03.01.2014 Views

sectoral economic costs and benefits of ghg mitigation - IPCC

sectoral economic costs and benefits of ghg mitigation - IPCC

sectoral economic costs and benefits of ghg mitigation - IPCC

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Gina Roos<br />

Energy Dem<strong>and</strong> in the Commercial Sector<br />

SANEA (1998) report that coal use in this sector declined from 27 PJ in 1980, to 7.4 PJ in 1996,<br />

while electricity consumption increased from 36.5 PJ to 53.5 PJ. Electricity services 86% <strong>of</strong> the<br />

final energy dem<strong>and</strong> in the sector with coal contributing the remainder although gas supplied<br />

about 20 PJ in the hospitality <strong>and</strong> tourism subsector. A survey in 1997 found that more than 50%<br />

<strong>of</strong> the organisations in this sector had implemented energy efficiency measures in order to reduce<br />

<strong>costs</strong>: energy efficient lighting, microwave technology, variable speed forms, energy efficient<br />

building management <strong>and</strong> energy efficient building designs (SANEA, 1998).<br />

Table 1 The Percentage Expenditure for Different Final Energy Dem<strong>and</strong> for a Variety <strong>of</strong><br />

Household Subsectors in 1996.<br />

Final Energy<br />

Dem<strong>and</strong><br />

Household Subsector Expenditure (%)<br />

Farm<br />

Labourer<br />

Rural<br />

Settlement<br />

Emergent<br />

Farmer<br />

Established<br />

Farmer<br />

Urban<br />

Informal<br />

Township<br />

Houses<br />

Electricity 28 56 50 76 32 44 74<br />

Coal 16 10 8 10 19 16 8<br />

Liquid Fuels 20 9 14 4 20 14 6<br />

Gas 34 22 24 10 24 16 8<br />

Suburban<br />

Houses<br />

Biomass & 2 3 4 0 5 10 4<br />

Renewables<br />

Source: SANEA, 1998<br />

Table 2 The Contributions to Final Energy Dem<strong>and</strong> <strong>of</strong> Different Fuel Sources for Four Different<br />

Commercial Subsectors in 1996.<br />

Final Energy Dem<strong>and</strong><br />

Commercial Subsector Consumption (PJ)<br />

Trade &<br />

Finance<br />

Hospitality &<br />

Tourism<br />

Community &<br />

Training<br />

Health &<br />

Social Care<br />

Coal 21 21 58 55<br />

Liquid Fuels 22 10 8 8<br />

Gas 14 22 6 4<br />

Electricity 40 45 24 30<br />

Biomass & Renewables 8 2 5 2<br />

Source: SANEA, 1998<br />

Mitigation<br />

SANEA (1998) report that a 10- 20% energy saving through improved energy efficiency in<br />

South Africa could lead to an effective increase <strong>of</strong> 1.5 – 3% in gross domestic product (GDP)<br />

within the time frame <strong>of</strong> such savings. This will be achieved by creating awareness <strong>of</strong> the<br />

<strong>benefits</strong> <strong>of</strong>, <strong>and</strong> creating <strong>economic</strong> incentives for, energy efficiency. However, barriers do exist<br />

in terms <strong>of</strong> lack <strong>of</strong> awareness, lack <strong>of</strong> information <strong>and</strong> skills, high <strong>economic</strong> return criteria <strong>and</strong><br />

capital <strong>costs</strong>. This finding will be re-examined in the course <strong>of</strong> the Mitigation component <strong>of</strong> the<br />

South African Country Study.<br />

Two important points arise when examining the impacts <strong>of</strong> <strong>mitigation</strong> on the residential sector.<br />

The first is that <strong>mitigation</strong> options undertaken anywhere in the economy will have an impact on<br />

households – an aspect that can only be examined with a macro<strong>economic</strong> model. The results <strong>of</strong><br />

the model are in turn only as good as the level <strong>of</strong> disaggregation, data <strong>and</strong> assumptions on which<br />

255

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!