Synergies and Trade-offs between Energy Efficiency and Sustainablity Indicators: The EU-28 Study of Sustainable Energy Use

Transcription

1 Synergies and Trade-offs between Energy Efficiency and Sustainablity Indicators: The EU-28 Study of Sustainable Energy Use Jari Kaivo-oja, Jyrki Luukkanen & Jarmo Kaivo-oja Session 6, Futures of Energy June 217, Turku Finland Futures Research Centre, Turku School of Economics, University of Turku, Finland Background analyses Conventional synergy: Economic cycles are not smoothened Long-run stabilized synergy: Calculation based on Moving Average of variables to compensate the impacts of economic cycles and smoothen the results in order to reveal the trends 1

2 Million TOE Final energy consumption in the EU-28 (Million TOE, tonnes of oil equivalent), Final Energy Consumption in the EU-28 Countries (Million TOE, tonnes of equivalent) 2 5, United Kingdom 2 3, Sweden Finland Slovakia Slovenia 2 1, Romania Portugal Poland 1 9, Austria Netherlands Malta Hungary 1 7, Luxembourg Lithuania Latvia Cyprus 1 5, Italy Croatia France 1 3, Spain Greece Ireland Estonia 1 1, Germany (until 199 former territory of the FRG) Denmark 9, Years Czech Republic Bulgaria Belgium European Union (28 ) Final energy consumption per capita (all Fuels, kwh/cap) in the EU-28 Countries, Years 1995, 2, 25, 21, 213 and 214, Eurostat. 12 Energy Consumption per Capita, the EU-28 Countries, Gross Inland Consumption, ktoe/cap in Years 1995, 2, 25, 21, 213 and 214, Eurostat

3 Changes in final energy consumption per capita (all Fuels, kwh/cap) in the EU-28 Countries, Years , 25-21, , Eurostat Changes in Energy Consumption per Capita, the EU-28 Countries, Gross Inland Consumption, ktoe/capin Between Years , 2-25, 25-21, , Eurostat In in 2-25 in in Total changes in final energy consumption per capita (all Fuels, kwh/cap) in the EU-28 Countries, Years , Eurostat. 2 Total Change in Energy Consumption per Capitain the EU-28 Countries, Gross Inland Consumption, ktoe/cap, Years

4 Primary energy intensity (toe/meuros) in the EU-28 Countries, Years 1995, 2, 25, 21, 213 and 214, Eurostat 1 Primary Energy Intensity in the EU-28 Countries, toe/meuros 21, Years 1995, 2, 25, 21, 213 and 214, Eurostat Changes in primary energy intensity (toe/meuros) in the EU-28, years , 25-21, , Eurostat 1 Changes in Primary Energy Intensity in the EU-28 Countries, toe/meuros 21, Between Years , 2-25, 25-21, , Eurostat In in 2-25 in in

5 Carbon intensity (kg CO 2 /toe) in the EU-28, years 1995, 2, 25, 21, 213 and 214, Eurostat 4 Carbon Intensity in the EU-28 Countries, kg CO 2 /toe, Years 1995, 2, 25, 21, 213 and 214, Eurostat Total Change in Carbon Intensity in the EU-28 Countries, kg CO2/toe, years Total Change in Carbon Intensity in the EU-28 Countries, kg CO2/toe, years

6 Population (First of Jan) in the EU-28 in Population (First of Jan) in the EU-28 in Urban population in the EU-28, years, 1995, 2, 25, 21, 213 and 214 (World Bank 216 Data) Urban population in the EU-28, years, 1995, 2, 25, 21, 213 and 214 (World Bank 216 Data)

7 Analysis 1. Synergy analyses and trade-off-analyses *Energy intensity and Value added *Energy Intensity and Population *Energy intensity and Urban population Average stabilised synergy level analysis in : Synergy analysis between energy intensity and value added in the EU- 28. Average Stabilised Synergy Level Analysis in : Synergy analysis between Energy Intensity and Value Added in the EU-28 Countries (SynergyStabilised-EI-VA),2,1, -,1 -,2 -,3 -,4 -,5 -,6 7

8 Value Added, Million euros, current prices euros gro gross Trade-off analysis between energy intensity and value added in the EU-28. Average stabilised synergy level analysis in Trade-off between Energy Intensity (All Fuels, toe/meuros 21) and Value Added (Gross, Million Euros, current prices euros) in the EU-28, (Average of variables in 1995, 2, 25, 21, 213 and 214) 25, 2, 15, 1, 5,, -5, Energy Intensity (toe/million euros 21) Average stabilised synergy level analysis in : Synergy analysis between energy intensity and population in the EU-28.,6 Average Stabilised Synergy Level Analysis in : Synergy analysis between Energy Intensity and Population in the EU-28 Countries (SynergyStabilised-EI-VA)SynergyStabilised-EI-POP,4,2, -,2 -,4 -,6 -,8-1, 8

9 Population Trade-off analysis between energy intensity and population in the EU- 28. Average stabilised synergy level analysis in Trade-off between Energy Intensity (All Fuels, toe/meuros 21) and Population (Number in First day of Jan) in the EU-28, (Average of variables in 1995, 2, 25, 21, 213 and 214) Energy Intensity, toe/meuros 21 Average stabilised synergy level analysis in : Synergy analysis between energy intensity and urban population in the EU-28.,6 Average Stabilised Synergy Level Analysis in : Synergy analysis between Energy Intensity and Urban Population in the EU-28 Countries (SynergyStabilised-EI-VA) SynergyStabilised-EI-POP (SynergyStabilised-EI-URBPOP),4,2, -,2 -,4 -,6 -,8-1, 9

10 Urban popluation Trade-off analysis between energy intensity and urban population in the EU-28. Average stabilised synergy level analysis in Trade-off between Energy Intensity (All Fuels, toe/meuros 21) and Urban population (Number in First day of Jan) in the EU-28, (Average of variables in 1995, 2, 25, 21, 213 and 214) , 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, Energy Intensity, All Fuels, toe/meuros 21 Analysis 2. Synergy analyses and trade-off-analyses *Energy consumption per cap and Value added *Energy consumption per cap and Population *Energy consumption per cap and Urban population 1

11 Value Added, Gross, Million Euros, current prives Average stabilised synergy level analysis in : Synergy analysis between average energy consumption per capita and average value added in the EU-28,2 Average Stabilised Synergy Level Analysis in : Synergy analysis between Energy Consumption per Capita and Value Added in the EU-28 Countries (SynergyDynamic-EnerConsumptionPerCap-VA),1, -,1 -,2 -,3 -,4 -,5 -,6 Trade-off analysis between energy consumption per capita and value added in the EU-28. Average stabilised synergy level analysis in , Trade-off between Energy Consumption per Capita (Gross Inland Consumption, ktoe/cap) and Value Added (Gross, Million Euros, current prices euro) in the EU-28, (Average of variables in 1995, 2, 25, 21, 213 and 214) 2, 15, 1, 5,, , Energy Consumption. Gross Inland Consumption, ktoe/cap 11

12 Population Average stabilised synergy level analysis in : Synergy analysis between average energy consumption per capita and average population in the EU-28.,6 Average Stabilised Synergy Level Analysis in : Synergy analysis between Energy Consumption per Capita and Population in the EU- 28 Countries (SynergyStabilised EnergyConsumption per Cap-Pop),4,2, -,2 -,4 -,6 -,8-1, Trade-off analysis between energy consumption per capita and population in the EU-28. Average stabilised synergy level analysis in Trade-off between Energy Consumption per Capita (Gross Inland Consumption, ktoe/cap) and Population (First of Jan) in the EU-28, (Average of variables in 1995, 2, 25, 21, 213 and 214) Energy Consumption per Capita, Gross Inland Consumption, ktoe/cap 12

13 Urban population Average stabilised synergy level analysis in : Synergy analysis between average energy consumption per capita and average urban population in the EU-28 Average Stabilised Synergy Level Analysis in : Synergy analysis between Energy Consumption per Capita and Urban Population in the EU-28 Countries (SynergyStabilised-EnergyConsumptionperCap-UrbPop),6,4,2, -,2 -,4 -,6 -,8-1, Trade-off analysis between energy consumption per capita and urban population in the EU-28. Average stabilised synergy level analysis in Trade-off between Energy Consumption per Capita (Gross Inland Consumption, ktoe/cap) and Urban population (First of Jan) in the EU-28, (Average of variables in 1995, 2, 25, 21, 213 and 214) Energy Consumption per Capita, Gross Inland Consumption, ktoe/cap 13

14 Analysis 3. Synergy analyses and trade-off-analyses *Final electricity consumption per cap and Value added *Final electricity consumption per cap and Population *Final electricity consumption per cap and Urban population Average stabilised synergy level analysis in : Synergy analysis between final electricity consumption per capita and average value added in the EU-28,2 Average Stabilised Synergy Level Analysis in : Synergy analysis between Final Electricity Consumption per Capita and Value Added in the EU-28 Countries (SynergyStabilised-Final Electricity Consumption-VA),1, -,1 -,2 -,3 -,4 -,5 -,6 14

15 Value Added, Gross, Million Euros Trade-off analysis between final electricity consumption per capita and value added in the EU-28. Average stabilised synergy level analysis in Trade-off between Final Electricty Consumption per Capita (All Fuels, kwh/cap) and Value Added (Gross, Million Euros, current prices euro) in the EU-28, (Average of variables in 1995, 2, 25, 21, 213 and 214) 25, 2, 15, 1, 5,, , Final Electricty Consumption per Capita, All Fuels, kwh/cap Average stabilised synergy level analysis in : Synergy analysis between final electricity consumption per capita and average population in the EU-28,6 Average Stabilised Synergy Level Analysis in : Synergy analysis between Final Electricity Consumption per Capita and Population in the EU-28 Countries (SynergyStabilised-Final Electricity Consumption per Capita-Pop),4,2, -,2 -,4 -,6 -,8-1, 15

16 Population Trade-off analysis between final electricity consumption per capita and population in the EU-28. Average stabilised synergy level analysis in Trade-off between Final Elecricity Consumption per Capita (All Fuels, kwh/cap) and Population (First of Jan) in the EU-28, (Average of variables in 1995, 2, 25, 21, 213 and 214) Final Electricity Consumption per Capita, kwh/cap Average stabilised synergy level analysis in : Synergy analysis between final electricity consumption per capita and average urban population in the EU-28,6 Average Stabilised Synergy Level Analysis in : Synergy analysis between Final Electricity Consumption per Capita and Urban Population in the EU-28 Countries (SynergyStabilised-Final Electricity Consumption per Capita-UrbanPop),4,2, -,2 -,4 -,6 -,8-1, 16

17 Urban popluation Trade-off analysis between final electricity consumption per capita and urban population in the EU-28. Average stabilised synergy level analysis in Trade-off between Final Elecricity Consumption per Capita (All Fuels, kwh/cap) and Urban population (First of Jan) in the EU-28, (Average of variables in 1995, 2, 25, 21, 213 and 214) Final Electricity Consumption per Capita, All fiels, kwh/cap Synergy analyses 4-6 There were synergy analyses 4-6 too, but these are not reported in detail in this presentation 17

18 Energy intensity and sustainable society indicators: SSI framework (21 indicators) Methodological framework: Synergy between SSI system indicators and energy intensity indicators in the EU-28 region 18

19 Example 1: EU-28 Synergy Analysis between Healthy Life and Energy Intensity.,8 EU-28 Synergy Analysis between Healthy Life and Energy Intensity,6,4,2 -,2 -,4 -,6 Synergy, Dynamic, Healthy Life-Energy Intensity Synergy, stabilised, Healthy Life-Energy Intensity Example 2: EU-28 Synergy Analysis between Good Governance and Energy Intensity. 1 EU-28 Synergy Analysis between Good Governance and Energy Intensity,8,6,4,2 -,2 -,4 -,6 -,8 Synergy, Dynamic, Good Governance-Energy Intensity Synergy, stabilised, Good Governance-Energy Intensity 19

20 Example 3: EU-28 Synergy Analysis between Biodiversity of Forest Area and Energy Intensity.,6 EU-28 Synergy Analysis between Biodiversity of Forest Area and Energy Intensity,4,2 -,2 -,4 -,6 -,8 Synergy, Dynamic, Biodiversity of Forest Area-Energy Intensity Synergy, stabilised, Biodiversity of Forest Area-Energy Intensity Example 4: EU-28 Synergy Analysis between GDP and Energy Intensity,6 EU-28 Synergy Analysis between GDP and Energy Intensity,4,2 -,2 -,4 -,6 -,8-1 Synergy, Dynamic, GDP-Energy Intensity Synergy, stabilised, GDP-Energy Intensity 2

21 Example 5: Value Added in the EU-28, Value added, gross, in current prices, million euros 3, Value Added in the EU-28, Value added, gross, in current prices, million euros 25, 2, 15, 1, 5,, Example 6: EU-28 Synergy Analysis between Employment and Energy Intensity.,6 EU-28 Synergy Analysis between Employment and Energy Intensity,4,2 -,2 -,4 -,6 -,8 Synergy, Dynamic, Employment-Energy Intensity Synergy, stabilised, Employment-Energy Intensity 21

22 Summary section Summary and conclusions of explorative analyses (Analyses 1-5) Synergy analysis 1. Energy Intensity and Value Added 2. Energy Intensity and Population 3. Energy intensity and urban population 4. Energy consumption per capita and value added 5. Energy consumption and population Direction of synergy between variables Negative in 26 EU -28 had negative synergies (18 ). 9 EU - member had positive synergies. One country, Portugal had almost zero level synergy. had negative synergies (21 ). One country, Czech Republic had almost zero level synergy. had negative synergies (26 ). had negative synergies (17 ). 11 EU - member had positive synergies. Slovakia had almost zero level synergy. Trade-off analysis Exceptions among EU-28 The higher is value - Luxembourg and added, the lower is Austria. energy intensity. The lower is No clear exceptions. population, the higher is energy intensity. The lower is urban population, the higher is energy intensity. The higher is value - added, the lower is energy consumption pe r capita. The higher is population, the lower is energy consumption per capita. No clear exceptions. Seven EU- had positive synergies. Luxembourg and Austria. No clear exceptions. 22

23 Summary and conclusions of explorative analyses (Analyses 6-1) 1. Energy consumption and urban population 2. Final electricity consumption per capita and value added 3. Final electricity consumption per capita and population 4. Final electricity consumption per capita and urban population 5. Primary energy intensity and value added had negative synergies (21 ). Seven EU - member had positive synergies. had negative synergies (26 ). Two EU - member had positive synergies. had negative synergies (18 ). In ten EU - member states is was positive. had negative synergies (21 ). In seven EU-member states is was positive. had negative synergies (26 ). In two EU - member states is was positive. The higher is urban population, the lower is energy consumption per capita. The higher is value added, the lower is final electricity consumption per capita The higher is population, the lower is final electricity consumption per capita. The higher is urban population, the lower is final electricity consumption per capita. The higher is value added, the lower is primary energy intensity. No clear exceptions. Luxembourg and Austria. No clear exceptions. No clear exceptions. Luxembourg and Austria. Summary and conclusions of explorative analyses (Analyses 11-15) 1. Primary energy intensity and population 2. Primary energy intensity and urban population 3. Carbon intensity and value added 4. Carbon intensity and population 5. Carbon intensity and urban population had negative synergies (21 ). In nine EU - member states is was positive. had negative synergies (21 ). In nine EU - member states is was positive. In Czech Republic it was almost zero. had negative synergies (22 ). In four EU - member states is was positive. In Malta and Hungary it was zero. had negative synergies (15 ). In el even EU-member states is was positive. In Malta it was zero. had negative synergie s (21 ). In seven EU-member states is was positive. In Malta it was zero. The higher is population, the lower is primary energy intensity. The higher is urban population, the lower is primary energy intensity. The higher is value added, the lower is carbon intensity. The higher is population, the lower is carbon intensity. The higher is urban population, the lower is carbon intensity. No clear exceptions. No clear exceptions. Czech Republic, Latvia, Luxembourg and Hungary. Bulgaria and Romania had very positive synergy. Bulgaria, Estonia and Romania had very positive synergy. Belgium, Poland and Cyprus had very negative synergy. 23

24 Sustainable society indicators and energy intensity: Results of synergy analyses Synergy analysis 1. Energy Intensity and Sufficient Food 2. Energy Intensity and Sufficient Drink 3. Energy Intensity and Safe Sanitation 4. Energy Intensity and Education 5. Energy Intensity and Healthy Life Direction of synergy between variables Both positive and negative synergies identified Both positive and negative synergies identified Both positive and negative synergies identified Negative synergy in Negative synergy in Policy Special comments harmosation field Basic needs Sustainability problems in some EU-member Basic needs Sustainability problems in some EU-member Basic needs Sustainability problems in some EU-member Health France and Sweden are clearly exceptions (strongest positive synergies in relative terms). Health Estonia and Finland are clearly exceptions (strongest positive synergies in relative terms). Sustainable society indicators and energy intensity: Results of synergy analyses 1. Energy Intensity and Gender Equality 2. Energy Intensity and Income Distribution Negative synergy in Positive synergy in 3. Population Growth Both positive and negative synergies identified 4. Energy Intensity and Good Governance 5. Energy Intensity and Biodiversity of Forest Area Positive synergy in Both positive and negative synergies identified Health Personal and social development Personal and social development Personal and social development Natural resources France and Finland are clearly exceptions (strongest positive synergies in relative terms). France and Slovakia are clearly exceptions (strongest positive synergies in relative terms). Lithuania and Estonia are clearly exceptions (strongest negative synergies in relative terms). Ireland and Cyprus are clearly exceptions (strongest positive synergies in relative terms. Cyprus is clearly an exception (strongest negative synergy in relative terms). Hungary, Malta and the Netherlands are clearly exceptions (stron gest positive synergies in relative terms. Ireland is clearly an exception (strongest positive synergy in relative terms. Poland is clearly an exception (strongest negative synergy in relative terms. 24

25 Sustainable society indicators and energy intensity: Results of synergy analyses 1. Energy Intensity and Biodiversity, Protected Ares 2. Energy Intensity and Renewable Water 3. Energy Intensity and Consumption 4. Energy Intensity and Energy Use 5. Energy Intensity and Energy Savings Positive synergy in Positive synergy in Both positive and negative synergies identified Positive synergy in Positive synergy in Natural resources Natural resources Climate and energy Climate and energy Climate and energy Greece is clearly an exception (strongest positive synergy in relative terms. Portugal is clearly an exception (strongest negative synergy in relative terms. Negative synergies were found in Estonia, Finland and Greece. Both Romania and Hungary have highest positive synergies. Strong negative synergies were observed in Cyprus, Lithuania and Poland. Ireland, Portugal and Slovakia have highest positive synergies. Strong negative synergy was observed in Finland. Many EU-member states have negative synergies Sustainable society indicators and energy intensity: Results of synergy analyses 1. Energy Intensity and Greenhouse Gases 2. Energy Intensity and Renewable Energy 3. Energy Intensity and Organic Framing 4. Energy Intensity and Genuine Savings 5. Energy Intensity and Gross Domestic Product Positive synergy in Negative synergy in Negative synergy in Positive synergy in Negative synergy in Climate and energy Climate and energy Transition Transition Economy Greece, Lithuania and Finland have negative synergies. Portugal shows very positive synergy. Very strong negative synergies were observed in Lithuania, Luxembourg and Romania. Estonia, Greece, Latvia and Finland have positive synergies. Portugal is an exception with almost +,8 synergy. Strong negative synergies have Germany, Estonia, Lithuania, Sweden and Finland. Ireland is an exception with strong positive synergy (over +,5). Positive syner gies were observed in Spain, Croatia, Italy, Luxembourg and Finland. 25

26 Sustainable society indicators and energy intensity: Results of synergy analyses 1. Energy Intensity and Employment 2. Energy Intensity and Public Debt Negative synergy in narrow majority of EU28- Negative synergy in Economy France is an exception. It has -,5 negative synergy. Austria is also an exception. It has almost +,5 positive synergy. Economy Many EU-member states have positive synergies Conclusions These reported synergy analyses above reveal that in many EU member there are needs to correct incentive schemes of energy policy. The European Union also has knowledge based reasons to pay special attention to the following energy policy issues: (1) Improving energy efficiency in Central and Eastern European member states, (2) improving energy efficiency in the context of fast urbanization in European cities and metropolitan regions and (3) paying a special attention to energy and sustainability policy harmonisation in the EU member states. It is very important to critically evaluate the integration of sustainable development policy with energy savings and efficiency solutions. In some EU member, there are still some problems, as shown above, in the integration of these policy arenas. The results of this report reveal that the potential synergy differs from country to country and also overt time. The EUFORIE report gives us very detailed information about these differences, but also vital information about similarities. This report reveal also interesting linkages of sustainability policy. In this EUFORIE report we limited our synergy analyses on looking pairwise synergy/trade-off analysis of various key SSI and energy variables, which are relevant for energy saving/energy efficiency policies in the EU-28 region. 26

27 Conclusions The synergy method serves us for envisaging the linkages among policy sectors and track the sustainable development in more integrated approach to develop coherent energy and sustainability policies in the EU-28 region. Also transition paths towards better sustainability can be analysed by such synergy analyses. Thank you for attention! Dr Jarmo Vehmas, FFRC, TSE, University of Turku Dr Jyrki Luukkanen, FFRC, TSE, University of Turku Dr Jari Kaivo-oja, FFRC, TSE, University of Turku 27