[beefield]

> In the UK heat poverty is a widespread problem due to the costs of heating fuels.

I would imagine that he cost of the heating fuels is pretty much the same all over Europe. I think the difference is that in the Nordic countries people seem to insulate their houses better, like using double or even triple glasses in windows to reduce heat waste.

[distances]

Yes, triple glass has been the norm for decades. You of course don't open the windows during the winter, and ventilation is almost always mechanical so that it can include heat recovery from the outbound air flow, allowing further savings in heating cost and emissions.

[jodrellblank]

I would imagine that he cost of the heating fuels is pretty much the same all over Europe.

UK has 3.16 million hectares of woodland[1], Finland has 23 million hectares[2] of forest. UK population is 65 million, Finland has 5 million. [Wikipedia]

With 7 times more trees potentially providing fuel for 1/13th as many people, shouldn't it work out noticably cheaper?

[1] http://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/infd-7aqknx

[2] http://www.metla.fi/metinfo/sustainability/finnish.htm

[beefield]

I do not know, but if wood (or biomass) was noticeably cheaper than fossil fuels, I would think there was no need for climate agreements and there would be a large industry shipping wood from Canada and Siberia to use as a fuel.

[Symbiote]

Wood is rarely used as a fuel.

Gas, oil, electricity, district heating or geothermal heat are used. Prices will be roughly similar, where the supply exists.

[jodrellblank]

Wikipedia says "The wood stove sauna is the most common type of sauna [in Finland] outside of the city areas".

In the context of "It's amazing if Finland has solved poverty to the level that every household can afford to set aside the space for a sauna and costs of running it.", and rural areas tend to be poorer than city areas, discussing wood as fuel for said saunas seems relevant.