Probability analysis of different scenarios

There are lots of uncertainty related to cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology in general, in terms if they are ever going to be publicly accepted. Basically, there is

no technical obstacles, but legislation is currently quite harsh on cryptocurrencies.

Therefore, it is not widely used, and its future is uncertain. Besides the fact that cryptocurrencies remain niche currency, blockchain technology itself has to overcome few fundamental problems, such as scalability issues. Also, other kinds of regulations and legislations can have negative impact on decentralization movement, since it benefits mostly consumers, not existing corporations. It can become a problem, since there are corporations heavily invested on existing energy infrastructure. This sub-chapter identifies and analyses these problems, thus ending with probabilities for each scenario to happen. Most of the scenarios assume that p2p energy trading platform is applied, except the last scenario, where net metering is applied. This is not either-or –situation, but more like, if there is working decentralized markets, it will most likely be one of these. It can end up with other scenario too, such as complete centralization. This would be quite the same as it is today, in current situation.

It is quite bold statement to say, that cryptocurrencies will go mainstream on energy trading platform, when it has not gained its role in monetary markets. However, since there is time until 2050 basically, lots can change. If Finland wants to be completely under renewable energy by 2050, something must change. One change can be the adoption of cryptocurrencies, and therefore blockchain, but it does not seem likely within few years from new. Blockchain has proven itself, but academic discussion and research is highly needed to address this problem. Basically, the system could work in a way, where prosumers and customers do not even notice that they have made transactions in cryptocurrency, since different exchange services can be implemented to smart contract for example. In this way, the transactions would be seen as euro transactions, but they would be instant, and in micro level most likely, since the flows of surplus energy sold should remain quite low in case of ordinary prosumer. In conclusion, blockchain technology is near-ready to be fully implemented, but legislation has quite many unanswered questions. For these reasons, this is single biggest reason why blockchain based p2p sharing economy could not work in case of energy trading. Most likely the legislation problems will not be solved within next few years, but after blockchain have proven itself academically, it could have role in society. If blockchain does not get implemented,

most likely net metering will solve the problem of surplus energy. This scenario is introduced in sub-chapter other scenarios. Otherwise, decentralization will remain low and industrial-sized wind and solar plantations will be the future. In this case, business-as-usual keeps the status quo having its benefits and disadvantages.

If there is fully working blockchain solution for Finnish energy markets, it would most likely disrupt the traditional markets. This would mean moving from current situation to the slow-mowing markets immediately. Likelihood for this seems to be high, since there are niche segments to be improved, such as off-grid ecosystems. However, this scenario is temporary, because it has to develop from this situation, since it is not stable or encouraging. Global market evolution seems to be in high level, therefore affecting Finnish markets also. This will lead to cheaper PV systems and quite likely to more innovative systems too. However, without suitable political environment, market evolution cannot accelerate these markets enough to disrupt properly. The biggest reason for this is, the lack of economic incentives, such as better price for surplus energy, which can only be achieved by deregulating current legislation. If the price for surplus energy remains as low as in slow-moving markets, the PV systems installed will most likely remain smaller, in order to optimize self-consumption to the level of self-production. This will slow down the development of truly p2p shared economy, since there is not much to be shared. It will also be less attractive for companies to get involved, thus the competition is not that fierce than it could be. However, if the suitable political environment is achieved, green revolution seems inevitable. It seems plausible to reduce some costs, such as energy tax and small reductions to grid fees too, if the local grid is used only. In results chapter, there is calculations if all the taxes are reduced from selling the surplus energy and from the equipment’s too. This seems quite too radical to happen. At least, if the apartment building is freed from legislation, thus allowing free trade inside its network, it would accelerate the adoption of PV systems.

Therefore, it seems probable that political decisions will enhance the markets for decentralized solar energy. Furthermore, if the political side is checked, the market evolution will be high, because it is already high globally.

In conclusion, green revolution scenario seems doable, if blockchain technology improves to the level needed, and is adapted to these markets. Also, political environment must be suitable, since only high market evolution itself cannot lead to green revolution. If the political environment is not suitable, fragmented scenario can be reached, but it will not satisfy the needs of the markets. This would eventually lead to regress back to situation where centralized forms of energy are mainly consumed. There would not be any financial incentives to encourage consumers becoming prosumers, at least in a level needed for truly decentralize the energy markets. Therefore, if the movement is towards true p2p sharing economy in solar energy, the end-result will most likely be green revolution, since other scenarios does not seem to sustain in long-term.