[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.