Open Access

The paper describes patterns of resource use related to German households' equipment. Using cluster analysis and material flow accounting, data on socio-demographic characteristics, and expenditures on fuel, electricity and household equipment allow for a differentiation of seven different household types. The corresponding resource use, expressed in Material Footprint per person and year, is calculated based on cradle-to-gate material flows of average household goods and the related household energy use. Our results show that patterns of resource use are mainly driven by the use of fuel and electricity and the ownership of cars. The quantified Material Footprints correlate to social status and are also linked to city size, age and household size. Affluent, established and/or younger families living in rural areas typically show the highest amounts of durables and expenditures on non-durables, thus exhibiting the highest use of natural resources.

Für die Umsetzung der Energiewende und speziell den Ausbau erneuerbarer Energien sind nicht nur energiewirtschaftliche oder Klimaschutz-Kriterien maßgeblich. Zu einer umfassenden Nachhaltigkeitsbewertung gehört unter anderem auch die Ressourcenbewertung. Hier ist unstrittig, dass die Gesamt-Ressourceninanspruchnahme eines Energiesystems generell erheblich niedriger ist, wenn dieses nicht auf fossilen, sondern auf erneuerbaren Energien basiert (und dabei nicht hauptsächlich auf Biomasse ausgerichtet ist). Bisher wurde jedoch insbesondere der Verbrauch und die langfristige Verfügbarkeit der mineralischen Rohstoffe, die in der Regel zur Herstellung von Energiewandlern und Infrastruktur benötigt werden, wenig untersucht. Im Rahmen des Projekts KRESSE wurde daher erstmals analysiert, welche "kritischen" mineralischen Rohstoffe für die Herstellung von Technologien, die Strom, Wärme und Kraftstoffe aus erneuerbaren Energien erzeugen, bei einer zeitlichen Perspektive bis zum Jahr 2050 in Deutschland relevant sind. Die Einschätzung als "kritisch" umfasst dabei die langfristige Verfügbarkeit der identifizierten Rohstoffe, die Versorgungssituation, die Recyclingfähigkeit und die Umweltbedingungen der Förderung. Die Studie macht deutlich, dass die geologische Verfügbarkeit mineralischer Rohstoffe für den geplanten Ausbau der erneuerbaren Energien in Deutschland grundsätzlich keine limitierende Größe darstellt. Dabei kann jedoch möglicherweise nicht jede Technologievariante unbeschränkt zum Einsatz kommen.

The European Horizon 2020-project COMBI ("Calculating and Operationalising the Multiple Benefits of Energy Efficiency in Europe") aims at estimating the energy and non-energy impacts that a realisation of the EU energy efficiency potential would have in the year 2030. The project goal is to cover the most important technical potentials identified for the EU27 by 2030 and to come up with consistent estimates for the most relevant impacts: air pollution (and its effects on human health, eco-systems/crops, buildings), social welfare (including disposable income, comfort, health and productivity), biotic and abiotic resources, the energy system and energy security and the macro economy (employment, economic growth and the public budget). This paper describes the overall project research design, envisaged methodologies, the most critical methodological challenges with such an ex-ante evaluation and with aggregating the multiple impacts. The project collects data for a set of 30 energy efficiency improvement actions grouped by energy services covering all sectors and EU countries. Based on this, multiple impacts will be quantified with separate methodological approaches, following methods used in the respective literature and developing them where necessary. The paper outlines the approaches taken by COMBI: socio-economic modelling for air pollution and social welfare, resource modelling for biotic/abiotic and economically unused resources, General Equilibrium modelling for long-run macroeconomic effects and other models for short-run effects, and the LEAP model for energy system modelling. Finally, impacts will be aggregated, where possible in monetary terms. Specific challenges of this step include double-counting issues, metrics, within and cross-country/regional variability of effects and context-specificity.

The economic assessment of low-carbon energy options is the primary step towards the design of policy portfolios to foster the green energy economy. However, today these assessments often fall short of including important determinants of the overall cost-benefit balance of such options by not including indirect costs and benefits, even though these can be game-changing. This is often due to the lack of adequate methodologies. The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive account of the key methodological challenges to the assessment of the multiple impacts of energy options, and an initial menu of potential solutions to address these challenges. The paper first provides evidence for the importance of the multiple impacts of energy actions in the assessment of low-carbon options. The paper identifies a few key challenges to the evaluation of the co-impacts of low-carbon options and demonstrates that these are more complex for co-impacts than for the direct ones. Such challenges include several layers of additionality, high context dependency, and accounting for distributional effects. The paper continues by identifying the key challenges to the aggregation of multiple impacts including the risks of overcounting while taking into account the multitude of interactions among the various co-impacts. The paper proposes an analytical framework that can help address these and frame a systematic assessment of the multiple impacts.