ENERGY FOR A SUSTAINABLE WORLD - World Resources Institute

More documents

Recommendations

Info

III. Alternative Energy Futures The energy price shocks of the 1970s prompted a number of institutions, both national and international, and scientists to project future energy demand and supply. In most of these projections, the energy future is portrayed as an extension of the past: energy demand is seen to rise steeply, so that virtually all energy supplies must be expanded at formidable rates to meet projected demand. Most have underestimated the potential of measures to increase energy efficiency, probably because the world had never before experienced anything remotely like the changes relating to energy that have occurred since the first oil shock. What is striking about these efforts is that as time passed, the demand projections came down. For example, the International Energy Agency's demand projections dropped markedly between 1977 and 1980. (See Figure 11.) Energy demand projections for the United States also moved steadily downward. (See Figure 13.) The first effort exploring the prospects for energy efficiency improvement was the Ford Foundation's Energy Policy Project (EPP). In its final report, published in 1974, EPP suggested that "zero energy growth" for the United States was a possibility near the turn of the century, so that by the year 2000 demand would be "only" about 100 quads (quadrillion British thermal units [Btu]) per year. 11 This suggestion was roundly criticized at the time as "fuzzyheaded," "irresponsible," and "totally impractical" by a number of experts, including several on the project's board of advisors. In fact, it was then virtually impossible to find any energy analyst outside the Energy Policy Project who thought U.S. energy demand could be as low as 100 quads per year in the year 2000. Government agencies and the trade associations for the oil and gas, electric utility, and nuclear power industries were projecting energy demands of 150 to 170 quads by 2000. It was not long, however, before the Ford Project's middle-of-the-road "technical fix" scenario of 125 quads was adopted by energy analysts as conventional wisdom. The United States has already experienced zero energy growth for the period 1973 to 1985, and today most forecasters project a U.S. energy demand in 2000 of only 85 to 90 quads per year. Why did analysts err on the high side? The most serious problem with these projections is that most were based on the assumption that in the future there would be a close coupling between a nation's energy demand and its level of economic activity, as measured by its GDP or gross national product (GNP). This correlation was indeed strong historically, but no more in the market-oriented industrialized countries. As we have already noted, a remarkable decoupling of energy and economic growth has already been seen for the OECD countries since 1973. (See Figure 14.) Certainly the most ambitious analysis of the global energy problem in this period, published 27
Figure 12. OECD Primary Energy Demand and Supply, History and Projections -8900 / lion Tonnes of Oil Eqjivalent % 4500. 1 <strong>World</strong> Energy / Outlook, 1977 —*" / A i // 'J -6910 Coal Study, 1978 5810 High 5500 Reference Case 1980 5090 Low 4350 Reference Case 1980 3500_ OECD Energy / v ' j*£r 4000 High 3870 Low 8500- 7500- 6500. 5500- 2500- «« OECD Energy j^« Supply | 1500 1 i II I |l 19 60 1970 1980 1990 Year The alternative projections were made in 1977, 1978, and (<strong>World</strong> Energy Outlook [Paris: 1982]). i \ i 2000 1980 by the International Energy Agency 28
Page 1 and 2: ENERGY FOR A SUSTAINABLE WORLD (iii
Page 3 and 4: Kathleen Courrier Publications Dire
Page 5 and 6: V. Changing the Political Economy o
Page 7 and 8: Foreword The 1970s saw nothing less
Page 9 and 10: The Energy Crisis Revisited The sha
Page 11 and 12: Table 1. Net Oil Imports and Their
Page 13 and 14: I. Some Surprises on the Demand Sid
Page 15 and 16: Figure 3. Cross-Section of a "Stres
Page 17 and 18: Table 2. Pre-Energy Crisis Trends i
Page 19 and 20: Figure 6. The Rapidly Changing Tech
Page 21 and 22: Figure 8. A High-Efficiency Wood St
Page 23 and 24: Figure 9. Alternative Projections o
Page 25 and 26: II. A Closer Look at the Energy Pro
Page 27 and 28: substitutes exist for fueling autom
Page 29 and 30: Tanzania. Each year human overuse l
Page 31 and 32: Higher CO 2 concentrations in the a
Page 33: would also buy time for the develop
Page 37 and 38: Figure 14. Primary Energy Consumpti
Page 39 and 40: might ensue. In short, the Middle E
Page 41 and 42: IV. Behind the Numbers E nergy is o
Page 43 and 44: Figure 15. Sectoral Distribution of
Page 45 and 46: Figure 17. Trends in the Apparent C
Page 47 and 48: containing less material per dollar
Page 49 and 50: Figure 20. The Material Intensity o
Page 51 and 52: Figure 21. Final Energy Intensity V
Page 53 and 54: Figure 23. Final Energy Intensity V
Page 55 and 56: many different technological possib
Page 57 and 58: Table 4. Distribution of Petroleum
Page 59 and 60: Table 5. Continued e. The average f
Page 61 and 62: Detailed measurements in the late 1
Page 63 and 64: Table 6. Energy Performance of Refr
Page 65 and 66: Table 7. Final Energy Use in the Re
Page 67 and 68: Table 8. Oil Use by Automobiles in
Page 69 and 70: the next several decades was 37 mpg
Page 71 and 72: Table 10. Continued d. The 39-kilow
Page 73 and 74: million autos in developing countri
Page 75 and 76: (the combined production of heat an
Page 77 and 78: Table 12. Parameters Relating to th
Page 79 and 80: Table 13. Final Energy Use Scenario
Page 81 and 82: Table 14. Final Per Capita Energy U
Page 83 and 84: Table 16. Alternative Scenarios for
Page 85 and 86:
Table 18. Alternative Final Energy
Page 87 and 88:
Table 20. Activity Levels for a Hyp
Page 89 and 90:
Table 21. Continued g. A 25 percent
Page 91 and 92:
Figure 28. Final Energy Use Per Cap
Page 93 and 94:
V. Changing the Political Economy o
Page 95 and 96:
are controlled to protect the poor,
Page 97 and 98:
plementing social goals. Far more i
Page 99 and 100:
energy performance targets. Such ta
Page 101 and 102:
Of course, energy utilities won't b
Page 103 and 104:
The era of energy-demand consciousn
Page 105 and 106:
more difficult to implement in deve
Page 107 and 108:
Efforts to modernize bioenergy woul
Page 109 and 110:
Table 24. Expenditures of Multilate
Page 111 and 112:
support projects need not rely much
Page 113 and 114:
These "threshold" countries are not
Page 115 and 116:
Notes 1. The World Bank, World Deve
Page 117 and 118:
35. H.S. Geller, The Potential for
Page 119 and 120:
Appendix A Top-Down Representation
Page 121 and 122:
Figure A-l A Top-Down Representatio
Page 123 and 124:
plausible expectations about energy
Page 125 and 126:
World Resources Institute 1735 New
show all

ENERGY FOR A SUSTAINABLE WORLD - World Resources Institute

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

Delete template?

Save as template?