DOCSLIB.ORG

Bioenergy Development in Finland and Sweden: the Cases of North Karelia, Jämtland, and Västernorrland

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bioenergy Development in Finland and Sweden: the Cases of North Karelia, Jämtland, and Västernorrland Bioenergy Development in Finland and Sweden: The cases of North Karelia, Jämtland, and Västernorrland Anna Berlina and Nelli Mikkola NORDREGIO WORKING PAPER 2017:6 nordregio working paper 2017:6 1 Bioenergy Development in Finland and Sweden: The cases of North Karelia, Jämtland, and Västernorrland Anna Berlina and Nelli Mikkola NORDREGIO WORKING PAPER 2017:6 nordregio working paper 2017:6 2 Bioenergy Development in Finland and Sweden: The cases of North Karelia, Jämtland, and Västernorrland Nordregio Working Paper 2017:6 ISBN 978-91-87295-53-9 ISSN 1403-2511 © Nordregio 2017 and the authors Nordregio P.O. Box 1658 SE-111 86 Stockholm, Sweden [email protected] www.nordregio.se www.norden.org Editors: Anna Berlina and Nelli Mikkola Contributors: Karen Refsgaard and Alberto Huerta Morales Cover photo: www.pixabay.com The TRIBORN (Securing triple bottom line outcomes from bioenergy development and innovation in rural Norway, project no 233640/E50) is a research project funded by the Research Council of Norway (2014-2017). Nordregio is a leading Nordic and European research centre for regional development and planning, established by the Nordic Council of Ministers in 1997. We conduct solution-oriented and applied research, addressing current issues from both a research perspective and the viewpoint of policymakers and practitioners. Operating at the international, national, regional and local levels, Nordregio’s research covers a wide geographic scope, with an emphasis on the Nordic and Baltic Sea Regions, Europe and the Arctic. The Nordic co-operation Nordic co-operation is one of the world’s most extensive forms of regional collaboration, involving Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and the Faroe Islands, Greenland, and Åland. Nordic co-operation has firm traditions in politics, the economy, and culture. It plays an important role in European and international collaboration, and aims at creating a strong Nordic com- munity in a strong Europe. Nordic co-operation seeks to safeguard Nordic and regional interests and principles in the global community. Common Nordic values help the region solidify its position as one of the world’s most innova- tive and competitive. The Nordic Council of Ministers is a forum of co-operation between the Nordic governments. The Nordic Council of Ministers implements Nordic co-operation. The prime ministers have the overall responsibility. Its activities are co-ordinated by the Nordic ministers for co-operation, the Nordic Committee for co-operation and port- folio ministers. Founded in 1971. The Nordic Council is a forum for co-operation between the Nordic parliaments and govern- ments. The Council consists of 87 parliamentarians from the Nordic countries. The Nordic Council takes policy initiative s and monitors Nordic co-operation. Founded in 1952. Stockholm, Sweden, 2017 Contents Preface ............................................................................................................................................................... 7 1. The case of North Karelia, Finland ......................................................................................... 8 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 8 1.2 Forest industry and bioenergy development in north karelia ....................................................... 8 1.2.1 Motivation arising from local assets ......................................................................................... 8 1.2.2 Long-term strategic work pays back ........................................................................................ 9 1.3 Cross-sectoral cooperation as a driver for bioenergy development ..........................................12 1.3.1 The interplay between regional and sub-regional innovation platforms ........................15 1.3.2 Case Nurmes ..................................................................................................................................15 1.4 Key characteristics of sustainable bio-innovation in north karelia ............................................17 1.4.1 Lessons learned and ways forward ..........................................................................................18 References ........................................................................................................................................................ 21 Interviews ........................................................................................................................................................ 22 List of figures: Figure 1: Forest bioeconomy sector in North Karelia ................................................................................... 9 Figure 2: Spearheads of North Karelia’s Smart Specialisation Programme (RIS3) .......................... 10 Figure 3: Bioeconomy investments in North Karelia 2013-2015 ............................................................... 11 Figure 4: Target lines for the share of different energy resources by % in North Karelia in 2020 ................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Figure 5: Share of different energy resources by % in North Karelia in 2008 .....................................12 Figure 6: Target lines for energy consumption in North Karelia ..............................................................12 Figure 7: Key Research and Education Institutions in North Karelia ......................................................14 Figure 8: Employment (in persons) of renewable energy sector in North Karelia ..............................17 Figure 9: Turnover (€) of renewable energy sector in North Karelia ......................................................17 Figure 10: Impact assessment of North Karelia’s Climate and Environmental Programme 2020 ..............................................................................................................................................18 2. The case of Jämtland, Sweden................................................................................................ 23 2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 23 2.2 Brief description of the case study area .......................................................................................... 23 2.2.1 The forestry industry ................................................................................................................... 24 2.2.2 The energy situation .................................................................................................................... 26 2.2.3 Bioenergy ........................................................................................................................................ 26 2.3 The evolution of a local bioenergy market ....................................................................................... 27 2.3.1 A historical perspective – key milestones ............................................................................... 27 2.3.2 The role of different actors and their goals .......................................................................... 27 2.3.2.1 Östersund municipal government .............................................................................. 27 2.3.2.2 Region Jämtland Härjedalen ....................................................................................... 29 2.3.2.3 Jämtkaft – the municipal energy company .............................................................30 nordregio working paper 2017:6 4 2.3.2.4 Göviken – biogas production ........................................................................................31 2.3.2.5 Small-scale biogas production .....................................................................................31 2.3.2.6 SCA Skog- forest company .......................................................................................... 32 2.3.2.7 Skogsägarna Norrskog – forest owners association............................................. 33 2.3.2.8 Educational institutions ................................................................................................ 33 2.4 The activities and measures carried out by the different actors ............................................... 34 2.4.1 Public support instruments ....................................................................................................... 34 2.4.1.1 Energy prices ...................................................................................................................... 34 2.4.1.2 EU and national investment support .......................................................................... 34 2.4.1.3 Regional instruments and strategies .......................................................................... 35 2.4.1.4 Other economic instruments and regulations .......................................................... 36 2.4.2 Possible barriers for bioenergy development ........................................................................ 38 2.5 Bioenergy and the community ............................................................................................................ 39 2.5.1 Cooperation, competence and knowledge ...........................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Outokumpu Industrial Park
    Welcome to Outokumpu Industrial Park Juuso Hieta, CEO Outokumpu Industrial Park Ltd. Outokumpu Industrial Park (the core of it) Joensuu 45 km We are in this building at the moment Kuopio 92 km Sysmäjärvi industrial area Outokummun Metalli Oy Piippo Oy Mondo Minerals A Brief history of industrial evolution First stone chunck that gave evidence for Otto Trustedt’s exploration team of a rich copper ore deposit somewhere in North Karelia was found in 1910 about 70 km southeast from Outokumpu → ore discovery was the starting point of Outokumpu (both: company & town) Population vs. ore extraction – causality? Population now (~6800) What is left of our strong mining history? ”An Industrial hub” Outokumpu Industrial Park • A good example of Finnish regional (industrial) policy in the 1970’s • Outokumpu was one of many industrial cities in Finland to face such a major structural change with a very, very large scale on the local economy – many others followed → industrial park was established to broaden the local economy and to create new industrial jobs as a replacement for the declining mining business • Even as we speak we still have 15 hectares of already zoned areas for industrial purposes with a good and solid infrastructure: district heating of which 99 % is produced with renewable energy sources, optical fibre & electricity networks and modern sanitation systems easily accessible to all industrial and other start ups • Today (2018) about 960 jobs in industrial companies in Outokumpu, with 6800 inhabitants, which makes us one of the most
    [Show full text]
  • Labour Market Areas Final Technical Report of the Finnish Project September 2017
    Eurostat – Labour Market Areas – Final Technical report – Finland 1(37) Labour Market Areas Final Technical report of the Finnish project September 2017 Data collection for sub-national statistics (Labour Market Areas) Grant Agreement No. 08141.2015.001-2015.499 Yrjö Palttila, Statistics Finland, 22 September 2017 Postal address: 3rd floor, FI-00022 Statistics Finland E-mail: [email protected] Yrjö Palttila, Statistics Finland, 22 September 2017 Eurostat – Labour Market Areas – Final Technical report – Finland 2(37) Contents: 1. Overview 1.1 Objective of the work 1.2 Finland’s national travel-to-work areas 1.3 Tasks of the project 2. Results of the Finnish project 2.1 Improving IT tools to facilitate the implementation of the method (Task 2) 2.2 The finished SAS IML module (Task 2) 2.3 Define Finland’s LMAs based on the EU method (Task 4) 3. Assessing the feasibility of implementation of the EU method 3.1 Feasibility of implementation of the EU method (Task 3) 3.2 Assessing the feasibility of the adaptation of the current method of Finland’s national travel-to-work areas to the proposed method (Task 3) 4. The use and the future of the LMAs Appendix 1. Visualization of the test results (November 2016) Appendix 2. The lists of the LAU2s (test 12) (November 2016) Appendix 3. The finished SAS IML module LMAwSAS.1409 (September 2017) 1. Overview 1.1 Objective of the work In the background of the action was the need for comparable functional areas in EU-wide territorial policy analyses. The NUTS cross-national regions cover the whole EU territory, but they are usually regional administrative areas, which are the re- sult of historical circumstances.
    [Show full text]
  • The Finnish Environment Brought to You by CORE Provided by Helsingin Yliopiston445 Digitaalinen Arkisto the Finnish Eurowaternet
    445 View metadata, citation and similar papersThe at core.ac.uk Finnish Environment The Finnish Environment brought to you by CORE provided by Helsingin yliopiston445 digitaalinen arkisto The Finnish Eurowaternet ENVIRONMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PROTECTION Jorma Niemi, Pertti Heinonen, Sari Mitikka, Heidi Vuoristo, The Finnish Eurowaternet Olli-Pekka Pietiläinen, Markku Puupponen and Esa Rönkä (Eds.) with information about Finnish water resources and monitoring strategies The Finnish Eurowaternet The European Environment Agency (EEA) has a political mandate from with information about Finnish water resources the EU Council of Ministers to deliver objective, reliable and comparable and monitoring strategies information on the environment at a European level. In 1998 EEA published Guidelines for the implementation of the EUROWATERNET monitoring network for inland waters. In every Member Country a monitoring network should be designed according to these Guidelines and put into operation. Together these national networks will form the EUROWATERNET monitoring network that will provide information on the quantity and quality of European inland waters. In the future they will be developed to meet the requirements of the EU Water Framework Directive. This publication presents the Finnish EUROWATERNET monitoring network put into operation from the first of January, 2000. It includes a total of 195 river sites, 253 lake sites and 74 hydrological baseline sites. Groundwater monitoring network will be developed later. In addition, information about Finnish water resources and current monitoring strategies is given. The publication is available in the internet: http://www.vyh.fi/eng/orginfo/publica/electro/fe445/fe445.htm ISBN 952-11-0827-4 ISSN 1238-7312 EDITA Ltd. PL 800, 00043 EDITA Tel.
    [Show full text]
  • Regions of Eastern Finland (Summary)
    Summary of views on the 2nd Cohesion Report Regions of Eastern Finland, 27.8.2001 Regions of South Karelia, South Savo, Kainuu, North Karelia and North Savo Starting point: - The EU regional policy is important for the development of Eastern Finland regions. - During the period 1995-1999 Eastern Finland was covered by the Obj 6, 5b and Interreg II A programmes. Of these the Obj 6 programme area was defined in the Accession Treaty of Finland and Sweden on account of specific circumstances of sparse population. - In the present period until 2006 the South Savo, North Karelia, North Savo and Kainuu regions form an Obj 1 programme area. At the same time East Finland has an A support status according to Article 87.3 of the Treaty, allowing allocation of higher state aid. The region of South Karelia is covered by the Obj 2 programme. In addition there are two Interreg III A programmes implemented in the area. - The Eastern Finland regions consider that the additionality principle has not been followed in the implementation of the regional development programmes. - The Eastern Finland (NUTS II area) GDP has lowered by 2.3 % between 1995-1999 in comparison to the EU average, and by over 5 % in comparison to the national average. It is very likely that the GDP/capita of Eastern Finland will not exceed 75 % of EU15 average without (national) specific measures. Views on the future Cohesion Policy: - The enlargement and increase of territorial inequality means that sufficient structural policy resources are required to guarantee a stable regional development. It seems that the proposed 0.45 % of the GDP will not be enough in the enlarged Union.
    [Show full text]
  • Koli National Park • Location: Joensuu, Kontiolahti, Lieksa • 30 Km2 • Established: 1991
    Koli National Park • Location: Joensuu, Kontiolahti, Lieksa • 30 km2 • Established: 1991 Metsähallitus, Parks and Wildlife Finland • Ukko Visitor Centre, Ylä-Kolintie, Koli, tel. + 358 (0)206 39 5654 [email protected] • nationalparks.fi/koli • facebook.com/ kolinkansallispuisto National Park Please help us to protect nature: • Please respect nature and other hikers! Koli • Leave no traces of your visit behind. Safely combustible wastes can be burnt at campfire sites. into one of Finland’s national Metsähallitus manages Please take any other wastes away landscapes. The best loved cultural landscapes within the when you leave the park. vistas open up vellous view over national park, at the same time Light campfires is allowed in the Lake Pielinen from the top of preserving traditional farming • sites provided in the camping When you take in the mar- Ukko-Koli hill, it’s easy to see methods. Swidden fields are areas marked on the map. Lighting vellous view over Lake why this spot has attracted so cleared and burnt in the park’s campfires is forbidden if the forest many Finnish artists, photog- forests, meadows are mown by Pielinen from the top of fire warning is in effect. Ukko-Koli hill, it’s easy to see raphers and nature-lovers over hand, and cattle graze the park’s • You may freely walk, ski and row, in why this spot has attracted the centuries. The splendid pastures. scenery always instills a sense of the park, except in restricted areas. so many Finnish artists, serenity and wonder in visitors. Hilltops and meadows • Please keep pets on lead.
    [Show full text]
  • R-Sarja Ntm 14 / 20.05.2013 (2018-08-30)
    R-sarja Ntm 14 / 20.05.2013 Tm/UfS/NtM 25. 10.9.2018 *274 /2018 (2018-09-10) Suomi. Vuoksen vesistö. Eno. Peltoniemi. Kaapelit ja johdot Finland. Vuoksens vattendrag. Eno. Peltoniemi. Kablar och rörledningar Finland. Vuoksi watercourse. Eno. Peltoniemi. Cables and pipelines Kartat / Kort / Charts Edellinen / Föregående / Previous R285, R285.1 262 /2018 Viite: TM 28/305/2012 Referens: UfS 28/305/2012 Reference: NtM 28/305/2012 2 R285, R285.1 Muuta Seuraavien pisteiden välillä: (1) 62°56.37'N 30°05.05'E Ändra > Mellan följande positioner: (2) 62°56.88'N 30°05.70'E Amend Between the following positions: ( FTA, Lappeenranta/Villmanstrand 2018 ) Tm/UfS/NtM 24 31.08.2018 *262 /2018 (2018-08-30) Suomi. Vuoksen vesistö. Eno. Kaltimonkoski. Kaapelit ja johdot Finland. Vuoksens vattendrag. Eno. Kaltimonkoski. Kablar och rörledningar Finland. Vuoksi watercourse. Eno. Kaltimonkoski. Cables and pipelines Kartat / Kort / Charts Edellinen / Föregående / Previous R/INDEX, R278 34 /2018 1 R/INDEX, R278 (1) 62°47.689'N 30°07.078'E Lisää Seuraavien pisteiden välille: (2) 62°47.662'N 30°07.255'E Inför Mellan följande positioner: (3) 62°47.695'N 30°07.528'E Add Between the following positions: 2 Kuva viitteeksi, karttaotteet ei merikartan mittakaavassa / Bild för referens, kortutdrag inte i sjökortets skala / Image for reference, chart extracts not to scale of chart ( FTA, Lappeenranta/Villmanstrand 2018 ) Tm/UfS/NtM 4 10.02.2017 *34 /2018 (2018-02-08) Suomi. Vuoksen vesistö. Pielinen. Joensuu. Ahveninen-Suurselkä väylä (2.4 m). Poistettu matalikko. Syvyystiedot Finland. Vuoksens vattendrag. Pielisjärvi. Joensuu. Farleden Ahveninen-Suurselkä (2.4 m).
    [Show full text]
  • Outokumpu Mining Case Study
    OUTOKUMPU MINING CASE STUDY Preliminary reflections 7 March 2019 1. Regional strengths of Outokumpu 2. Challenges for sustained growth 3. Policy options 4. Data appendix 2 1. Geographic location – proximity to Joensuu - 50 kilometres distance to Joensuu (average travel time of 40 minutes) and 40km to Joensuu airport (travel time 35 minutes) - 90 kilometres distance to Kuopio (average travel time of 75 minutes) - Less than 120 kilometres distance to the Russian border Population trend (1990 = 100) 120 Joensuu Outokumpu 115 110 Outokumpu is part of the largest labour 105 Regional population growth is concentrating market in North 100 in Joensuu Karelia (Joensuu). 95 90 85 80 75 2. A strong industrial sector and a high share of tradable activities Share of employed population by economic sector (2016) Finland Local labour Outokumpu market Agriculture, forestry and fishing (A) (T) 3% 8% 4% Public administration and defence, compulsory social security, 29% 32% 30% education and human health (O,P,Q) (NT) Construction (F) (NT) 7% 7% 6% Real estate (L) (NT) 1% 1% 1% Other services (R,S,T,U) (T) 5% 5% 5% Mining and quarrying, electricity and 1% 2% 4% water supply (B,D,E) (T) Manufacturing (C) (T) 13% 16% 24% Whole sale and retail trade, transportation, accommodation and food 21% 17% 14% services (G, H, I) (NT) Information and communication (J) (T) 4% 1% 1% Professional, scientific, technical and 13% 8% 10% administrative activities (M, N) (NT) Financial and insurance activities (K) (T) 2% 1% 1% • Outokumpu’s industry plays an instrumental role in the smart specialization strategy of North Karelia 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Strinda Bygdebok Bind 1, 1939
    , . , L O H LT Ol. matr.nr. 73, løpenT. 211. Ol. jSkyld 1 spand. Nawu . Q. Rygh: 'cft~ dtn nuværend,e form kunde man formode at • første ledd inneholder, del f;a Mel us kj enttelvenavn Loa, men . noe sikkert kan Ikke sis om det, nir skriftfonnene fra 10.' lrh. er sl vaklend~ or min ikke kjenner andre.' Skrivemlte: LofftlOld (efter lIors~e regnskaper og jordebøker fra 1514- 1521). LandlioldL Liøhol 1550, LOffattt 1590. I..echoll 1624. Loeholt 1626. Loeltolt 1631. LohoJit 1()67. Lothor! 1723. Eu" OK. b n. • I jordebo~ av 1061 finnts opte 2 ,lrder,Loholt. btgge like store, nemUg l apand, o&, liI~øren e konien - krongods. I 1683 ~ den ene av glrdene l være gl pvtT i privat eie, idej. Kasper Wiedlhagen da er optert som eier. Wieidthagen eide ogsl Drag­ voll, og hans eiendom Loholdt bl slAtt sammen med Dragvoll ti l ett bruk, 02 siJedes gir denne Loholtglrd ul av matrikkel­ fortegnel~ som aelvstendit i1r<\ · (det det samlede bruk Ur navnet Dragv<>11. Anilende eierne ~r · l683 henvises til denne glrd. Det føliende iielder ~den an e IV de i 1661 opførte gArder , av navnet LoholL for 1645 er brukertn optert 50 hl)vilrdsmann. Hans navn er Anders Loeholdt; hin fl" iift, m~ hustruens navn ikke anført. , Dessuten bor pl ilrdfll OUttff 0i lrett; men om diSSC' er barn • 272 .' av Anders Oi hustru eller tjenere pl gArden kan ikke avgjøres. Oll,uff ml antagelig være sønn av Anders, da den næste brukers navn er Qlluff. r 1661 er opfert 2 brukere, nemlig Anders og OJluff.
    [Show full text]
  • SOCIO-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS Public Version
    SOCIO-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS Public Version Legal name of applicant(s): AkzoNobel Pulp and Performance Chemicals Submitted by: AkzoNobel Pulp and Performance Chemicals Substance: Sodium dichromate Use title: Use 1: Use of sodium dichromate as an additive for suppressing parasitic reactions and oxygen evolution, pH buffering and cathode corrosion protection in the electrolytic manufacture of sodium chlorate, with or without subsequent production of chlorine dioxide Use 2: Use of sodium dichromate as an additive for suppressing parasitic reactions and oxygen evolution, pH buffering and cathode corrosion protection in the electrolytic manufacture of potassium chlorate. Use number: 1 & 2 Disclaimer This report has been prepared by Risk & Policy Analysts Ltd, with reasonable skill, care and diligence under a contract to the client and in accordance with the terms and provisions of the contract. Risk & Policy Analysis Ltd will accept no responsibility towards the client and third parties in respect of any matters outside the scope of the contract. This report has been prepared for the client and we accept no liability for any loss or damage arising out of the provision of the report to third parties. Any such party relies on the report at their own risk. Note This public version of the Socio-Economic Analysis includes some redacted text. The letters indicated within each piece of redacted text correspond to the type of justification for confidentiality claims which is included as an Annex (Section 6) in the complete version of the document. Table
    [Show full text]
  • OECD Mining Regions and Cities Case Study: OUTOKUMPU and NORTH KARELIA, FINLAND
    Policy Highlights OECD Mining Regions and Cities Case Study: OUTOKUMPU AND NORTH KARELIA, FINLAND About the OECD The OECD is a unique forum where governments work together to address the economic, social and environmental challenges of globalisation. The OECD is also at the forefront of efforts to understand and to help governments respond to new developments and concerns, such as corporate governance, the information economy and the challenges of an ageing population. The Organisation provides a setting where governments can compare policy experiences, seek answers to common problems, identify good practice and work to co-ordinate domestic and international policies. About CFE The Centre for Entrepreneurship, SMEs, Regions and Cities helps local, regional and national governments unleash the potential of entrepreneurs and small and medium-sized enterprises, promote inclusive and sustainable regions and cities, boost local job creation and implement sound tourism policies. About this booklet This document summarizes the key findings of OECD (2019), OECD Mining case study: Outokumpu and North Karelia, OECD Publishing, Paris. The full publication will be available at http://www.oecd.org/regional/regional-policy/mining-regions-project.htm This document and any map included herein are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. Photo credits: ©Getyyimages, @Outokumpu Mining Museum For more information: http://www.oecd.org/cfe/regional-policy/ │ 1 Introduction This policy highlight provides a summary of the first OECD Mining Regions and Cities Case Study. The Case Study focuses on the region of North Karelia and the municipality of Outokumpu in Finland.
    [Show full text]
  • Puhos–Kitee Bioindustrial Areas in North Karelia – Information Card Puhos–Kitee Area Overview
    Did you know that… • Puhos is near the international border crossing point of Niirala, which is open 24/7. • The Puhos Port has a depth of 4.2 metres and it pro- vides a direct sea link to Europe and Russia. • Communications links of 10 Gb are available at Pu- hos through two optical fibre cables and operators. • There is a VIP sauna and accommodation facilities plus facilities for holding meetings at Puhos. • Hexion Oy owns a 10 megawatt energy generation plant at Puhos, which runs with hydrogen, chips and heavy fuel oil. • Central Karelia Development Company KETI Ltd pro- vides comprehensive business advisory services and stakeholder cooperation for companies planning to start operations in the area. For more information about the area, go to www.kiteenpuhos.fi Download the cards www.pohjois-karjala.fi/bioteollisuusalueet Puhos–Kitee Bioindustrial areas in North Karelia – information card Puhos–Kitee Area overview The Puhos industrial area is located in Kitee near the Niirala border crossing point be- tween Finland and Russia. The location in the vicinity of the Baltic Sea deep water port, railway and highway 6 opens up excellent business opportunities around the world. Companies engaged in the manufacturing of wood products and wood processing and their support services have operated in the Puhos industrial area for decades. The location of the site is optimal due to the availability of wood raw material and easy distribution of final products. After Kitee’s sawmill ceased business in the area, it created room for new operators. In addition to the sawmill, the Puhos area is home to other industries, planned in- Puhos dustrial plots and an industrial hall owned by the City of Kitee which also has social, administrative and dining facilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Premieliste Skogn Tier'n 2007
    Premieliste – Skogn Tier’n Klasse 1 15 Skudd 1 Lise Nervik Mosvik 49 50 48 147 Kr 114 2 Espen Tangstad Mosvik 49 48 49 146 Kr 69 2 Oddmund Rognli Leksvik 47 49 50 146 Kr 69 4 Anita Lynum Skogn 47 48 50 145 5 Marte Løvli Skogn 50 46 46 142 6 Olaus Nyeng Mosvik 48 46 47 141 7 Karen Lynum Skogn 37 45 45 127 Klasse 2 15 Skudd 1 Ola Valstad Mære 49 43 49 141 Kr 138 2 Tore Green Helgådal 47 45 46 138 Kr 91 3 Torbjørn Skjerve Skogn 45 42 49 136 Kr 59 4 Ellen Løvli Skogn 44 43 48 135 5 Morten Reitan Skogn 47 38 47 132 6 Ola Haugskott Helgådal 47 43 42 132 7 Stig Hermo Steinkjer 46 37 47 130 8 Henrik Reitan Skogn 42 45 43 130 Klasse 3 15 Skudd 1 John Andre Sverkmo Lyngen (Inntr) 48 48 49 145 Kr 171 2 Bjørnar Ulvik Frosta 49 46 45 140 Kr 114 3 Bjørn Bylund Verdal Søndre 47 43 48 138 Kr 85 4 Lilly Nerenget Skogn 48 44 46 138 Kr 78 5 Kjell Pettersen Inderøy 49 43 46 138 Kr 71 6 Ole Jørgen Grytten Holsen 48 42 47 137 Kr 57 7 Jo Morten Lyng Inderøy 49 42 45 136 8 Inge Storholmen Helgådal 47 41 48 136 9 John Olav Skei Skogn 49 41 45 135 10 Morten Lynum Skogn 49 42 44 135 11 Arne Mørkved Levanger og Frol 48 44 42 134 12 Sigmund Nerenget Skogn 47 41 46 134 13 Bjarne Ulvik Frosta 47 44 42 133 14 Jan Otto Brænne Frosta 49 32 47 128 15 Bernt Røkke Meråker 49 36 39 124 16 Øystein Sjevelås Markabygda 47 26 47 120 Klasse 4 15 Skudd 1 Kolbjørn Damås Verdal Søndre 50 46 49 145 Kr 151 2 Kjersti Brøndbo Wettre Levanger og Frol 50 45 49 144 Kr 112 3 Ann Cathrine Sverkmo Lyngen (Inntr) 50 46 48 144 Kr 93 4 Mary Vannebo Inderøy 50 48 46 144 Kr 84 5 Nina Sjevelås Levanger og Frol 48 47 48 143 Kr 64 6 Per Gunnar Tønne Inderøy 50 45 47 142 7 Olav Gran jr.
    [Show full text]