There is good reasons to feel serious doubts about the plan to break Swedish oil dependency by 2020. Since the mid 1990s the Social democratic government has been notorious for its rethoric on Sweden as a pioneer country in the shift to sustainable development, but in practice continuing on a "business as usual" approach. In almost every way imaginable the Swedish government support short term economic growth at the cost of long term environmental concerns. One case in point: Lately they have increased subsidies to air traffic, and corrspondingly reduced subsidies to rail operators. Which brings us to whats not into the "break oil" plan - Transports. As long as this plan does not include motorism (which has been increasing exponentially over the last 15 years, in many ways as a result of governmental policies), and just hinting at the problem, it cannot be seen as a serious plan for phasing out fossiles. The magic solution to get rid off fossiles in heating and industry are nuclear power (the other day the Swedish government decided to increase the effect in the most important nuclear power plant of the country) and big distant heating plants. Over the last 10 years huge investments have been done in power plants where elsewhere recyclable household and industry material is burned to produce energy. My personal guess is that the government wants to position the social democratic party (versus the green party) in the run up to next years parlimentary election. The simple truth is that this government is not seriously interested in a shift towards sustainable development and localisation of the economy. In real politics there is almost no evidence what so ever over the last ten years that they are willing to prioritise ecological concerns when there is a conflict to short-term economic goals. They are also stucked into the "technological fix" (the Bigger the better) way of thinking, which does not confront the mechanisms that cause the problems. Bjorn Forsberg PhD Pol Science Umea Sweden