Search

An analysis of energy and material flows has been elaborated for the Swedish region Jämtland with the aim of monitoring and comparing regional sustainability by following the work energy flow method developed in a study of the Danish island of Samsø (Nielsen & Jørgensen, 2011). In the region of Jämtland about 46,000 TJ of energy flows into society, of which 88% is renewable. From this an amount corresponding to 30,800 TJ is exported as electricity from the region, while another 410 TJ is exported as waste to be incinerated. The remaining part, about 15,200 TJ (63% renewable), drives Jämtland. From an energy flow perspective, the most important production from the region, apart from electricity production, is biomass from the forest: 49,000 TJ estimated as energy content in the biomass harvested. Another 55,000 TJ is added to the standing biomass every year as forest growth (only productive forest land area has been calculated). Some suggested indices of sustainability have been calculated and Jämtland shows high values. However, it will be a challenge to transform the quite large transport sector of Jämtland, and therefore the potential to become fully sustainable (ref to indexes used for the Samsø study) might not be quite as high. In order to reduce the use of non-renewable energy, a major conversion of the transport fleet is needed, and this should be given high priority. The private sector is the largest single user of non-renewable energy (2,200 TJ). One successful transition is the Swedish diesel mix with 19% FAME/HVO derived from vegetable or animal sources and regarded as renewable. The consumption of FAME/HVO is predicted to increase significantly, increasing the importance of the forest as a source. A sustainability analysis based at work energy flows shows for both Samsø and Jämtland that large natural resources producing a high work energy output combined with low work energy use due to low population density, gives high sustainability indicators. This indicates that regions with high population density and the absence of natural resources (high import), as in most regions in the world, will show low sustainability indicators.

The introduction of thermodynamical views to interpret phenomenological behavior of biological systems such as organisms, populations, ecosystems or even the bio- and anthroposphere is not an easy exercise and not carried out without obstacles. The resistance against such an endeavor can be met from all scientific disciplines ranging from hardcore physics at one end to ecological fundamentalists at the other. Thus the area represents a field of tension. The reasons for this may be many, but at the center one will recognize complication that are closely linked – directly or indirectly – to the issues around philosophical reductions undertaken in the process. Such steps are necessary to take in an attempt to formulate a new holistic biological theory that tends to formulate a new metaphysics, namely that of making possible interpretations of all kinds of systems within the biosphere in terms of a thermodynamic framework. Common to all attempts have been the establishing and definition of boundaries – real, physical as well as constructed and virtual – together with a generalized application of isomorphic mathematical expressions used different sets of ontological entities that vary with levels of the biological hierarchy. Prebiotic systems represent the closest we may get to a situation where classical thermodynamic descriptions may be used but still only to a certain extent. All levels having a fixed boundary from monocellular organisms or conglomerates of such systems and upwards in the hierarchy – i.e. higher organisms and levels throughout the biological hierarchy represent systems under conditions so far away from equilibrium that they – under the given energetic, material and intrinsic constraints tend to stabilize at dynamic states or sequential semi-stable repetitive patterns. This means that we may not talk about classical thermodynamics any longer. Terms like entropy, free energy, exergy and power may be used as convenient metaphors, but it must be stated that it as a consequence is necessary to (re-)define concepts and reformulate equations based on adequate ontological units. Although they may perform with a similar phenomenology as the classical variables, it should be kept in mind that they are no longer the same, – each domain will need its own definitions.