15. Final words

In previous roles, I have worked to help other countries with their energy security (not just gas). You always start from the same direction; you look at what opportunities the country itself has to build up its own preparedness, in a sustainable way using the conditions that are naturally available in the country. Only then is self-control and securing of access created. Of course, it can feel good to have full stocks of fuel, but even better must be to be able to fill them yourself, even in times of crisis.

Import of gas is much more uncertain in a crisis than own production of gas. Biological waste/sewage, which is the input to Swedish energy gas, is something that we have a never-ending stream of, in all scenarios, even in times of crisis/war. Large quantities of sustainable biogas are something that can be produced in Sweden, if only the right conditions for a robust Swedish energy gas sector are in place. I’m talking about some smaller smart policy instruments that need to be implemented. There is strong support from Swedish business for this. There is broad support for a climate change in society. [1] Political agreement for a strong biogas sector exists from all major parties in Sweden, from left to right. 

Sweden needs to stand united on the three pillars of energy policy, which are society’s security of supply, competitiveness and ecological sustainability,  as a civil servant I acted independently there. Within gas in particular, it is very easy to clearly contribute to all three of these legs. 

That I would have been fired as a result of a boyish streak started to take revenge on old bosses who had been stupid sounds a bit trite. Or is it rather perhaps fear of a gradual phasing out of some of our fossil fuels that is the basis? Fear that I would not do the same analysis as my predecessor? That I looked at possibilities for how we could get rid of some of our fossil fuel dependence? Surely that sounds too stupid to be true? Or does the fear generated by my posts on Facebook come from the Rebel Moms demanding accountability for the climate-destructive decisions that have been made? Certainly the reasons may vary. 

The fact is that many government employees testify about widespread fear and a culture of silence, and that the climate issue is polarizing and difficult to discuss [2]. I also felt it when I worked at the agency. And now afterwards in that colleagues in the branch is taking distance from me if I happen to say hello. The fear becomes like a psychological obstacle.

Although the climate issue is often only about pure natural science, it gets mixed up with political opinions. Emotions. People sit crosswise and slow down the transition because they become suspicious, mostly because they don’t understand. Today, people are employed at the Department for Energy Preparedness at the authority without any requirements for knowledge of the energy sector at all. Or durability. This also creates polarization; Surely it can’t be the case that one part of the Energy Agency will solve the energy transition, the other the issue of energy preparedness? Anyone who has worked on the total defense issue knows that it will not be resolved unless all parts of society take responsibility for it to work. The same applies to the climate issue – one part of society cannot be responsible for reducing total emissions – all parts need to take responsibility for that to happen. 

This is what Wennblad wrote in his editorial 231012:

‘Now, with an appointed minister for civil defence, there should be the right time to again start to discuss a new LNG terminal in the West coast of Sweden.’

To his statement there I reply: there are better solutions. After Bohlin’s outburst and demand that ‘this should not happen again’, the Energy Agency is re-arranging its recruitment routines with additional question batteries. They react by tightening the seat belt for other climate engaged who seek security-classified positions. If you show climate commitment, there will be tougher tests and controls, which does not make it easier for the agency to find qualified aspirants. Knowledge of circular flows is something that the authority is in great need of, perhaps especially on the preparedness side. (When I applied for the position, in the recruitment process there weren’t many qualified people who knew gas to choose from, it was basically only me who had the ‘right level’ I was told).

For example, if you show an understanding that people are protesting something through peaceful civil disobedience, you will not pass a security clearance (my case).

Swedish energy gas production is largely about making use of what no one wants (waste, sewage) and turning it into something that everyone wants (energy).

It’s about circular flows, and understanding what ecosystems need to function. If, in future employment processes, you place higher safety requirements on employees with climate competence than others, and for example make a possible future biogas expert suspicious if he is involved in the climate movement, then you have misunderstood something. If you understand what climate change really means, then you act, at least if you are a mother.

It’s pure self-preservation.

I don’t know what this story might lead to, but one thing I think has already happened, is that it has made it harder to harass or retaliate against committed people. If something like this were to happen again, managers should think the situation through more than mine did, and try to avoid acting in a panic. If committed people are exposed for no reason, it would be immediately noticed, and managers don’t like that. I hope it leads to people feeling that climate engagement in an agency can be something positive. I can advise on the Network for government employees which is an alternative. If I may wish for anything, I hope that the fear of engagement that my story initially led to is turned into courage in people, to stand up for what is right.

 

 

[1] https://www.klimatpolitiskaradet.se/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/stodforochattitydertillklimatpolitikisverige.pdf

[2] T ex https://www.publikt.se/nyhet/klimatforskare-kanner-sig-ansatta-25051

https://www.publikt.se/fordjupning/reportage/myndighetsanstallda-mitt-i-stormen-26353

https://www.dn.se/sverige/tjansteman-pa-fhm-vi-tystas-om-klimathotet/