Nature protection and distance to homes sharply reshape Pirkanmaa wind options

A spatial study for Pirkanmaa shows wind farm locations shift markedly depending on whether planners prioritise biodiversity protection or distance to settlements. Published in June in the Journal of Environmental Management, the paper models three production scenarios for 2035 and maps areas that could host wind power. The work was carried out by the Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke) and the University of Oulu.

The researchers modelled three scenarios: maintaining Pirkanmaa’s current electricity self-sufficiency (20%); achieving regional self-sufficiency at about 3.4 GW; and a maximum-placement scenario that would fit just over 5 GW. Areas were classed as suitable if they could host at least five turbines, had low assessed nature values, were far from residences and met legal and guidance restrictions.

Most extensive suitable zones were found in the forested northwest of Pirkanmaa, where population density is low. But priorities make a big difference. Areas judged suitable on biodiversity grounds and those judged suitable by distance-to-settlement criteria differ substantially. The overlap would support just over 2 GW. That meets the 20% scenario but falls short of regional self-sufficiency.

The researchers say meeting both conservation and distance objectives will require compromises. Doctoral researcher Saara Luukkonen said, "If both biodiversity and distance to settlements are taken into account, compromises must be made about the most favourable locations." Research professor Anne Tolvanen added that rising distance requirements and a shift of production northward would increase demand for new transmission lines, creating wider land-use and nature impacts than the turbines themselves.

The study was produced as part of Luke’s REPower project, funded by the European Union, to inform renewable energy land-use planning. The authors argue spatially explicit analyses can help planners balance wind power expansion with conservation, forestry, recreation and community acceptance, and identify the combined impacts of turbines and transmission on nature and landscapes.

Its implications are underlined by a separate critique in YLE of the planned Haitinkangas wind-and-solar complex on the Karvia–Parkano border. YLE reports that the environmental NGO LVV concludes the project would threaten the protected golden eagle population, criticising the environmental assessment for downplaying birdlife impacts; it also says the effects could be “very large negative effects”.

YLE adds that the proposal is scaled up to include up to 16 turbines and more than 350 hectares of solar panels, with most turbines planned on the Karvia side. The project would reach up to 10 MW, with a maximum tip height of about 350 metres, and YLE notes that likely resident impacts include shadow flicker and noise.

According to YLE, LVV also raises concerns about cumulative effects, pointing to the nearby Kantin wind park alongside Haitinkangas. YLE further reports on grid-connection plans, describing a transmission line of around 30 kilometres with two route alternatives: one via Parkano’s Kuivasjärvi and the other via Kankaanpää’s Marjasuo.

The findings are relevant to local planning debates, following Tampere's 2026 nature protection plan and amid regulator warnings about potential bird and resident impacts at the Parkano Kangaslammi project raised earlier this year. YLE connects the newer Haitinkangas criticism to earlier LVV concerns about large wind-and-solar plans in Parkano, linking them to the same type of spatial-impacts questions highlighted by the June study.