Refine
Year of Publication
- 2019 (8) (remove)
Document Type
- Peer-Reviewed Article (3)
- Conference Object (3)
- Report (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Language
- English (8) (remove)
Estimating the sufficiency potential in buildings : the space between underdimensioned and oversized
(2019)
The emission reduction potential of energy efficiency and energy supply in buildings is estimated in various energy and climate action plans, scenarios, and potential analyses. But the third pillar of sustainability - sufficiency - is neglected in most studies.The increasing demand of space per person in the residential sector is a trend in most European countries. Its implication on energy use, demand for resources like land, building material, equipment, and waste production is enormous. Next to the ecological impact, the distribution of space has social and societal effects. Thus, sufficiency policies in the building sector complementing efficiency and energy policy are needed for a sustainable development of the European building stock.
But how can a sufficiency potential in the building sector be estimated? How much space and equipment is needed for a decent living and how much is too much? The paper proposes four areas of sufficiency in buildings: space, design and construction, equipment, and use. It presents a set of indicators, a quantitative estimate of energy savings from reduced per capita floor area, and visualises the sufficiency potential in European countries in an experimental approach. The final discussion focuses on the question: What does this mean for policy making?
On 26 January 2019, the Commission on Growth, Structural Change and Employment recommended that no more coal-fired power plants would be operated in Germany by 2038 at the latest. In this paper the Wuppertal Institute comments on the results of the Commission and makes recommendations for the current necessary steps for the climate and innovation policy in Europe, Germany and North Rhine-Westphalia.
India's present development trajectory is at a crucial juncture with a requirement to meet the demands of a population of over 1.2 billion while ensuring environmental sustainability. The resulting economic growth over the past two decades has over-exploited finite natural resources and led to tremendous environmental degradation. Therefore, decoupling economic growth from resource consumption is crucial in the transformation towards a green economy. Building construction is one of the most resource-intensive sectors, as well as creating a high impact on the environment. This study analyzes existing mechanisms in India's building construction sector that attempt to decouple economic growth from resource use and environmental impacts. The key contributors for decoupling are analyzed. Recommendations for regulations, market incentives, transparency, data monitoring and capacity-building are provided for an array of policy initiatives targeted at political and financial decision-makers at the national, state and local levels for different buildings.
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.
The implementation of energy efficiency improvement actions not only yields energy and greenhouse gas emission savings, but also leads to other multiple impacts such as air pollution reductions and subsequent health and eco-system effects, resource impacts, economic effects on labour markets, aggregate demand and energy prices or on energy security. While many of these impacts have been studied in previous research, this work quantifies them in one consistent framework based on a common underlying bottom-up funded energy efficiency scenario across the EU. These scenario data are used to quantify multiple impacts by energy efficiency improvement action and for all EU28 member states using existing approaches and partially further developing methodologies. Where possible, impacts are integrated into cost-benefit analyses. We find that with a conservative estimate, multiple impacts sum up to a size of at least 50% of energy cost savings, with substantial impacts coming from e.g., air pollution, energy poverty reduction and economic impacts.
In spite of differences in energy policies and supply, Japan and Germany have to master similar challenges: To reorganize the energy supply system towards - in the long term - being reliable, affordable, low in risks and resource use, and climate-neutral. At the same time, the ecological modernization should maintain or even strengthen international competitiveness. To better address these challenges, a bi-national expert council has been established between the two high-tech countries in 2016 - the GJETC.
The aim of the GJETC is to show that despite different starting points, a national energy transition can be more successful, if both countries learn from their strengths and also weaknesses, to avoid the latter. If the implementation of an energy transition in the two countries is socially and economically sound and advances technology innovation and deployment, it may not only double success, but can also serve as blue prints for other countries, especially due to learning from similarities and differences. For example: Why is per capita energy consumption higher in transport in Germany, but energy intensity higher in Japan's building sector? How can variable renewable energies be integrated in an efficient energy system at lowest costs?
The Council meets twice a year, holds stakeholder dialogues and outreach events, and prepares policy papers on strategic topics of mutual interest. Four comprehensive studies, each in cooperation of a German and a Japanese research institute, have been the basis for 15 joint key recommendations during the 1st phase. The 2nd phase to 2020 will study the role of hydrogen and digitalisation for the energy transition, as well as other topics. The paper presents the findings and recommendations of the GJETC of the first phase 2016-18 as well as first results of the second phase. It also reviews the setup of the GJETC and the way it works, to assess if and how it can serve as a role model of bilateral cooperation on the energy transition.
Energy sufficiency has recently gained increasing attention as a way to limit and reduce total energy consumption of households and overall. This paper presents both the partly new methods and the results of a comprehensive analysis of a micro- and meso-level energy sufficiency policy package to make electricity use in the home more sufficient and reduce at least the growth in per-capita dwelling size. The objective is to find out how policy can support households and their members, as individuals or as caregivers, but also manufacturers and local authorities in practicing energy sufficiency. This analysis needed an adapted and partly new set of methods we developed. Energy sufficiency does not only face barriers like energy efficiency, but also potential restrictions for certain household members or characteristics, and sometimes, preconditions have to be met to make more energy-sufficient routines and practices possible. All of this was analysed in detail to derive recommendations for which policy instruments need to be combined to an effective policy package for energy sufficiency. Energy efficiency and energy sufficiency should not be seen as opposed to each other but work in the same direction - saving energy. Therefore, some energy sufficiency policy instruments may be the same as for energy efficiency, such as energy pricing policies. Some may simply adapt technology-specific energy efficiency policy instruments. Examples include progressive appliance efficiency standards, standards based on absolute consumption, or providing energy advice. However, sufficiency may also require new policy approaches. 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.