Keynote at workshop "Sustainable and Peaceful Energy Future in Asia", 28. - 30. September 1998, Seoul and at
Pan-European NGO Sustainable Energy Seminar, 18.-22. September 2001, Denmark
SUSTAINABLE ENERGY FUTURE
- NORDIC PERSPECTIVE
Jorgen S. Norgard
Department of Buildings and Energy
Technical University of Denmark
DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark
ABSTRACT
The paper suggests that environmental sustainability of an energy system first of all
depends on the level of energy consumption, since all energy supplies have some
environmental impact. The basis for the methodology outlined is that future energy
consumption, E, is determined by development in the three main factors, namely 1)
population, P, 2) material welfare, expressed by the level of energy services, S, and 3) the
energy intensity of the technology applied, I. Energy consumption is then E = P * S * I. All
three determinants can be subjected to political as well as individual actions. A key factor is
the development in S, stressing that the economic policies must also adapt to the
environmental realities of a limited world.
Based on the method mentioned the paper indicates how a high quality of daily life
can be reached with an energy consumption of only a small fraction of what Europeans are
using today. These options have been demonstrated in scenario projects for Denmark,
Scandinavia, and Europe. Finally the energy development since 1973 is outlined, involving
governmental as well as public actions. In the recent decade the low energy options have come
to influence the policy of the Danish Government. Its present energy plan has a target of a 20
percent reduction of CO2 emission by 2005 and 50 percent by 2030. The paper ends with
some personal views on the difficulties of implementing a sustainable development.
2
0. INTRODUCTION
To a large extent this paper is a summary of some earlier works of mine, which are
referred to and in which more detailed references can be sought.
The first section discusses the advantages of energy savings as well as the meaning of
the concept sustainable development. The following section 2 outlines a Nordic methodology,
developed for, and applied to, various energy scenarios in Europe. The methodology is based
on the three main determinants for the energy flow: population, economy, and technology.
These determinants can all be adapted and shaped by political and individual actions, and their
possible contributions to a sustainable development are discussed in sections 3, 4, and 5.
Special attention is given to the development in economy and social values, factors which are
often ignored in the environmental debate. Section 6 gives a brief outline of results from
applying the methodology to the Nordic countries and to Western Europe. Section 7 is
devoted to describing the energy development in Denmark since 1973. This has involved
government actions as well as vigorous activities by the environmental movements and
thereby by the public in general. Finally, some concluding remarks in section 8 summarize
some of my views on the fundamental difficulties in implementing a policy for a sustainable
development.
The reader need not go through the whole paper, but can jump from section 1 to say
section 6 or 7, or even to 8.
1. SAVINGS AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
The most environmentally benign measure to take in adapting an energy system to
sustainability is to reduce the flow of energy, since a unit of energy saved in general does not
pollute or cause any other environmental problems. Second most important is the utilization
of renewable energy resources for supply. But it should be kept in mind that some of them can
cause severe environmental problems when exploited excessively, as is for instance known
from some uses of biomass and hydropower.
A further advantage of energy savings as compared to supply options is that they are
usually superior also in economic terms, even before including the external environmental
cost of the supply options. The lesser need for power plants and other energy supply systems
can leave capital for more obvious improvements in the general development of a country,
such as educational institutions, health care, sanitary systems, transport systems and other
infrastructures. In affluent regions, like the OECD countries, energy savings can be in conflict
with a conventional economic growth policy.
As an extra advantage of energy savings, the technologies necessary to harvest the
savings can be developed, produced and implemented within almost any country. This is in
contrast to most supply technologies, and can drastically reduce dependency on foreign import
and investments in energy supply systems. Last, but not least, energy savings reduce the need
for import of nuclear and fossil fuels.
Consequently, to curb the energy waste and aim for a low energy flow will be
beneficial to the development within each single country, and at the same time contribute to a
world wide sustainable development by reducing the risk of disastrous global climate changes,
etc.
1.1 Defining Sustainability
In relation to environmental problems the term sustainability has been used and
abused a lot over the recent decade, often without specifying or even reflecting on the
3
meaning of the word. The economist H. Daly has, based on economic theories of
consumption, defined a sustainable development with respect to energy and other resources as
a development which does not reduce the development options of the future by deteriorating
the natural environment (Daly 1990). In more operational terms the conditions for a
sustainable development can be expressed as follows:
1) Renewable resources (like biomass) should not be used faster than they
regenerate.
2) Pollutants (like CO2 and radioactive waste) should not be generated
faster than the environment can absorb or neutralize them.
3) Non-renewable resources (like uranium, coal, oil, and gas) should not be
used. A softer definition of sustainability says that they should not be
used at a rate higher than that of building up substitutes in the form of
energy savings or renewable energy supply systems.
The above three environmental requirements are necessary physical conditions for a
sustainable use of the environment, even though they do not reflect the need for preserving
nature and its beauty. They can serve as guidelines for the long transformation towards an
environmentally sustainable development, which will be radically different from present
development in most parts of the world, particularly in the affluent OECD countries, but not
necessarily worse from a humane point of view.
1.2 Indication of Development
A decision to move towards a sustainable development implies a definition - or at
least some feeling - of what is meant by the two words in the concepts, sustainable and
development. While sustainability has been discussed somewhat above, the latter word,
development, is often assumed to be obvious, which indeed it is not, as will be briefly
discussed in this section.
It is not likely that a global consensus on what indicates a development can ever be
reached or should ever be aimed for. There seems to be a rather widespread understanding,
however, that the one parameter which presently dominates as an indicator of development,
the Gross Domestic Product, GDP, is insufficient and often directly misleading as an indicator
of progress. A couple of examples will illustrate this. If you get paid to care for other people
in a kindergarten, an old people's home or a hospital, it will contribute to GDP, but not if you
do this unpaid out of love or compassion, for instance to your family members. Similarly,
when we generate, and afterwards clean up, some pollution, this will all count positive in the
GDP, while a prevention of the pollution in the first place will not show up. Attempts to
correct GDP for such obvious shortcomings are discussed in the later section 4.1.
So how do we define development? There is not one simple answer to what
constitutes a positive development - a progress. It should not be left to some expert to define
this, since we are here touching the core of democracy. And rather than aiming at finding one
single indicator to replace GDP, a number of indicators could be registered and made public,
such as crime rates, infant mortality, educational level, equity, or others, which the society
chooses according to its social and cultural values. On the bases of such indicators it could be
left to the public to value and weigh the different indicators, and judge the job of its leaders.
At the next election the electorates can voice their appreciation of the candidates.
For exactly that reasons, some large scale, centralized, high technologies and
structures can be viewed as incompatible with a progressive development in a humane sense.
4
Such technologies will inevitable leave the real power and control in the hands of a few
people. These technologies can be found within the energy supply from non-renewables
(nuclear and large fossil fuel power plants), as well as from renewable energy (large
hydropower plants, large scale solar power systems, etc.). In the present economic structure,
some energy saving options will also be large in scale, simply because a substantial part of our
other economic activities takes place in large, central production units. But basically, energy
saving options are found in the interface between technology and humans, and hence they are
small in scale. Energy savings at the same time require a broad public participation and
promote such participation.
The whole issue of indicators to guide us towards a humane and sustainable
development has been the subject of recent studies (Meadows 1998, Bossel 1998). There is no
indication that an environmental sustainability needs to hamper improvements in human
quality of life in any part of the world.
2. CONCEPTS IN ENERGY DEMAND MODELLING
The concepts and methodologies used in our analyses and referred to in the following
text are briefly outlined in this section. It is not, however, essential to read this section in order
to get the understanding of the rest of the paper.
2.1 The Energy Chain
Figure 1 A long chain of technologies and institutions converts the means, - coal, wind, uranium, natural gas,
etc. – into the ends, satisfaction of human needs, etc.
5
Figure 1 illustrates some of the basic concepts in an energy system. A long chain of
technologies, social structures and lifestyles converts the ultimate means, the primary energy,
into the ultimate ends, whether we call this welfare, quality of life, well-being or the
satisfaction of people's needs and wants.
The first link, supply technology, includes technologies like power plants, refineries,
district heating plants, windmills, etc. They convert the primary energy, like coal, uranium,
wind, etc. into secondary energy, (also sometimes termed energy ware (ISO 1997)), which is
usually the type of energy sold to the final consumers. Electricity is a typical form of
secondary energy. But also gasoline, charcoal, kerosene, and other forms of energy are
marketed and utilized at the end-users. The supply technologies have usually been developed
into rather efficient systems, because they are run on a commercial basis, often by big
businesses.
The next major link is the end-use technology, which converts secondary energy into
energy services, like a good indoor climate, cool storage for food, illumination, clean
laundry, a warm meal, just to mention a few examples from the private homes. The end-use
technology include for example houses, refrigerators, lamps, and cooking stoves. They are
usually not very efficient at all. As we shall see later, they can typically be made three times as
efficient, meaning that they can provide the same service with one third of the secondary
energy input.
It is a prerequisite of the planning for sustainability to be aware that energy is of no
direct value to human beings (when excluding food energy). Only the energy services can be
useful. Hence it is highly misleading to use for instance the electricity consumption per capita
as an indicator of people's well-being, even though it can seem to make sense for a statistic
consideration.
In Figure 1 the energy chain is extended to include lifestyles, a term here used to
cover the way we organize our societies, economic system, households, and life in general,
recognizing that the level of energy service should not be taken as an ultimate end.
2.2 Sub-optimizing versus Integrated Resource Planning
As mentioned, to some extent the energy supply system is quite efficient, simply
because it is optimized also from an economic point of view. This does not necessarily imply
that it is optimized from the view of total cost, including the external cost, such as
environmental cost. Even with those externalities included, however, optimizing the supply
technologies constitutes a sub-optimizing only as compared to considering the whole energy
chain in Figure 1.
Integrated Resource Planning, IRP, is a methodology which should avoid the suboptimizing. The idea of IRP (or Least Cost Planning, which is a similar concept) is that we
should not optimize the single links in the chain, but the chain as a whole. So far the IRP has
been interpreted to include only the links up to the energy services. As an example, if it is less
costly to save a kWh of electricity in the end-use than to produce a kWh, then the investments
should be directed not to building new supply, but to save secondary energy and hence
provide the energy services at the lowest cost. If this was taken seriously in Western Europe,
for instance, there would hardly be a need for any new electricity supply system for a decade
or two, since the investment in electricity savings would be more profitable, both from an
economic and an environmental point of view. In most developing countries, an IRP would
lead to a much lower need to invest in expensive supply systems.
It is important to recognize that you cannot optimize the energy chain as a whole by
6
separately optimizing the single links. You cannot optimize and sub-optimize at the same
time. Each time an investment is made in an electricity supply in order to optimize the supply,
it is a sub-optimization, because it might have prevented the money to be invested in more
efficient end-use technologies, even if that would be more cost-effective and hence optimal. In
economic terms: A more optimal electricity system is one that gives the consumer the energy
services at a lower bill (including environmental externalities). The kWh-price might very
well be for instance 20% higher in a more optimal system if the electricity consumption is say
40% lower.
2.3 Efficiency Paradox
The problem of sub-optimizing becomes even more striking when you include also
the upper link in the energy chain in Figure 1, including the lifestyles (and economic system)
in the chain. The more energy services you get, the less marginal benefit it will usually
provide. You will not get twice as happy by having twice as much light in your house.
The efficiency paradox occurs when we focus too much on the efficiency of the
technologies, for instance the end-use technologies. Typically, you will measure the efficiency
of a refrigerator by how much it consumes annually per liter of storage volume. If you just buy
a bigger refrigerator, you will - everything else equal - consume more electricity, but at the
same time be termed more efficient, since it will consume less per liter. With bigger size light
bulb you will use more electricity, but less per lumen light output, and hence be termed more
efficient. The paradox is that you can become more efficient by consuming more. And this is
actually often what happens, because attention is devoted almost entirely to the technical
efficiencies.
The efficiency paradox, which also applies to the misleading use of energy
consumption per GDP when comparing nations, arises from not taking into account the
efficiency of lifestyles, the well-being per energy service. This cannot be measured in a
normal and precise way, but might very well be more important than the easily quantifiable
efficiencies.
There are other so-called efficiency rebound effects from emphasizing only the
technical end-use efficiencies and pretending the rest of the economy can go on as usuall. The
rebound effect depends on how the money saved is allocated. The full efficiency effect is
achieved if the money saved is converted into more leisure time or other non-monetary
purposes.
2.4 Three Main Determinants
There is no such thing as a decoupling between economic activities and energy
consumption. It is the economic activities which require the energy consumption in the
production sector as well as in the other sectors. The observation that the energy intensity of
the economy, in terms of energy consumption per GDP, is changing is no indication of a
decoupling. No matter how energy efficient goods and services can be provided, twice as
many of them still consume twice as much energy.
Similarly, energy consumption can never be decoupled from the development in the
population, since it is the people, who through their economic activities consume the kinds of
energy we are here talking about. No matter how energy efficient human beings learn to live,
two of them still consume twice as much as one.
7
Figure 2 Population, energy service level as an expression of the economic activity, and energy intensity
determine the energy consumption by E = P*S*I, when expressed by indices.
Therefore, the question of what determines the development in energy consumption
and the associated environmental impact can basicly, as shown in Figure 2, be answered by
the development in: 1) the population, P, 2) the economy or material standard of living,
indicated by for instance the energy service, S, and finally 3) the technologies used to provide
these services to people, expressed mainly by their energy intensity, I. If these three
parameters are expressed by indices, normalized to a base year, then the index for energy
demand in a future year is given by:
E=P*S*I
The simple equation can be applied to a single end-use in a country, for instance
lighting. If in a future year lighting technologies are anticipated to be twice as efficient as what
is used today (base year), then I = 0.5. If in the same year illumination per capita is expected
to be 20% higher than today, the service index will be S=1.2. If, finally, population is
expected to grow by 10%, making P = 1.1, then energy demand index for that purpose will be
E = 1.1 * 1.2 * 0.5 = 0.66, meaning a 34% lower energy demand for that use.
Figure 3 shows a matrix of electricity-uses, applied in a project for Low Electricity
Europe (Norgard and Viegand 1994). Horizontally, electricity consumption in each country is
split up according to the final end-use technologies, while the vertical division reflects the
various economic sectors of the economy. In this study a total of 175 elements were specified,
although only one of the countries had data for all of them. For each element is ascribed a
value of P (which is common to all end-uses in the country), S and I, and consequently a
resulting E is calculated.
It is tempting to disaggregate the model into more matrix elements. For many
purposes, however, a simpler model will be sufficient or better. For making political decisions
on energy conservation policies, the model can be aggregated into a few types of end-uses
only, and a few economic sectors.
8
Figure 3 Part of a matrix used in the Low Electricity Europe study (Norgard and Viegand 1994) with economic
sectors and end-use technologies as the two dimensions.
At the extreme, the matrix can be reduced to just one element for a nation. This is
actually already common practice, when comparing nations. In that case the future energy
service level, S, is normally being indicated by the anticipated Gross Domestic Product per
capita, while the future development in the energy intensity, I, of the technologies will be
based on an estimated average. The use of GDP as an indicator for energy service is not,
however, a good choice, as discussed later in section 4.1.
2.5 Planning as an Iterative Scenario Process
Energy planning should not be reduced to a mere fatalistic prediction of what is most
likely to happen, whether we are talking about supply or demand. The purpose of planning is
normally to be able to shape the future. But if the planning activity is suggesting just one
option - one way people could live in the future - the democratic element is lost. Even when
we have to limit the options to those which are environmentally sustainable, there will be
room for a vast diversity in the ways people can live. Obviously, however, some types of
extravagant lifestyles might not be permissible, because they are unsustainable and hence
severely shrink the options of other groups of people or of future generations.
The three determinants, the developments in population, economy, and technology
are all being shaped by human activities, individually or through political and corporate
systems. And so they will be in the future. The question is who are shaping them and towards
which goals. In energy policy there has been a tendency to consider change in the technology
as the only option for political regulation, ignoring population as well as economy and
lifestyles as parameters in an energy and environment policy.
9
Figure 4 Graphic illustration of the iterative process of energy planning for sustainability. If the first scenario is
found unsustainable the three determinants must be adjusted, and next scenario developed and judged, etc.
A process of integrated energy planning can be summarized as in Figure 4. A first set
of parameters, P, S, and I, is established for instance by extrapolating present trends. The
resulting energy demand is likely not to be acceptable, when the impact of the necessary
energy supply is held up against environmental targets for sustainability, etc. The first
assumed developments in P, S, and I, or some of them, must be adjusted, etc. in an iterative
process, until one or more acceptable scenarios can be presented for public debate. In the three
following sections are briefly discussed the three determining factors and their flexibility for
changes.
3. POPULATION
I will be brief on the population issue, since it is dealt with in many other contexts
about development. The reason for bringing it into the discussion here on energy systems is
that the environmental problems as we define them are all created by humans, and in general
more people will make it more difficult to reach environmentally sustainable developments.
10
The Chinese philosopher Han Fei-tzu wrote 2,500 years ago "People think five sons are not
too many and each son has five sons also. Therefore people are more numerous and wealth is
less; the people work hard and receive little" (Keyfitz 1984). Today these words apply more
than ever, now also in a more global perspective. The more people in the world, the lower
overall quality of life will they be able to enjoy. Especially the environmental impacts from
using renewable resources, which will have to dominate the supply side in a sustainable
energy system, are very sensitive to population growth (Cincotta and Engelman, 1997).
In Europe the population density, and even more the energy consumption density, is
higher than in any other continent. Therefore the present zero growth and even slight decline
in many European countries' populations should be seen as a progress. There are, however, a
tendency to ignore the environmental aspect when discussing population. Some have
suggested that even in the densely populated Europe a growth in population would be
desirable. Actually, these arguments are textbook examples in narrow-minded and short-term
interests. Future unemployment among teachers, construction workers, etc. has been voiced
seriously as arguments for increasing birth rates. An interesting pair of arguments for
increasing birth rates are 1) the need for more consumers to buy products, and 2) the need for
more labor to manufacture the products. The latter two are examples of arguments, based on
the assumption that the aim of the economy is to ensure its own growth, rather than ensure the
well-being of people.
4. LIFESTYLE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
The energy service level, S, is here used to indicate the aspects of economic
development, which are relevant to the energy system. This service level can be indicated by
different physical parameters like the dwelling size available per capita or the amount of
cement produced per year. For a country as a whole is often used the GDP, which has earlier
been described as quite insufficient to indicate the development of people's well-being.
4.1 Correcting the GDP as Indicator
We will here briefly take up the discussion on which indicators are relevant to use
when aiming for a sustainable development. Attempts have been made to correct the GDP for
some of the absurdities indicated above. One is the "Genuine Progress Indicator", GPI, shown
for USA in Figure 5 (Genuine Progress Indicator 1995). With some rather modest and very
reasonable adjustments of the GDP, the trend is a decline since around 1965, and with the
present level lower than ever in more than 45 years. One of the changes is that in this GPI the
cost of restoring environmental damage is counted negative rather than positive, as is the case
in the GDP. Despite the indication that with the present trend people are getting worse off year
by year, the politicians in USA and other affluent countries are dedicated to pursue the same
conventional target, which means the downward trend for GPI.
Another alternative to GDP was the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare, ISEW,
which showed similar trends (Daly and Cobb, 1994). While these attempts clearly show the
incompetence of GDP, none of them claim to have found the right indicator.
11
ANNUAL OUTPUT
18000
16000
1982 - US dollars per capita
14000
Gross Domestic Product, GDP
12000
10000
8000
6000
Genuine Progress Indicator, GPI
4000
2000
0
1950
1955
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
Year
Figure 5 The conventional Gross Domestic, GDP, is here for USA compared with the Genuine Progress
Indicator, GPI. (Redefining Progress 1995).
A major shortcoming of the above-mentioned attempts to adjust the conventional
GDP might be that they still aim at just one number to encompass the diversity of what makes
up a life and a culture. A solution with several indicators was suggested in section 1.2.
4.2 Value Changes Towards Saturation
The shortcomings of using GDP as a welfare indicator is also illustrated by people's
preferences of more leisure time over more income. In many countries with a rather high
material standard of living and a relatively high equity, such as in Scandinavia, a majority
seems to prefer a society with more leisure over extra income and consumption, if offered the
choice. They would like to have more time for hobbies and for being with friends and families
(Platz 1988, Norgard and Christensen 1993). Also in the USA, millions are aiming for a better
life through reducing consumption (Dominguez and Robin, 1993).
Such changes in people's values away from eternally growing income and
consumption should of course be welcomed by governments dedicated to sustainable
development. But in real life, these trends towards economic saturation, which have shown up
once in a while during the last century, have always been counteracted vigorously by
governments, whether left-wing or right-wing oriented. Today the countermeasures include
tax policies, increasing income inequities, and allowing more advertisement, permitting longer
shopping hours, promoting electronic shopping, and in general welcoming more aggressive
marketing. Such steps seem quite natural for governments which give higher priority to
growth in the abstract GDP than to a sustainable development aimed at human satisfaction.
4.3 Universal Needs and Cultural Values
The cultural diversity is, like the biological diversity, an important aspect of a good
12
life. The biological diversity constitutes an important pool of genes for future biological
resilience and changes. Similarly, the cultural diversities constitute pools for cultural
adaptation to the realities of a limited earth.
Basic needs for food, shelter, security, social contacts etc. are universally shared by
all people. The cultural values determine the way we try to satisfy these universal needs under
different environmental conditions, and they vary from one culture to another. The Western
cultures in Europe and USA have been very successful in material production, which has led
to societies that increasingly satisfy their needs by material means. Also the non-material
needs for security, self esteem, social respect, etc., are sought satisfied by material means.
Unfortunately these values, leading towards unsustainability are now being proliferated to
most parts of the world.
It is necessary to change those cultural values which are behind the present
consumption patterns of Western cultures if we are to reach a sustainable development with
joy. As indicated above by people's preferences in Northern Europe, such changes are
underway, but delayed by conventional economic expansion policy in government and by
enormous vested private interests on a global scale.
4.4 The Blind Alley of a Service Growth Economy
The material consumption in an economy changes in the course of economic
development. In early stages of industrialization, when a society's infrastructure is being built
up with roads, houses, etc., the economy is rather energy- and material intensive, due to a high
demand for steel, cement, and other building materials. Later the service sector comes to
dominate the economy.
Politicians often suggest that when a country reaches a certain level of economic
output, future economic growth will almost entirely occur in the service sector, which is
understood to have a low energy intensity. The argument then implies that the society will
automatically de-materialize. However, when taking into account the energy input-output
activities between sectors, the outlook for this argument is not so optimistic. For Denmark this
has been investigated by Jespersen (Jespersen 1998). He found that when taking into account
the actual correlations between the economic sectors, an Euro worth spent in the so-called
commercial service sector, would require only around 20% less energy than an Euro worth
demanded from the manufacturing sector in Denmark. The difference is more marked when
looking at what is termed the non-commercial service sectors, that is education, health care,
child care, and other services which have typically been provided by the public sector. For this
sector, the energy intensity was found to be around 65% lower than that of the manufacturing
sector. Still, however, the energy intensity is significant and a continuous growth in this noncommercial service sector will push electricity consumption upwards.
Furthermore, even if possible, pursuing a path of all economic growth occurring only
in this non-commercial sector will be a blind alley in the long term. For Denmark a 3.5%
annual growth in GDP would in 40 years have to expand this person-related non-commercial
service sector by a factor around 14! (Norgard 1995). With only 24 hours available per day
this could pose some practical problems in the long run.
4.5 Durability and Repairability
Besides the implications of more energy-efficient end-use technologies described in
the following, one extra option for reducing the use of energy and other resources in the
production sector is to increase the lifetime of the durable goods. Roughly speaking, a
13
doubling of the goods' lifetime could halve the energy necessary to maintain the stock of
durable goods. This is only to a minor extent a technical problem. It is much more a question
of challenging the cultural values about fashion and fast changes, which today is used as a
means to spur the expansion of the economy. Efforts towards less replacement of goods and
more repair would move some economic activities away from the large-scale industry to the
small-scale repair businesses. Today the trend is clearly the opposite.
5. TECHNOLOGICAL END-USE OPTIONS
The last of the three determinants of the energy consumption to be discussed is the
technology. As suggested earlier, the end-use technology, which converts the secondary
energy into the useful energy services, could be made more energy-efficient by a factor of
three or more. This means getting more than three times the service without increasing energy
consumption. Or, more appropriate for Europe and other affluent societies, reducing energy
consumption to less than one third without affecting the energy welfare. Some basic principles
and a few examples will illustrate this in the following. There are several sources for more
information on end-use efficiency (Goldemberg et al 1988, Norgard 1989, Weizsäcker et al
1998).
5.1 More efficient houses
In almost all regions of the world the climate is uncomfortable part of the year, either
too hot or too cold. Indoors a more comfortable climate can be established. This can be
achieved by adding an active heating or cooling system. But if the buildings are properly
designed the need for such active cooling or heating systems can be reduced and sometimes
entirely eliminated. Since we are mainly trying to cope with the temperature difference
between indoor and outdoor, thermal insulation is an obvious necessity in solving the
problem.
In cold regions, some basic heat supply is always available in the houses. The
sunshine through the windows and the fact that people themselves give off body heat
contribute to keeping warm indoors. The same does electric and other energy-using
equipment. In normal houses several times more heat supply is needed for a comfortable
indoor temperature. But if the house is very well insulated, 30 - 50 cm mineral wool for
instance, it is possible to build houses with extremely low or no need for space heating at all,
even in the cold German winter (Feist 1996). Windows with double or triple glasses and
special coatings and gases in between can in some cases even become net contributors to the
heating by allowing more solar heat in than they let heat out during nights and clouded
periods. Furthermore, heat is a low-quality form of energy (low exergy content), which is
often available at low cost in terms of required primary energy as well as in money terms.
The situation is different when the climate is hot. Here the "free heat" from people,
windows, etc. adds to the problem of too warm indoor climate. The color of the buildings and
their whole design are very essential for reducing the heat load and for obtaining some natural
ventilation and cooling. Often experiences from traditional house construction in tropical
climates can be transferred to new constructions. Window design is important for preventing
heat load from solar radiation. Moving the air forces evaporation from the body and thereby
cools it. A simple and efficient mechanical cooling system is the ceiling fan. Furthermore,
recent aerodynamic science has shown how to improve the efficiency of traditional ceiling
14
fans, so they will require less than half of the electricity normally needed without even
improving the motor (Parker et.al. 1999)
5.2 Low Energy Equipment
ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION, ALL APPLIANCES AND LIGHT
in kWh/year per capita
3200
100 %
2590
75 %
1510
50 %
825
620
25 %
0%
HEAT
AUT
AST
BAT
EAT
EAT+
Average used
Technology 1988
Average sold
Technology 1988
Best Available
Technology 1988
Efficiency advanced
Technology
Efficiency advanced
Technology plus
Heat Subst.
Figure 6 Potentials for reducing electricity intensity for lighting and appliances in Danish households as well as
service sector, using various levels of end-use efficiencies (Norgard 1989)
Appliances and various equipment in households, shops, institutions, and offices
consume a substantial part of a country's energy budget, mostly in the form of electricity. For
the consumer each of these uses will typically appear to be rather small and insignificant. This
is one of the many reasons why so little attention is devoted to reducing such energy
consumptions. If, however, we analyze each little pump, refrigerator, fan, washing machine,
computer, etc. it will soon become obvious that at essentially no extra cost they can be several
times more efficient by purely technical improvements. Over the years, this has been shown in
a number of studies (Norgard 1979, Johansson et al 1989, E-Source). Figure 6 shows the
results of an investigation in 1989.
5.3 Producing Goods and Services
Each time we purchase a shirt, a loaf of bread, a travel, etc. we also consume energy,
since such goods and services are produced and delivered with the use of energy. In a typical
industrialized country this indirect or embodied energy consumption amounts roughly to the
same as the direct energy purchased as electricity, gasoline, district heat, fuel oil, gas,
etc.(Vringer and Blok 1995). Some of the products are purchased as private consumption,
some as public consumption, and finally some are invested. Like in the cases above, energy
for the production processes can be reduced dramatically. Maybe not always to quite the same
extent as in those cases, because in some industries, for instance, attention has always been
devoted to avoiding energy waste, just for the sake of making good business. This is
15
particularly the case for enterprises, where energy cost makes up a significant part of the
budget, such as at steel works, cement factories and manufacturers of fertilizers. But in most
cases, energy consumption in a company accounts for only 1 - 4 % of the budget.
Institutions as different as farms, car factories, and hospitals, might have a number of
similar processes, such as drying materials, mixing chemicals, pumping liquids, etc. These
processes can all be performed much more energy efficient, and experience from one
institution can be transferred to another. This calls for more experts, institutions, and
enterprises to specialize in end-use efficiency. As an example, osmosis is a process for
separating fluids and solid compounds, which in principle is very simple and several times
less energy demanding than the normal ways by evaporation etc. Osmosis is now being
applied in businesses as different as sewage treatment and sugar production. No further
concrete examples will be listed here.
The low attention given to energy savings, particularly in the production sector, is
reflected in the fact that investment in energy-saving activities in industries will typically by
the managers be required to pay back itself in saved energy in less than one year or maybe
two. This implies a required annual yield of the investment of 50 to 100%. From a
socioeconomic point of view a much longer payback time would be acceptable, and this
would make significantly larger energy savings cost-effective.
From a consumer's point of view, one of the ways to reduce the energy consumption
of the industry is by simply buying less and preferring long-lasting goods. As mentioned
earlier, this is only to some extent a technical matter, since most goods in the affluent
countries are discarded with no or only small and repairable break-downs. This is clearly the
case for clothing.
5.4 Transporting Goods and People
Saving options in this sector are hard to divide into purely technical measures on the
one hand and structural and behavioral measures on the other. Trains, trucks, buses and cars
can each typically be made at least twice as energy-efficient measured in for instance how
many kilometers they can transport one person per liter of gasoline. Another way to make
transport more energy-efficient is to reorganize the traffic away from individual transport to
busses, trains and the like. The best way to save energy for transport is, however, to reduce the
needs and desires for transport, since they are mostly generated by the societies we establish.
To reduce those needs will usually involve some changes in lifestyles, but not necessarily
towards the worse.
6. CASE STUDIES
Energy-saving proposals appear more convincing when presented in an overall
scenario for a country or a region. In the following are described very briefly two such
scenario studies, one for Western Europe and one for Scandinavia.
6.1 Low Electricity Europe
In section 2.4 about the three main determinants was described how the PSImodelling processes outlined were applied to a study of how Western Europe could phase out
the use of nuclear power as well as coal power (Norgard and Viegand 1994, Norgard et al
1994). Some of the results are shown in Figure 7. One scenario is based on a continued
16
economic expansion in all countries, reflected most directly in the energy service, S. This
economic growth scenario is in accordance with the anticipations and hopes of most
politicians and economists. In the other scenario, the economies and hence the demand for
services, S, gradually saturate, first in the most affluent countries. This economic development
seems to be in harmony with the wishes of people in general. In both scenarios shown, the
technological options for efficient end-use of the electricity, expressed by the energy intensity,
I, were implemented vigorously. Population is assumed to remain almost stable, following the
official predictions.
DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS IN WESTERN EUROPE
250
ECONOMIC GROWTH SCENARIO
Energy
Services
200
S
INDEX, %
150
100
50
0
1980
P
Population
E
Electricity
consumption
I
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
Intensity
2010
2015
2020
YEAR
250
EC O N O M IC SA TU R A TIO N S C E N A R IO
200
IN DEX , %
150
100
S
E nergy
S ervices
P
P opu lation
E
E lectricity
co nsum ption
I
Intensity
50
0
1985
1990
19 95
2 000
200 5
20 10
2015
202 0
YEA R
Figure 7 The results of two scenarios from the Low Electricity Europe study with different economic
development, one with continued economic growth and one with economic saturation (Norgard and Viegand
1994).
17
The two scenarios illustrate that if the necessary measures are taken to implement
end-use technology with a low energy intensity, - high efficiency - the demand for electricity
can soon decline in both scenarios. The decline is most marked in the scenario with economic
saturation, in which the electricity demand stabilizes at a level around half the present.
The main lesson to be learned from the scenarios, however, is that in the one with
continued economic growth, the electricity savings from the better technology are partly eaten
up by the expansion in services, and when the technological options are used up, the growth in
electricity consumption will again follow the growth in the economy. These are of course
simplified pictures. We will not suddenly run out of technical options. But the trends are that
the progress in efficiency improvements will slow down because they are approaching some
theoretical as well as practical limits. If economic expansion is continued forever, it will
sooner or later dominate the efficiency gains. Long before that happens the overall human
welfare might actually be declining because the marginal gains from more energy services are
outbalanced, among other things by the losses in welfare from deteriorating the environment.
With the saturation economy, which in this scenario leaves all Europeans with more
energy services than the present average in Northern Europe, electricity demand ends up at a
level around half of the present. For the energy supply side the consequence is that for long no
new electricity supply capacity needs to be built. A gradual introduction of more renewables
will of course speed up the reduction in CO2-emission as well as the technical development in
these fields. A total conversion into renewable energy resources will at the end be greatly
facilitated in terms of both economy and environment. The present West European supply
from hydropower is around 20%. In the saturation scenario, it can then make up 40% of the
supply and furthermore act as a buffer for the more fluctuating supplies from solar, wind, etc.
The saturation scenario is not necessarily the optimal scenario. Material affluence is
at a very high level before saturation, and the marginal benefits from the last part are
diminutive or maybe negative as earlier discussed in section 4 and Figure 5. This could point
towards economic saturation at a lower level of energy service than here anticipated. If
encouraged or just accepted by governments, also population could decline significantly over
such a long period with a corresponding extra decline in electricity consumption. So future
electricity demand in Western Europe could easily end up far below half of the present level.
6.2 Sustainable Scandinavia
The PSI-methodology was applied also to a study for the Scandinavian countries,
Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark (Brinck et al 1991, Benestad et al 1993). In this
study the level of disaggregation was a little lower than in the Low Electricity Europe study,
but the Scandinavian project included not only electricity, but all forms of energy, also for
heating, transportation, and industrial processes. Also the various energy supply options are
investigated in the study of Scandinavia.
One of the scenarios is built on an assumption about an energy service development
similar to that in the saturation scenario in Low Electricity Europe. This implies a material
welfare like the one in the base year 1987 maintained stable till the year 2030. Primary energy
consumption in the Scandinavian countries could be reduced by between 54 and 79%, most in
Denmark. An interesting consequence of such a scenario is that as a whole, Scandinavia,
blessed with hydropower potentials, biomass, and wind, could by the year 2030 become a
significant net exporter of CO2-free, "green" electricity with 113 TWh per year, or more than
three times the present consumption in Denmark. This "green" electricity could - as also
assumed in the Low Electricity Europe study - be available to the densely populated rest of
18
Europe, less blessed with renewable energy options.
Since this Scandinavian study includes also the supply side, the major results deal
with the emission levels for various pollutants, mostly SO2, NOx, and CO2. Therefore the
supply side is included in this model, and the major results come out as reductions in CO2emissions. It appears that there need not be any problems in reaching the CO2-emission
reduction of around 90 - 95%. And if approaching this limit for CO2, the other SO2- and
NOx-emission-targets are more or less reached automatically.
7. ENERGY POLICY AND DEBATE IN DENMARK
This section will present glimpses of the recent 25 years of Danish energy
development, but also describe the present situation as well as the Government plans for the
future.
7.1 Denmark's Energy Plans
When the oil crisis hit the world in 1973, Denmark was caught with a dependence on
imported oil for more than 95% of all its energy consumption. Since the forests were almost
totally cut hundreds of years ago, the country's dependence on imported fossil fuels has earlier
been severely felt during wars and other conflicts. For that reasons some traditions and
knowledge about saving energy had been preserved and developed in the country.
PRIMARY ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN DENMARK
1100
EP76
1000
AE76
EP81
900
800
PJ/YEAR
700
EP96
600
EP90
500
AE96
400
ACTUAL CONSUMPTION
300
AE83
200
100
0
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
YEAR
Figure 8 Denmark´s actual consumption of primary energy is here shown with a solid line, while consumption as
suggested in various energy plans by Government and energy scientists are shown dotted. The symbols are
explained in the text.
The first Governmental energy plan appearing after the 1973 oil shock was mainly
directed towards replacing the oil with other fuels, including nuclear. The anticipated future
19
consumption of primary energy was as indicated by EP76 in Figure 8. This was not based on
careful investigation of the demand side, but rather on extrapolation of passed trends. An
alternative energy plan, without nuclear AE76, developed by university researchers and
published the same year, was by an large also ignoring the energy demand analyses and
options for energy demand management.
Second round of energy plans in Denmark came in 1981 and 1983 with a
Government plan and a nuclear free alternative plan by university people, see in Figure 8
EP81 and AE83, respectively. Here for the first time was shown a marked difference in the
suggested future energy demands of the two plans. While the Government's plan, which had
now cost-effectiveness and security of supply as its major targets, anticipated a continuous
growth in primary consumption, the alternative plan proposed a plan with emphasis on
demand side management, resulting in a steady decline in energy demand.
Third energy plan from the Danish Government in 1990, Energy 2000 (Danish
Ministry of Energy 1990), constituted a turning point in Danish Governmental energy
planning, see EP90 in Figure 8. It had major features in common with the earlier 1983
alternative plan. The environmental problems, especially CO2 emission, were in focus, and
for the first time the Government applied an end-use approach. As seen from Figure 8, the
resulting demand for energy in the future also showed a similar declining trend as that of the
alternative plan from 1983. There was, however, one major difference. Contrary to the
alternative 1983-plan, the Government's 1990-plan was based on an economic scenario with
continuous economic growth, although low and declining, dictated by the ministry of
economics. The result was a more moderate decline in energy demand and in the long run a
catch-up of growth of energy consumption, making it unsustainable.
The most recent energy plan from the Danish Government was published in 1996
(Danish Energy Agency 1995, Danish Ministry of Environment and Energy 1996), see EP96
in Figure 8. This action plan still stresses energy savings, but because of acceptance or
anticipations of higher economic growth, the ambition for reducing energy demand has now
shrunk to a mere 17% by the year 2030 as compared to the level in 1989. The main aim of this
plan is a reduction of CO2-emission from Denmark by 20% in the year 2005 as compared to
1990, and by 50% in 2030. To a large extent these reductions are achieved by switching
electricity production from coal to the cleaner, but more limited resources of natural gas. A
scenario based on a saturating economy is in Figure 8 sketched as AE96.
After the total dependence on imported energy up to the 1973-crisis, Denmark has
discovered oil and gas resources of its own in the North Sea, so that the country is now
pumping up more than its own consumption. This does not make much difference, however,
as far as economic and environmental aspects are concerned.
7.2 The Push for Nuclear Energy in Denmark
The energy plans from Government as well as from alternative sources in Denmark,
outlined above, reflect the fact that the energy debate in Denmark has been more intense than
in most other countries and with a broad public participation. The reason for this is probably,
besides the long tradition of dependence on import, the situation about nuclear power. The
1973 oil crisis brought the nuclear energy option to the surface. For long the Danish
Government had prepared for introducing this energy source in Denmark, mainly by
establishing in 1958 a Nuclear Research Center at Risoe. The exceptionally low and declining
oil prices in the 1960s, however, made the nuclear power option unattractive for the utilities
from an economic point of view. But with the soaring oil prices and insecurity of oil supply in
20
the early 1970s, the Danish electric utilities pushed for Government permission to build
nuclear power plants.
PROGNOSES FOR ELECTRICITY DEMAND IN DENMARK
120
EL´75 high
100
EL´72
80
TWh/year
EL´74
GOV´74
EL´75 low
60
40
ACTUAL CONSUMPTION
20
0
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
Figure 9 Examples of early prognoses for Denmark´s electricity demand, here compared to actual development
in electricity consumption. EL-´72 was suggested by electric utilities in 1972, etc. GOV-´74 came from
Government in 1974 (Norgard 1998).
The total lack of end-use analyses and end-use planning was another serious
characteristic of the utilities' push for nuclear. Figure 9 illustrates how the forecast of
electricity demand essentially consisted of simple extrapolation of past trends. Even after the
1973 oil crisis the high forecast continued, also by Government, although now slightly
modified. According to these forecasts, electricity demand would by year 2000 be more than 3
times what it now seems to end up to be. This is not so much due to a successful policy to
save energy. Rather is it an illustration of the shortcomings of making mathematical
extrapolations and no end-use analyses at all.
7.3 Grassroots Movement OOA
People seemed worried about the prospects of having several nuclear power plants
spread out over the small and densely populated country. So when a group of energy activists
early in 1974 started to provide information about the risk etc. of nuclear power, they soon got
hundreds of supporters, and later hundreds of thousands (Christiansen 1983). The movement,
OOA (Organisation for Information About Nuclear Power) was a true grassroots movement,
and in the course of a decade OOA managed to change the public opinion through wellattended meetings, media debate, and distribution of information material to essentially all of
the 2 million Danish households. An extensive brochure presenting alternatives to nuclear
power was printed in 2.3 million copies, (OOA 1980), and later brochures came out in
550.000 and 50.000 copies in the small country (OOA 1982, OOA 1983). In the Danish
parliament, Folketinget, only a small left wing party of the several political parties objected to
21
nuclear power in 1974. Eleven years later, in 1985, a majority in parliament voted to rule out
nuclear power as an option in Danish energy supply. This decision was made a year before the
Chernobyl nuclear plant accident.
The environmental risks and the social cost of nuclear power were the main
arguments put forward in OOA's campaigns against nuclear power. But it is probably safe to
say, that on top of the risk and cost of nuclear power the credible alternative options presented
by OOA were what turned the opinion of the public, and also gradually changed the minds of
the politicians. Nuclear power was simply not necessary. While the renewable energy supply
options did play a spectacular role in these alternatives, the options for reducing demand seem
to have been a decisive factor. This became convincing because as the years passed by, all
official forecasts of energy demand turned out to be too high. This was the case for electricity
as well as for primary energy in general, see Figures 9 and 8. When the second oil crisis hit in
1979-80, OOA opted strongly for end-use efficiency and other energy savings.
During all this work, OOA had important two-way cooperation with energy scientists
at different universities in Scandinavia, especially through the publication of the alternative
scenarios. After the Parliament and Government ruled out nuclear power, the reduction of
CO2 emission has been the main issue of debate in Danish energy policy. But the planned
phasing out of nuclear power plants in the neighboring countries Sweden and now also
Germany are critically followed by OOA. Although now at low activity, OOA can take the
main credit for a soon close-down of the Swedish plant in Barsebäck, only 20 km from
Denmark's capital, Copenhagen.
7.4 Present Energy Saving Action in Denmark
The plan, Energy21, from 1996 is still the official basis for the Danish energy policy,
with CO2 as the main target indicator. While the targets are quite ambitious, the political
agreement on how to carry it through cannot always be mobilized. Nevertheless over the past
25 years of active energy policy in Denmark, some measures to promote energy savings have
been implemented, as outlined in the following.
Economic incentives to achieve energy savings include taxes on energy, now
especially according to their CO2 emissions. For non-industrial customers the various taxes
(including a general 25% sales tax) on electricity now add an extra 150% to the price from
suppliers. Gasoline taxes add up to around 250%. The taxes are part of a green tax reform
aimed at transferring some of the taxes on labor (income taxes) to taxes on resources and
pollution. However, the free trade within the EU makes it difficult for the Government to go
very far with taxing energy for the internationally competing businesses. The CO2 taxes on
industrial use of fossil fuel are therefore small and to a large extent reimbursed in one way or
another.
Information measures include labelling of some electric appliances. In this field,
Denmark together with the Netherlands have been pioneering in implementing labels in EU.
The labels classify appliances into categories A, B, C, D, E, F, and G, according to energy
efficiency, and they seem to have had a profound effect on Danes' choice of model while the
implementation and the impact in several other EU-countries is very sparse (Winward et al
1998). Some electric utilities offer files of all major appliances on the Danish market with
information about electricity consumption as well as sizes and other features.
Governmental minimum efficiency standards have been used for new buildings since
long before 1973, but gradually they have been tightened. For appliances the Danish
Government has wanted similarly to implement minimum efficiency standards, but this was
22
blocked by the European Union, because it was considered a trade barrier. Instead EU has
introduced efficiency standards, which, however, are weak and without any noticeable effect
in Denmark.
Recently the Government has introduced a ban on installation of electric space
heating wherever district heat or natural gas is available, which is the case in around two
thirds of the buildings in Denmark.
Another important recent change in Government's policy on energy saving has been
to drop the strategy of leaving most electricity saving activities to the electric utilities. This
has never been really successful, and a decade has more or less been wasted on that policy.
One of the steps taken instead by Government has been to create in 1997 an Electricity Saving
Trust (Danish Energy Agency 1996). To begin with the dominating aim of the trust is to
subsidize the conversion of electric space heating in the around 50.000 homes and a number
of public buildings into heating systems with more appropriate energy forms like district heat
or natural gas. But the trust will increasingly promote the development and implementation of
energy efficient electric equipment as well as encourage the environmentally benign way of
life. The Danish electricity saving policy is further described elsewhere (Gydesen 1998).
7.5 Shortcomings of Danish Energy Saving Policy
The ambitions of the present Danish Government are quite high when it comes to
sustainable development. Especially when compared to those of other countries. But in daily
political actions it turns out that other aspects like economic growth are by politicians given a
higher priority than the environment. In fact the economic policy and development dictates the
background for the energy and environment policy instead of the other way around. One
consequence of giving top priority to expansion in GDP is that the free market in Europe as
well as in the world as a whole is supported by politicians much more than by the public in
general and despite its negative consequences for the environment. When the economy grows,
no matter whether this is really wanted or not by the public, general consumption must
necessarily grow too. An ever expanding consumption cannot be in harmony with a policy
aiming at living environmentally more benign, since this will imply a lower consumption in
general.
For the time being, the largest outlet for the economic expansion pressure in
Denmark occurs in the transport sector. The purchasing and driving of private cars is soaring,
and so is the energy consumption in this sector. The Government is actually not passive to this
development. It is promoting it! Car traffic is made easier with highways, bridges, parking
facilities, etc. Also, while public transportation has become more expensive, the Government
is maintaining low gasoline taxes. From 1980 to 1997 the ratio between real price of public
transport and real gasoline price has increased by 85%. Finally the transport is subsidized by
maintaining commuting cost - including car commuting - deductible on income tax return.
The dilemma between environmental aims and economic growth philosophy is often
felt in the steps taken by Danish Government, which mostly take the country in the wrong
direction, towards more unsustainability.
8. CONCLUDING REMARKS
In the world as a whole we have the technology and the economic capacity to create
the material frames for a sustainable and good life for everyone. What is lacking is the
23
political will to aim for this. In the field of energy and environment, the strategy would call for
a low flow of energy, since all energy supply systems have some impact on the natural
environment. Fortunately, this can be combined with the good life by means of clean
technologies already available. Unfortunately, however, this is not the aim of the general
policies in the world.
An urge for a liberalization of global trade has been sweeping anonymous over the
world without any public debate and without even asking what are the benefits. Indeed a
market economy is excellent on a certain scale. But when it leads to ever larger production
and trade companies it is a threat to the environment as well as to democracy. It is no longer a
free market. From a democratically controlled market we have then moved to a market
controlled by the big market forces themselves. The criteria behind the economic theories of
the advantages of a free market no longer exist.
Simultaneously to the wave of free market euphoria has come a growing awareness
of the environmental limitations to human economic activities. This inevitably calls for more
regulation of the market. Fortunately, a growing number of market economists now see the
need for more regulation of the market, both for social and environmental reasons. The
liberalization wave will maybe soon begin to flatten off.
In the free, expansion oriented economy, waste is a virtue and hence energy saving
has no real basis there. This is what makes the efforts to save energy a difficult task. While the
implementation of new energy supply systems like renewable energy can be in harmony with
a growth economy, an energy saving strategy will usually be in conflict with it. Energy saving
will require the support and promotion from grassroots movements. It has a touch of irony,
however, that many environmental movements which are aiming at decentralized,
environmentally sustainable energy systems often leave the responsibility for the most
decentralized and environmentally most benign activity - energy savings - to the large scale
suppliers of unsustainable energy! Instead the movements mostly focus on implementing new
supply systems, renewable energy systems. While these systems indeed have to take over in
the long-term future, they are not likely to change the present overall supply trends with
nuclear and coal. This can be achieved only by challenging the growth in energy consumption.
As an illustration: The very famed Danish wind energy program has over its 25 years of
success history reached a level of supplying 7% of the electricity, or what is equivalent to a
couple of years' modest normal increase in electricity consumption! This is not to blame the
wind program which really is successful. The fault is with the growing demand for electricity.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The paper has been inspired by the workshop, "Sustainable and Peaceful Energy
Future in Asia" held in Seoul in September 1998, organized by Citizen´s Nuclear Information
Center (CNIC), Japan and Joint Institute for Sustainable and Environmental Energy Future
(JISEEF), Korea. I am grateful for this opportunity to exchange ideas. Also I want to thank
Tarjei Haaland, Tetsunary Iida, Tom Guldbrandsen, Anne Rasmussen, and Bente Lis
Christensen, all of whom have provided valuable comments to this paper, as well as Gitte
Nellemose for graphic work.
24
REFERENCES
Benestad, O., L.Brinck, L.Emborg, B.Juul-Kristensen, N.I.Meyer, K.Pulliainin, E.Selvig, and A.Vattinen (1993):
Energy and Environment - Nordic energy scenarios for 2010 and 2030", Energy Policy, Vol.21, pp.1225-1236.
Bossel, H. (1999): "Indicators for sustainable development: theory, method, application", A report to the
Balaton Group, International Institute for Sustainable Development IISD, 161 Portage Avenue East, 6th floor,
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3B OY4. Email: info@iisd.ca.
Brinck, L., L.Emborg, B.Juul-Kristensen, A.Kristiansen, K.Pulliainen, E.Selvig, A. Vaittinen, O.Benestad
(1991): "Miljö och energi i Norden - energiscenarier för år 2010", Nordisk Ministerråd, Store Strandstræde 18,
DK-1255, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Christiansen, S. (1983): "The Danish Information Campaign About Nuclear Power 1974-1977 - An analysis of
the background and a keyword description of the campaign model and the structure of the OOA", The
Organisation for Information about Nuclear Power in Denmark, OOA, Blegdamsvej 4, DK 2200 Copenhagen N,
Denmark.
Cincotta, R.P. and R. Engelman (1997): "Economics and Rapid Change: The Influence of Population Growth",
Occasional paper, Population Action International, 1120 19th street, NW, # 550, Washington D.C., USA.
Daly, H. and J.Cobb (1994): "For the Common Goods", Beacon Press, Boston.
Daly, H. (1990): "Towards Some Operational Principles of Sustainable Development", Ecological Economics,
Vol.2, pp.1-6, 1990.
Danish Energy Agency (1995): "Denmark's Energy Futures", Ministry of Environment and Energy, Copenhagen.
Danish Energy Agency (1996): "Act on the Danish Electricity Saving Trust", Danish Energy Agency,
Copenhagen.
Danish Ministry of Energy (1990): "Energy 2000 - A Plan of Action for Sustainable Development", Danish
Energy Agency, Copenhagen.
Danish Ministry of Environment and Energy (1996): "Energy 21 - Danish Government's Action Plan for Energy,
1996", Ministry of Environment and Energy, Copenhagen.
Dominguez, J. and V.Robin (1993): "Your Money or Your Life", Penguin Books, New York.
E-Source, Inc.: Technology Atlas, Several Volumes, continuously updated, E-Source Inc., 1033 Walnut Street,
Boulder, Colorado 80302, USA.
Feist, W. (1996): "Grundlagen der Gestaltung von Passivhäusern", Institut Wohnen und Umwelt GmbH,
Annastrasse 15, D-64285 Darmstadt, Germany.
Genuine Progress Indicator (1995): "The Genuine Progress Indicator. Summary of Data and Methodology",
Redefining Progress, One Kearney Street, Fourth Floor, San Francisco, CA 94108, USA.
Goldemberg, J., T.B.Johansson, A.K.N.Reddy and R.H.Williams (1988): "Energy for a Sustainable World"
Wiley Eastern Limited, New Delhi.
Gydesen,A. (1998): "Electricity Saving Policies i Denmark" in Development with Sustainable Use of Electricity
(eds. Norgard, Gula, and Almeida) Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
ISO (1997): ISO/CD 13600, Technical Energy Systems - Methods for Analysis, International Organization for
25
Standardization, Geneva.
Jespersen, J. (1998): "Reconciling Environment and Employment by Switching from Goods to Services? A
Review of Danish Experience", European Environment, Vol.9,(Forthcoming in 1999).
Johansson,T.B., B.Bodlund, R.H.Williams (eds) 1989: "Electricity", Lund University Press, Lund, Sweden.
Keyfitz, N. (1984): "The Population of China", Scientific American, vol.25, no 2, pp.22-31, February 1984.
Meadows, D.H. (1998): "Indicators and Information Systems for Sustainable Development", A report to the
Balaton Group. The Sustainability Institute, PO BOX 174, Hartland Four Corners, VT-05049, USA.
Norgard,J.S. (1979): "Improved Efficiencies in Domestic Appliances", Energy Policy, Vol.7, no.1, March 1979.
Norgard,J.S. (1989): "Low Electricity Appliances - Options for the Future", pp. 125-172 in Electricity (eds.
T.B.Johansson, B.Bodlund, R.H.Williams) Lund University Press, Lund, Sweden.
Norgard, J.S. (1995): "Efficient Technology in an Inefficient Economy", in Proceedings of the 1995 ECEEE
Summer Study: Sustainability and the Reinvention of Government - A Challenge for Energy Efficiency, ed. A.
Persson, The European Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Stockholm, Sweden.
Norgard, J.S. (1998): "Models of Energy Saving Systems - the Battle Field of Environmental Planning",
Forhtcoming in special issue of International Journal of Global Energy Issues in 1998 or 1999.
Norgard, J.S. and J. Viegand (1994): "Low Electricity Europe - Sustainable Options", European Environmental
Bureau, Rue de la Victoire 26 bte 12, B-1060 Brussels, Belgium.
Norgard, J.S. and B.L.Christensen (1993): "Towards sustainable energy welfare", Perspectives in Energy, Vol. 2,
pp. 313-332, 1992-1993.
Norgard, J.S., P.S.Nielsen, and J.Viegand (1994): "Low Electricity Europe", pp. 399-417 in Integrated
Electricity Resource Planning (ed. Almeida et al), Kluwer Academic Publisher, NATO Series E 261, Dordrecht,
The Netherlands.
OOA (1980): "Denmark Without Nuclear Power", translation of a brochure: “Danmark uden atomkraft", The
Organisation for Information about Nuclear Power in Denmark, OOA, Blegdamsvej 4, DK 2200 Copenhagen N,
Denmark.
OOA (1982): "We say: Give up Nuclear Power", translation of a brochure: "Vi siger: Opgi' Atomkraft", The
Organisation for Information about Nuclear Power in Denmark, OOA, Blegdamsvej 4, DK 2200 Copenhagen N,
Denmark.
OOA (1983): "An Alternative Energy Plan for Denmark", translation of a brochure: "En alternative Energiplan
for Danmark", The Organisation for Information about Nuclear Power in Denmark, OOA, Blegdamsvej 4, DK
2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark.
Parker, D.S., M.P. Callahan, J.K. Sonne and G.H. Su (1999): “Development of a High Efficiency Ceiling Fan”,
Florida Solar Center, 1679 Clearlake Road, Cocoa Florida 32922, USA. (www.fsec.ucf.edu).
Platz, M. (1988): Working Time (in Danish), The Danish National Institute of Social Research, Copenhagen.
Vringer, K. and K. Blok (1995): "The direct and indirect energy requirement of households in the Netherlands",
Energy Policy, Vol.23 (10), pp.893-910.
Weizsäcker, E.von, A.B.Lovins, L.H.Lovins (1998): "Factor Four - Doubling Wealth, Halving Resource Use",
26
Earthscan, London.
Winward, J., P.Schiellerup, B.Boardman (1998): "Cool Labels, The first three years of the European Energy
Label", Energy and Environmental Program, Environmental Change Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.