Energy Intensity of Final Consumption: the Richer, the Poorer the Efficiency.

To maintain perpetual economic growth, most energy transition scenarios bet on a break in the historical relationship between energy use and gross domestic product (GDP). Practical limits to energy efficiency are overlooked by such scenarios, in particular the fact that high-income individuals tend to buy goods and services that are more energy intensive. Detailed assessments of the energy embodied in regional final consumption are needed to better understand the relationship between energy and GDP. Here, we calculate the energy necessary to produce households and governments' final consumption in 49 world regions in 2017. We correct prices at the sector level and account for the energy embodied in the whole value chain, including capital goods. We find that high-income regions use more energy per unit of final consumption than low-income ones. This result contradicts the common belief that a higher GDP is correlated with a better efficiency and questions the feasibility of mainstream energy transition scenarios based on universal GDP growth.

[1]  H. Jeanmart,et al.  Assessing the Economic Consequences of an Energy Transition Through a Biophysical Stock-Flow Consistent Model , 2023, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[2]  C. Dorninger,et al.  Imperialist appropriation in the world economy: Drain from the global South through unequal exchange, 1990–2015 , 2022, Global Environmental Change.

[3]  K. Hubacek,et al.  Impacts of poverty alleviation on national and global carbon emissions , 2022, Nature Sustainability.

[4]  Hugo Le Boulzec,et al.  Modelling the Demand and Access of Mineral Resources in a Changing World , 2021, Sustainability.

[5]  Jing Meng,et al.  Extended carbon footprint and emission transfer of world regions: With both primary and intermediate inputs into account , 2021, Science of The Total Environment.

[6]  S. Sorrell,et al.  Energy efficiency and economy-wide rebound effects: A review of the evidence and its implications , 2021, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.

[7]  Narasimha D. Rao,et al.  Durable Goods Drive Two-Thirds of Global Households' Final Energy Footprints. , 2021, Environmental science & technology.

[8]  J. Millward-Hopkins,et al.  ‘Fair’ inequality, consumption and climate mitigation , 2021 .

[9]  D. Foley,et al.  Plausible energy demand patterns in a growing global economy with climate policy , 2021, Nature Climate Change.

[10]  J. Millward-Hopkins,et al.  Global redistribution of income and household energy footprints: a computational thought experiment , 2021, Global Sustainability.

[11]  Narasimha D. Rao,et al.  Providing decent living with minimum energy: A global scenario , 2020, Global Environmental Change.

[12]  Tanveer Ahmad,et al.  A critical review of comparative global historical energy consumption and future demand: The story told so far , 2020 .

[13]  Andrea Pescatori,et al.  Energy, Efficiency Gains and Economic Development: When Will Global Energy Demand Saturate? , 2020, IMF Working Papers.

[14]  Poverty and Shared Prosperity 2020 : Reversals of Fortune , 2020 .

[15]  Purchasing Power Parities and the Size of World Economies: Results from the 2017 International Comparison Program , 2020 .

[16]  Richard Wood,et al.  The capital load of global material footprints , 2020 .

[17]  F. Creutzig,et al.  A systematic review of the evidence on decoupling of GDP, resource use and GHG emissions, part II: synthesizing the insights , 2020, Environmental Research Letters.

[18]  Carl-Johan Södersten Capital use matrices , 2020 .

[19]  F. Creutzig,et al.  A systematic review of the evidence on decoupling of GDP, resource use and GHG emissions, part I: bibliometric and conceptual mapping , 2020, Environmental Research Letters.

[20]  J. Steinberger,et al.  Large inequality in international and intranational energy footprints between income groups and across consumption categories , 2020, Nature Energy.

[21]  Narasimha D. Rao,et al.  A framework for modelling consumption-based energy demand and emission pathways. , 2020, Environmental science & technology.

[22]  Serenella Sala,et al.  Environmental impacts of household consumption in Europe: Comparing process-based LCA and environmentally extended input-output analysis , 2019, Journal of cleaner production.

[23]  Narasimha D. Rao,et al.  Energy requirements for decent living in India, Brazil and South Africa , 2019, Nature Energy.

[24]  Helmut Haberl,et al.  Conceptualizing energy services: A review of energy and well-being along the Energy Service Cascade , 2019, Energy Research & Social Science.

[25]  João F. D. Rodrigues,et al.  Variation in trends of consumption based carbon accounts , 2019, Scientific Data.

[26]  Bas J. van Ruijven,et al.  Amplification of future energy demand growth due to climate change , 2019, Nature communications.

[27]  Jing Meng,et al.  Global overview for energy use of the world economy: Household-consumption-based accounting based on the world input-output database (WIOD) , 2019, Energy Economics.

[28]  Jose Manuel Lopez-Guede,et al.  Decoupling between human development and energy consumption within footprint accounts , 2018, Journal of Cleaner Production.

[29]  Ray Galvin,et al.  Economic Inequality and Household Energy Consumption in High-income Countries: A Challenge for Social Science Based Energy Research , 2018, Ecological Economics.

[30]  J. Stock,et al.  The Cost of Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions , 2018, Journal of Economic Perspectives.

[31]  Richard Wood,et al.  Endogenizing Capital in MRIO Models: The Implications for Consumption-Based Accounting. , 2018, Environmental science & technology.

[32]  João F. D. Rodrigues,et al.  Uncertainty of Consumption-Based Carbon Accounts , 2018, Environmental science & technology.

[33]  Arnold Tukker,et al.  Growth in Environmental Footprints and Environmental Impacts Embodied in Trade: Resource Efficiency Indicators from EXIOBASE3 , 2018 .

[34]  Sarah Schmidt,et al.  EXIOBASE 3: Developing a Time Series of Detailed Environmentally Extended Multi‐Regional Input‐Output Tables , 2018 .

[35]  Keywan Riahi,et al.  A low energy demand scenario for meeting the 1.5 °C target and sustainable development goals without negative emission technologies , 2018, Nature Energy.

[36]  Konstantin Stadler,et al.  The country converter coco - a Python package for converting country names between different classification schemes , 2017, J. Open Source Softw..

[37]  Michael J. Fell Energy Services: A conceptual review , 2017 .

[38]  Marco Sakai,et al.  Energy consumption-based accounts : A comparison of results using different energy extension vectors , 2017 .

[39]  Guoqian Chen,et al.  Energy overview for globalized world economy: Source, supply chain and sink , 2017 .

[40]  Keywan Riahi,et al.  Assessing the Feasibility of Global Long-Term Mitigation Scenarios , 2017 .

[41]  Benjamin Sovacool,et al.  Energy decisions reframed as justice and ethical concerns , 2016, Nature Energy.

[42]  Richard Wood,et al.  Effect of aggregation and disaggregation on embodied material use of products in input–output analysis , 2015 .

[43]  Michael Greenstone,et al.  Do Energy Efficiency Investments Deliver? Evidence from the Weatherization Assistance Program , 2015 .

[44]  Manfred Lenzen,et al.  EFFECTS OF SECTOR AGGREGATION ON CO2 MULTIPLIERS IN MULTIREGIONAL INPUT–OUTPUT ANALYSES , 2014 .

[45]  Gordon Walker,et al.  What Is Energy For? Social Practice and Energy Demand , 2014 .

[46]  Jonathan M Cullen,et al.  Reducing energy demand: what are the practical limits? , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[47]  S. Sorrell,et al.  The rebound effect: Microeconomic definitions, limitations and extensions , 2008 .

[48]  N. Nakicenovic,et al.  Regional and global exergy and energy efficiencies , 1996 .

[49]  P. Sands The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change , 1992 .

[50]  Cutler J. Cleveland,et al.  Biophysical economics: Historical perspective and current research trends , 1987 .

[51]  C. A. Roberts,et al.  Discussion * , 1970, Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting.

[52]  B. Stewart,et al.  What is Energy? , 1870, Nature.

[53]  G. Fond,et al.  The Exponential Relationship between Healthcare Systems’ Resource Footprints and Their Access and Quality: A Study of 49 Regions between 1995 and 2015 , 2022, Social Science Research Network.

[54]  Anne Owen Techniques for Evaluating the Differences in Multiregional Input-Output Databases: A Comparative Evaluation of CO2 Consumption-Based Accounts Calculated Using Eora, GTAP and WIOD , 2017 .

[55]  Peter Maurer,et al.  The Entropy Law And The Economic Process , 2016 .

[56]  Matthias Schroder,et al.  Input–Output Analysis , 2011 .

[57]  R. Easterlin Does Economic Growth Improve the Human Lot? Some Empirical Evidence , 1974 .