trucks are also appropriately sized consumers. A long-haul truck driving approximately 200,000 km per year consumes around 1,000 MWh, or 1 GWh, of biomethane annually. Supplying such demand requires plants producing around 100 GWh or more per year. Only at this scale does biomethane liquefaction become economically viable.

Table 3 shows that current biogas and biomethane production does not come close to meeting demand. A single Viking Grace–class cruise ferry operating between Helsinki and Tallinn consumes 300 GWh of liquefied gas annually. At present, Finland upgrades roughly this amount of biogas into methane in total, and only a small share of it is liquefied. In addition to new large biogas plants, electrofuels are also needed to decarbonise shipping beyond what emissions trading alone can achieve.

So far, this blog has focused mainly on transport demand. However, industrial energy needs must not be overlooked. Every industrial sector is striving to reduce its carbon footprint. Improving energy efficiency and electrifying processes are often the primary measures, but some processes cannot be made emission-free by these means alone. As a result, gas ecosystems will continue to play a strong role in the industrial energy mix in the future.

For example, Doranova has built biogas plants to meet the energy needs of a sauce factory, a potato processor, and local food and industrial companies. These plants, often producing 10–20 GWh per year, are strong drivers of regional vitality, with impacts extending far beyond energy use.

The role of biogas in electricity and heat production will remain marginal. In Finland, legislation supports small-scale production, making it sensible for an individual farm biogas plant to convert biogas into electricity and heat. However, even a 50% investment subsidy has not made such investments easy, and in many cases it has been more practical for farms to install solar panels on machinery halls than to invest in biogas.

Leadership is shifting – large plants first, medium and small to follow

This blog began by noting that while the number of biogas plants in Finland has exploded, production has declined. Politically, there has been a desire to support smaller units, while the lack of direct production subsidies has slowed the development of large-scale plants along the lines of Denmark and Sweden.

Now, however, we are witnessing a complete change in direction. In 2025, not a single farm-scale biogas plant has been built in Finland, while three plants with production volumes of 100–200 GWh per year are currently under construction.

The growing prevalence of large plants can be expected to continue for three reasons:

1. Agricultural side streams in Finland are still largely unused for biogas production.
2. Agriculture and the food value chain are urgently seeking ways to reduce their carbon footprint.
3. Liquefied biomethane production provides the profitability needed to make the processing of gate-fee-free and agricultural feedstocks economically viable.

“As investments are realised, it can be said that cows attracted the fuel factories of the future to Nivala.”

Large plants benefit from economies of scale beyond feedstock and digestate logistics and more efficient equipment. At present, the biogenic carbon dioxide produced by biogas plants is released into the atmosphere, but in the future it will be directed to electrofuel production and various industrial processes. Scale matters here as well: electrofuel producers are unlikely to be interested in utilising just a few thousand tonnes of CO₂, but tens of thousands of tonnes per year is a very different proposition.

With an annual production of 200 GWh, Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners’ biogas plant in Nivala will produce more than 30,000 tonnes of CO₂ per year. As the development company has also zoned adjacent land for electrofuel production, it is no surprise if new future-oriented investments soon emerge in Nivala. If these investments materialise, it can indeed be said that cows attracted the fuel factories of the future to Nivala.

 

Does the emergence of large plants mean that only large-scale facilities will be built in Finland in the future? Simply put: no. Finland is a sparsely populated country where suitable feedstocks for biogas plants are widely dispersed, as are industrial demand centres. For this reason, future plant locations and types will follow the hierarchy below:

1. Large plants near feedstock clusters.
   If sufficient unused feedstocks for 100 GWh/year production are available within a 20–30 km radius, the area is a potential location for a large plant. Proximity to a Fingrid high-voltage transmission line further strengthens the case. Nivala, Kiuruvesi, and Nurmo are among the first such locations. Currently, there is intense competition over who will be able to build capacity in the Säkylä and Oripää regions, and similar battles can be expected in the future.
2. Medium-sized plants driven by regional industrial demand (10–30 GWh/y).
   These plants utilise industrial side streams as well as agricultural feedstocks. The primary gas off-taker will be industry, but distribution of transport gas or injection into district heating plants is also possible. Several regional plants have already been built this decade, and there is still significant potential. Moreover, a regional plant can later be expanded into a large unit, provided this is considered already at the design stage.
3. Farm-owned plants.
   These units mainly convert manure’s energy potential into electricity and heat, reducing the farm’s need for purchased energy. While they will be well represented in terms of plant numbers, their contribution to total energy production will remain in the low single-digit percentages.