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.
Improvements in energy efficiency have numerous impacts additional to energy and greenhouse gas savings. This paper presents key findings and policy recommendations of the COMBI project ("Calculating and Operationalising the Multiple Benefits of Energy Efficiency in Europe").
This project aimed at quantifying the energy and non-energy impacts that a realisation of the EU energy efficiency potential would have in 2030. It covered the most relevant technical energy efficiency improvement actions in buildings, transport and industry.
Quantified impacts include reduced air pollution (and its effects on human health, eco-systems), improved social welfare (health, productivity), saved biotic and abiotic resources, effects on the energy system and energy security, and the economy (employment, GDP, public budgets and energy/EU-ETS prices). The paper shows that a more ambitious energy efficiency policy in Europe would lead to substantial impacts: overall, in 2030 alone, monetized multiple impacts (MI) would amount to 61 bn Euros per year in 2030, i.e. corresponding to approx. 50% of energy cost savings (131 bn Euros).
Consequently, the conservative CBA approach of COMBI yields that including MI quantifications to energy efficiency impact assessments would increase the benefit side by at least 50-70%. As this analysis excludes numerous impacts that could either not be quantified or monetized or where any double-counting potential exists, actual benefits may be much larger.
Based on these findings, the paper formulates several recommendations for EU policy making:
(1) the inclusion of MI into the assessment of policy instruments and scenarios,
(2) the need of reliable MI quantifications for policy design and target setting,
(3) the use of MI for encouraging inter-departmental and cross-sectoral cooperation in policy making to pursue common goals, and
(4) the importance of MI evaluations for their communication and promotion to decision-makers, stakeholders, investors and the general public.
Energy efficiency improvements have numerous benefits/impacts additional to energy and greenhouse gas savings, as has been shown and analysed e.g. in the 2014 IEA Report on "Multiple Benefits of Energy Efficiency". This paper presents the Horizon 2020-project COMBI ("Calculating and Operationalising the Multiple Benefits of Energy Efficiency in Europe"), aiming at calculating the energy and non-energy impacts that a realisation of the EU energy efficiency potential would have in 2030. The project covers the most relevant technical energy efficiency improvement actions and estimates impacts of reduced air pollution (and its effects on human health, eco-systems/crops, buildings), improved social welfare (incl. disposable income, comfort, health, productivity), saved biotic and abiotic resources, and energy system, energy security, and the macroeconomy (employment, economic growth and public budget). This paper explains how the COMBI energy savings potential in the EU 2030 is being modelled and how multiple impacts are assessed. We outline main challenges with the quantification (choice of baseline scenario, additionality of savings and impacts, context dependency and distributional issues) as well as with the aggregation of impacts (e.g. interactions and overlaps) and how the project deals with them. As research is still ongoing, this paper only gives a first impression of the order of magnitude for additional multiple impacts of energy efficiency improvements may have in Europe, where this is available to date. The paper is intended to stimulate discussion and receive feedback from the academic community on quantification approaches followed by the project.
Energy sufficiency has recently gained increasing attention as a way to limit and reduce total energy consumption of households and overall. This paper presents selected results of a research project funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research that examined the potentials and barriers for energy sufficiency with a focus on electricity in households, how household members perceive sufficiency practices, and how policymakers could support and encourage these. Bottom-up calculations for an average 2-person household in Germany yielded a total electricity savings potential from energy efficiency and sufficiency combined of theoretically up to 75 %.
The continuous growth of per capita living space was identified as one important driver for additional energy consumption both for heat and electricity. The paper will present findings of a representative survey of 600 persons responsible for the housework. It revealed that a part of the households is already practicing sufficiency options or are open towards these. Up to 30 % of these households can imagine, given the right conditions and policy support, to move to a smaller dwelling or to share an apartment with others when they are older.
Results of a first comprehensive analysis of an energy sufficiency policy to encourage and support households to sufficiency practices form the second part of the paper, with a focus on the feasibility and potential effectiveness of instruments for limiting the growth in average living space per person. This includes a case study on fostering communal housing projects as a measure to reduce living space. Further, the feasibility of a cap scheme for the total electricity sales of a supplier to its customers was examined. Instruments supporting energy-efficient and sufficient purchase and use of equipment complete the integrated energy sufficiency and efficiency policy package.
The paper will finally present the project's conclusions on an integrated energy sufficiency policy package resulting from this analysis.
Energy sufficiency policy : an evolution of energy efficiency policy or radically new approaches?
(2015)
In the last four decades, energy efficiency increased significantly in OECD countries. However, only during the most recent years, total energy consumption started to decrease a little, and much more slowly than energy efficiency potentials would suggest. Energy sufficiency has therefore gained new attention as a way to limit and reduce total energy consumption of a household or a country overall.
The project "Energiesuffizienz" funded by the German ministry for research has examined what energy sufficiency actually is, and what householders, household members but also manufacturers and local authorities could do to make electricity use in the home more sufficient. The focus of this paper is the policy part of the project - the first comprehensive analysis of an energy sufficiency policy.
The objective is to find out how policy can support market actors in using the energy sufficiency options identified. As for energy efficiency policy, it starts with the gathering of potential sufficiency actions and the analysis of the relevant barriers all market actors face, to derive recommendations for which policy instruments need to be combined to an effective policy package, and which other pre-conditions have to be met. Energy efficiency and energy sufficiency should not be seen as opposed to each other but work in the same direction - saving energy. Therefore, some instruments of the energy sufficiency policy package may be the same as for energy efficiency - such as energy taxation, and linear or progressive energy prices. Some may simply adapt technology-specific energy efficiency policy instruments. Examples are progressive appliance efficiency standards, standards based on absolute consumption, or providing energy advice. However, sufficiency may also require radical new approaches particularly to mitigate the drivers of non-sufficiency. They may range from promotion of completely different services for food and clothes cleaning, to instruments for limiting average dwelling floor area per person, or to a cap-and-trade system for the total electricity sales of a supplier to its customers, instead of an energy efficiency obligation. The paper presents these and other elements of an integrated energy sufficiency policy package resulting from this analysis.