John Nyboer

Aggregating physical intensity indicators: results of applying the composite indicator approach to the Canadian industrial sector

Abstract Issues surrounding the development, application and interpretation of energy intensity indicators are a continuing source of debate in the field of energy policy analysis. Although economic energy intensity indicators still dominate intensity/efficiency studies, the use of physical energy intensity indicators is on the rise. In the past, physical energy intensity indicators were not employed since it was often impossible to develop aggregate (sector-level or nation-wide) measures of physical energy intensity due to the difficulties associated with adding diverse physical products. This paper presents the results of research conducted specifically to address this “aggregation” problem. The research focused on the development of the Composite Indicator Approach, a simple, practical, alternative method for calculating aggregate physical energy intensity indicators. In this paper, the Composite Indicator Approach is used to develop physical energy intensity indicators for the Canadian industrial and manufacturing sectors, and is then compared to other existing methods of aggregation. The physical composite indicators developed using this approach are also evaluated in terms of their reliability and overall usefulness. Both comparisons suggest that the Composite Indicator Approach can be a useful, and ultimately suitable, way of addressing the aggregation problem typically associated with heterogeneous sectors of the economy.

Renewable energy and climate change

Executive Summary All societies require energy services to meet basic human needs (e.g., lighting, cooking, space comfort, mobility, communication) and to serve productive processes . For development to be sustainable, delivery of energy services needs to be secure and have low environmental impacts. Sustainable social and economic development requires assured and affordable access to the energy resources necessary to provide essential and sustainable energy services. This may mean the application of different strategies at different stages of economic development. To be environmentally benign, energy services must be provided with low environmental impacts and low greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, 85% of current primary energy driving global economies comes from the combustion of fossil fuels and consumption of fossil fuels accounts for 56.6% of all anthropogenic GHG emissions. Renewable energy sources play a role in providing energy services in a sustainable manner and, in particular, in mitigating climate change . This Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation explores the current contribution and potential of renewable energy (RE) sources to provide energy services for a sustainable social and economic development path. It includes assessments of available RE resources and technologies, costs and co-benefits, barriers to up-scaling and integration requirements, future scenarios and policy options. GHG emissions associated with the provision of energy services are a major cause of climate change . The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) concluded that “Most of the observed increase in global average temperature since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.”

The application of a hybrid energy-economy model to a key developing country – China

Energy security, local air pollution and GHG emissions are three key challenges facing Chinas decision-makers. In this study, we first applied CIMS, a hybrid (bottom-up/top-down) energy-economy model, to test how different policy packages could be designed to alleviate Chinas energy and environment challenges. Secondly, we compared the marginal abatement cost curve of this study with those of other analysts, and found that modeling methodology differences had significant impacts on cost estimates of GHG emission abatement. Finally, we derived the long-run autonomous energy efficiency indices (AEEIs) and elasticity of substitution (ESUB) values for China, and found that the aggregate Chinese AEEIs are somewhere between top-down and bottom-up estimates in the literature. Moreover, because the simulated ESUBs and AEEIs differ from one sector to another, this suggests that aggregated models with economy-wide values for these parameters may be unhelpful to policy-makers seeking to explore the effects of structural evolution on energy demand and emissions.