Energy and CO2 intensity changes in the EU-27: Decomposition into explanatory effects

被引:42
作者
Cruz, Luis [1 ,2 ]
Dias, Jose [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Coimbra, CeBER GEMF, Av Dias Silva 165, P-3004512 Coimbra, Portugal
[2] Univ Coimbra, Fac Econ, Av Dias Silva 165, P-3004512 Coimbra, Portugal
[3] Univ Coimbra, EfS, Av Dias Silva 165, P-3004512 Coimbra, Portugal
关键词
CO2; intensity; Decomposition analysis; Decoupling; Energy intensity; Sustainability; OECD COUNTRIES; METHODOLOGY;
D O I
10.1016/j.scs.2016.03.007
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
Sustainability has traditionally focused on three interconnected and mutually enforcing pillars: economy, ecology and society. One of today's major challenges is to tune environmental sustainability with economic growth and welfare by decoupling resources use and environmental degradation from economic growth. This work aims to assess energy-economy-environment interactions, analyzing energy and CO2 emission intensity. This is done through a comparative examination of their recent trends in the EU-27 countries, from 1999 to 2009, both by assessing resource and impact decoupling, and through the decomposition of the overall rates of change into their main explanatory effects. One of this work's major contributions is the derivation of policy implications from the assessment of the main driving forces behind energy and CO2 intensity, with a greater geographical and temporal focus than prior studies. The results show that, overall, the EU-27 economies reduced total energy use by moving into less energy-intensive structures and improving sectoral energy efficiency, in spite of the adverse results of the activity effect. Regarding CO2 emissions, the EU-27 decreased these by moving to less carbon-intensive structures and by improving the sectoral energy efficiency, the energy-mix and the emission-factor. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:486 / 495
页数:10
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]   DECOMPOSITION METHODOLOGY IN INDUSTRIAL ENERGY DEMAND ANALYSIS [J].
ANG, BW .
ENERGY, 1995, 20 (11) :1081-1095
[2]   The LMDI approach to decomposition analysis: a practical guide [J].
Ang, BW .
ENERGY POLICY, 2005, 33 (07) :867-871
[3]   Decomposition analysis for policymaking in energy: which is the preferred method? [J].
Ang, BW .
ENERGY POLICY, 2004, 32 (09) :1131-1139
[4]   A survey of index decomposition analysis in energy and environmental studies [J].
Ang, BW ;
Zhang, FQ .
ENERGY, 2000, 25 (12) :1149-1176
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2013, ECB MONTHL B EUR AR
[6]   Changes in the GHG emission intensity in EU-15: Lessons from a decomposition analysis [J].
Bhattacharyya, Subhes C. ;
Matsumura, Wataru .
ENERGY, 2010, 35 (08) :3315-3322
[7]   The quality of energy intensity indicators for international comparison in the iron and steel industry [J].
Farla, JCM ;
Blok, K .
ENERGY POLICY, 2001, 29 (07) :523-543
[8]   The driving forces behind changes in CO2 emission levels in EU-27. Differences between member states [J].
Fernandez Gonzalez, P. ;
Landajo, M. ;
Presno, M. J. .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY, 2014, 38 :11-16
[9]   Comparing structural and index decomposition analysis [J].
Hoekstra, R ;
van der Bergh, JJCJM .
ENERGY ECONOMICS, 2003, 25 (01) :39-64
[10]   Breaks and trends in OECD countries' energy-GDP ratios [J].
Liddle, Brantley .
ENERGY POLICY, 2012, 45 :502-509