Executive SummarySummarise the main findings of the report. Include brief discussions of each indicator. Compare the current year's indicators with 1990 values. Discuss major policy initiatives or other developments that may affect the trend of any of the indicators. We suggest that a summary table-comparing each indicator's current value with 1990-be included in the Executive Summary. We have included a template of this suggested table for your use.

top of file

Introduction

This section is intended not as an introduction to the use of indicators, or SEW's set of eight indicators, but as introducing the person or team comprising each country's Observer-Reporter, their affiliation and contact information, a short biography of each author and contributor, and whether a report was filed last year (and if so, by whom). Discuss the report's completeness, especially if one or more indicators could not be reported on and why, and major problems in finding the needed statistics or calculating the vectors.

top of file

General Discussion of Your Country

Use this section to introduce your country in a general way. Geographic overview, land area, arable land and principal crops, area under irrigation, animal husbandry, population and rate of growth, economic growth, principal imports and exports (energy and non-energy), literacy and education, urbanisation, and income and equity issues. Other topics of interest to readers of your report include principal environmental pressures, pertinent new legislation, and greatest social concerns that you consider important to briefly describe-such as gender issues, nutrition, food adequacy for the nation's poorest, public health, political freedoms, etc. You may wish to discuss UNDP's Human Development Index for your country (see this Manual's Appendix). Be creative and concise. There is no need to report on all of the topics suggested above; a Geographic and demographic overview with a simple description of the nation's energy picture may suffice.

top of file

Other Energy-Related Developments

Discuss other important developments, especially those related to the indicators. Discuss your country's use of traditional fuels such as wood, bio-energy, and charcoal. Discuss short-term energy developments such as hydropower projects and their impacts on the land, the environment, and the people who live in the region.

If other developments affect the sustainability of your country or region or the globe, yet are not being measured by the indicators, this is your chance to discuss such developments. A new coal mine, for example, will not only pollute the region's water supply, create needed jobs, and pollute the air around the powerplant; it will also release quantities of methane, an important non-carbon greenhouse gas that our indicators do not measure. It may be a planned factory for manufacturing CFCs (banned in industrial countries party to the Montreal Protocol but allowed in other countries until 2010)¹⁷. Or a new crude oil or natural gas pipeline originating in or transiting through your country. Numerous possible topics are of interest to your global and regional colleagues. Be creative, think expansively, but be concise.

You may want to mention other possible indicators that seem especially useful for your country, but are not part of SEW's set of eight indicators. You may even want to develop a separate indicator, compare it to 1990's value, and report on it in your Executive Summary as well as the sections on Notes to SEW and Notes to Future Observer-Reporters. Please do not substitute this indicator for any of SEW's indicators. It is important that Regional Node Coordinators and the SEW Secretariat be able to track a consistent and uniform set of indicators for geographic regions and the world as a whole. 

Discuss related legislative and regulatory changes and your country's overall energy policies and objectives. Mention major international financial investments and projects. Discuss energy sector or indicator-related incidents (e.g., pipeline breaks, refinery incidents, forest fires, industrial spills, transportation accidents, and energy-related military events, if any).

¹⁷ World Resources Institute (1998) World Resources 1998-1999, p. 178, Washington, DC. The Montreal Protocol phased out nearly all production of ozone-depleting substances in developed countries in 1996 but permitted production and use in developing countries to increase until 1999 with a gradual phase-out until 2010.

top of file

How to Report on the Eight Indicators: General Discussion

Each indicator will require statistics from different sources. Some will require information from national governments, others will use statistics from the United Nations or the World Bank, yet others will use data reproduced in the Appendix to this Manual. In each case we'll describe specifically what data are required and how to calculate the vector for each indicator. In most cases the data itself-the metric of the environmental, economic, or social condition being measured, such as carbon emissions per capita or percent of renewable energy in the nation's energy mix-must be converted into a vector through a simple calculation for which this Manual provides step-by-step instructions. Because the scale of each vector is integrated (but not identical), this allows comparison between vectors and between countries as well as the graphic representation of the Star (see next section).

A few of the indicators (# 1, 7, and 8) compare national statistics to global averages, while the remainder are compared to that country's 1990 levels. In every case the objective is to get a meaningful measure of a critical system indicative of the world's or each nation's environmental and societal health. But it is also important to get a sense of the rate of change for each indicator, to have indicators that are comparable between countries, and that can also be aggregated globally. Finally, for each indicator we have selected an indicator value that we deem to be "sustainable." Since these goals may be adjusted as we learn more about what sustainability really means in the context of each indicator, it is essential to document the data, their sources, and the details of the vector calculation. Hence the template sheets are relatively complete without undue complexity or ambiguity. Comments from users of this Manual, especially the Observer-Reporters, regarding uncertainties, lack of clarity, difficulty in getting the required data, or any other aspect of fulfilling the objectives of the report will be most appreciated by the SEW Secretariat and future Observer-Reporters.

We strongly encourage Observer-Reporters to provide complete citations of all sources of information used. Add explanatory footnotes if necessary. Each indicator section of the template contains a reminder to list references, including where the source might be found (if it's a government document with limited circulation, for example), and to note other sources of information, website addresses, personal contact information where needed, and so on.

top of file

The Star: General Discussion

SEW created the Star diagram to facilitate a graphic and visual recognition of progress toward or regress from a more sustainable energy system. It is an eight-pointed orientor star modified with the use of a "unit" circle that typically identifies the 1990 level of the measured indicator and with a center-the sustainability target-with a value of "zero¹⁸." While each indicator can be charted individually-growth of CO₂ emissions per capita, for example or access to electricity in rural households-either within each nation or collectively for a region or the world, an integrated Star diagram brings all of the indicators together in one stimulating and memorable form. Observers can compare progress over time by the dynamic changes in the diagram, or even compare progress in different countries. The indicators measure differing system conditions, and while the scales are integrated to values between zero and one, the scales are not identical; some indicators have vector values great-er than one, others do not. Some can have values less than zero (if the sustainability target is exceeded). Since the scales of measurement differ between each indicator, however, the area of the Star from year to year is not a measure of overall sustainable energy development. Each indicator tends towards the center of the Star if genuine progress is being measured. Regress away from sustainable development-in other words, worsening conditions are being measured-will appear as values greater than "one;" in some instances values as high as "five."

A sample Star appears below to illustrate the diagram (not based on real data).

¹⁸ See Bossel, Hartmut (1998), Indicators for Sustainable Development: Theory, Method, Applications, a report to the Balaton Group, International Institute for Sustainable Development, Winnipeg, Canada, "http://iisd.ca" for a useful discussion of orientor star construction for displaying changes in a set of indicators.

The center of the circle is a value of "zero," indicating the country has achieved the objective defined as sustainable for that particular indicator. For example, using Indicator #1, this would mean that the country reduced its emissions of carbon dioxide per capita to a fraction of the 1990 global average. Clearly, some sustainability objectives are extremely difficult to accomplish, and will take decades to reach in many countries, whereas other indicators may already be largely fulfilled in some countries. An example of the latter is Social Indicator #3-percent of households having access to electric power. This remains a valid indicator for most of the world's population, however, as access to electricity is considered a social good yet lacking for more than 1.5 billion people worldwide.

Indicators number 1, 7, and 8 measure each country's progress relative to 1990 global averages, whereas the other indicators are relative that country's performance in 1990.

Note: Discuss the position of each indicator on the Star. I think we suggested that each binary (e.g., social, economic) indicator is placed on opposite sides of the Star.

Note2: We must produce a scaled and labeled Star with indicators properly positioned. 

top of file

Indicator 1: Per Capita Energy Sector Carbon Dioxide Emissions

Vector:

• 1 : 1990 global CO₂ emissions per capita (1,130 kgC/cap) 

0 : three-tenths of 1990 global CO₂ emissions per capita (339 kgC/cap) 

Global environmental impact will be measured by carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions per capita (actually the carbon in the CO₂). Each nation's per capita emissions will be compared to the 1990 global average. We do not yet know with certainty what reduced level of total greenhouse emissions and related atmospheric CO₂ concentration would "prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system²¹." Reasonable estimates range from a 60% to an 80% reduction of emissions²². SEW selected a sustainability objective of a 70% reduction from 1990 emission levels.

At the Third Conference of the Parties in Kyoto, Japan, in December 1997 the developed countries collectively agreed to decrease emissions of the six principal greenhouse gases by 5.2% by 2008-2012 period compared to the base year 1990²³. We use 1990 as the base year for this and the other seven indicators. SEW participants, realising that a far more aggressive target than the Kyoto Protocol was needed, base the sustainability objective on a converging goal of equal per capita emissions for all world citizens. 

In 1990, the global average emission of CO₂ from fossil fuel combustion was 1.13 metric tonne (1,130 kg) of carbon per capita²⁴. Not included are emissions from cement manufacturing (which globally adds 3% to fossil fuel emissions), nor are increased emissions from biomass combustion, land clearing, or natural or intentional forest fires (which globally add ~29% to the atmospheric CO₂ burden)²⁵. Nor are other significant greenhouse gases such as methane (CH₄, 19%), CFCs (6%) and halocarbons (5%), or nitrous oxide (N₂O, 6%) included in the SEW target²⁶.

¹⁹ Houghton, J. T. et al eds (1996), Climate Change 1995: The Science of Climate Change, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, p. xi.
²⁰World Resources Institute (1998), World Resources 1998-1999, pp. 67-72. McMichael, A. J. et al eds (1996), Climate Change and World Health, World Health Organisation, Geneva. And Watson, Robert T., Marufu C. Zinyowera, and Richard H. Moss (1996), Climate Change 1995: Impacts, Adaptations, and Mitigation of Climate Change, International Panel on Climate Change, published by Cambridge University Press.
²¹In Article 2 of United Nations (1992), United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Geneva, "http://www.unfccc.org". Article 2 continues: "Such a level should be achieved within a time frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, to ensure that food production is not threatened, and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner."
²²IPCC members' estimates.
²³These Tier One (mostly OECD) countries have varying commitments ranging from -8% for the European Union as a whole, -7% for the United States, -6% for Japan and Canada, zero percent for New Zealand, Russia, and Ukraine, +1% for Norway, and +8% for Australia. United Nations (1997), Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Article 3; available via "http://www.unfccc.de".
²⁴Marland, Gregg, Tom Boden, Antoinette Brenkert, Bob Andres, and Cathy Johnston (1999), Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Environmental Sciences Division, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) data available at "http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends".
²⁵"Net emissions from changes in tropical land-use" total 1.6 ± 1.0 GtC/yr ˜ 29% (aver. 1980-89). Houghton, J. T. et al eds (1996), Climate Change 1995: The Science of Climate Change, op. cit., p. 17. The current global net is probably lower due to northern hemisphere forest regrowth and lower rates of tropical land clearing.
²⁶Houghton, J. T. et al eds (1996), Climate Change 1995: The Science of Climate Change, op. cit., p. xi.²

Instructions:

The following statistics are emissions of carbon (not carbon dioxide) in metric tonnes per year from combustion of fossil fuels (crude oil products such as motor fuels and heating oil, natural gas, natural gas liquids, heavier hydrocarbon gases, coal, tar sand and oil shale products, etc). To convert CO₂ units to carbon, divide by 3.667. See Appendix L for conversion factors. 

Enter the following data:

Country's emissions of carbon dioxide from 1990 fossil fuel consumption = million tonnes of carbon. Note: if you use data from this Manual's Appendix (World Resources Institute's World Resources 1998-1999), subtract emissions from cement manufacturing from the total emissions listed. Also note that the data is given in CO₂ emissions, not carbon content (i.e., divide by 3.667).

Country's total emissions this year = million metric tonnes of carbon.

Country's population 1990 = million and this year = million.

Country's 1990 emissions per capita = kilograms of carbon per capita.

Country's emissions per capita this year = kilograms of carbon per capita.

Calculating the vector value:

The "1" circle equals the 1990 value = 1,130 kilograms of carbon per capita (kgC/cap).

Country's per capita carbon emissions this year = X = kgC/cap.

The center, the zero point, equals three-tenths of the 1990 value = Y = 339 kgC/cap.

Hence the 0 to 1 segment equals seven-tenths of 1990: 1,130 minus 339 = Z = 791 kgC/cap.

Formula: (X - Y) ¸ Z²⁷.

Actual calculation of the vector: 

( - 339 kgC/cap)/791 kgC/cap equals country's vector = in 19 .

Optional vector calculation for 1990:

( - 339 kgC/cap)/791 kgC/cap equals country's vector = in 1990.

Two examples:

United States 1995: 5,602 kg of carbon emitted per capita. 1995 vector value = (5,602 kg/cap - 339 kg/cap)/791 kg/cap = vector value of 6.654. Since per capita emissions are far higher than the global average in most industrialised countries, and highest of all in the United States, a high vector value is expected, indicating extremely low global energy sustainability²⁸.

Albania 1995 = 141 kg of carbon per capita. 1995 vector value = (141 kg/cap minus 339 kg/cap)/791 kg/cap = vector value of -0.250, close to the center of the circle, indicating high sustainability²⁹. Since the value is negative-it is already below SEW's sustainability objective-Albania can increase its emissions in pursuit of economic growth, or, better yet, expand its economy without increasing its emissions. In the latter case, the country has a valuable asset that might, through Joint Implementation (JI) and/or tradable carbon permits, be "sold" on the international market.

top of file

Vector:

• 1 : 1990 level of the selected pollutant per capita 
• 0 : one-tenth of the 1990 per capita level 

Observer-Reporters may decide to use ambient air or water pollution concentrations as the standard (as we did in Example #2 below), in which case we recommend changing the vector to 1 = World Health Organisation guideline and 0 = two-tenths WHO guideline for each pollutant. Our example combines and averages two air pollutants (particulates and SO₂).

Common energy-related pollutants and their principal impacts include:

• Sulfur dioxide SO₂ (principally from coal-fired powerplants, smelters, and industry) causing acid precipitation;
• Nitrogen oxides NO_x (principally from vehicles and powerplants) causing smog;
• Ozone O₃ (a secondary pollutant formed by nitrogen dioxide and hydrocarbons in sunlight);

Carbon monoxide (principally from incomplete combustion in motor vehicle engines and boilers); Heavy metals (air or water pollution, principally from mining and powerplants); Particulate air pollutants (principally from fossil-fired powerplants, vehicles, road dust, and industry) causing respiratory diseases; Volatile organic compounds VOCs (principally from gasoline and other fuels, but also of particular concern inside buildings [e.g., from paints, sealants, adhesives]);Uranium, plutonium, and other radio-active substances (principally from uranium mining and processing, nuclear materials transport, fission reactors, and nuclear powerplant accidents or routine leakage, but, in terms of exposure, measured in becquerels, principally natural background radiation and medical x-rays. Lead (principally from leaded fuels for motor vehicles); Indoor air pollution (typically particulates, brown smoke, carbon monoxide from cooking and space heating, primarily from biomass and coal burned indoors). 

A combined index of two or more pollutants may make sense in some countries in order to measure pollutants that impact two or more systems-perhaps one of urban human health significance and another of rural or environmental importance. Observer-Reporters should be sure to select pollutants that are both significant and persistent to ensure validity and long-term tracking for the index. Carefully and completely note the details of such a pollutant combination for future Observer-Reporters, including data sources, your rationale for choosing the combination, and precisely how the indicator and its vector are calculated. If you choose to use ambient pollution concentrations rather than emissions per capita for this indicator, carefully note the details for the SEW Secretariat and future Observer-Reporters.

Instructions:

Enter the following data:

This calculation depends on the kind of pollutant and the metric chosen. It is recommended that emissions per capita and not an ambient level of, say, ozone or PM₁₀ particulate concentrations in urban areas is measured. One example would be to use SO₂ emissions per capita. (Substitute your actual choice of locally significant pollutant.)

Country's emissions in 1990 = and this year = million metric tonnes SO₂.

Country's population 1990 = million and this year = million.

Country's emissions per capita in 1990 = kilograms of SO₂ per capita.

Country's emissions per capita this year = kilograms of SO₂ per capita.

Calculating the vector value:

The "1" circle equals the 1990 value = kilograms of SO₂ per capita.

The center, the zero point, equals one-tenth of the 1990 value = Y = kg SO₂/capita.

Hence the 0 to 1 segment equals nine-tenths of the 1990 value = Z = kg SO₂/capita.

Enter the following data:

Country's per capita SO₂ emissions this year = X = kgSO₂/capita.

One-tenth of country's per capita SO₂ emissions 1990 = Y = kgSO₂/capita.

Nine-tenths of country's per capita SO₂ emissions 1990 = Z = kgSO₂/capita.

Formula: (X - Y) ¸ Z. 

Actual calculation of the vector: 

( - kgSO₂/cap)/ kgSO₂/cap equals country's vector = .

Optional vector calculation for 1990:

( - kgSO₂/cap)/ kgSO₂/cap equals country's vector = .

An example of a single pollutant:

United States 1990: 57.2 kg of SO₂ per capita and 1996: 42.8 kg SO₂ per capita. The center, the sustainability objective, is one-tenth of 1990 = 5.7 kg SO₂ per capita. The 0 to 1 vector value equals 1990 minus one-tenth of 1990 = 57.2 minus 5.7 = 51.5 kg SO₂ per capita. The actual vector value for the U.S. in 1996 is therefore the 1996 metric of 42.8 divided by the unit vector of 51.5 = 0.8311. The U.S. reduced its sulfur emissions principally through market-oriented approaches such as tradable emission permits, which reduced emissions faster and at a fraction of the anticipated cost

China, 1995: combine urban particulate concentrations and urban sulfur dioxide concentrations in Beijing. Change the indicator metric to 1 = 1.0 WHO guideline for each pollutant and 0 = 0.20 of the WHO guideline for each pollutant. WHO guideline for Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) = 50 m gr/m³; SO₂ = 60 m gr/m³ (CK, see WRI, p. 117). Ambient levels in Beijing in 1995 for TSP = 377 m gr/m³; and for SO₂ = 90 m gr/m³. Hence the zero to one segment for TSP = 10 to 50 m gr/m³ (therefore = 40) and for SO₂ = 12 to 60 m gr/m³ (therefore = 48). Beijing's 1995 TSP metric of 377 converts to 377/40 = 9.43. Beijing's 1995 SO₂ metric of 90 m gr/m³ converts to 90/48 = 1.88. Giving equal weight to each pollutant measure yields a combined vector of (9.43 + 1.88)/2 = 5.66.

top of file

Indicator 3: Households with Access to Electricity

Vector:

• 1 : zero% of households have access to electricity 

0 : 100% of households have access to electricity

DevelopTimes new romanuntries have already extended electrical service to all or nearly all households. Yet this indTimes new romanr remains a valuable measure ofTimes new romangy-related sustainable development as one-third or more of the world's people do not have access to electricity; in India alone 500 million rural people do not have access. In 1990, 1.4 billion of the 3.2 billion rural population of developing countriesTimes new romaned access to electricity. DevTimes new romanng countries can invest productivelyTimes new romanheir economies or misallocate capital and resources iTimes new romanlectrification but not both.

Investment in efficient use of electricity is essential. The goal, in a comprehensive way, is to invest precious development capTimes new romanto deliver needed energy in the right form, at the proper times, and the lowest total cost to industry, commerce, and househTimes new roman In rural areas, more often tTimes new romanot this will mean distributed, smaTimes new romanenewable systems providing essential needs. Investment in efficient use is essential. The goal is to systematically invest scarce development capital into technologies that deliver needed energy in the form, at the right time, at the lowest total cost to all consumers. In rural areas, this frequently means small, renewable, decentralised, "distributed" power systems appropriate to rural needs.

Instructions:

Find the number of households with access to electric power, either through the transmission grid or by stand-alone systems. Such data is often published by national governments, energy ministries, electric boards, or government-owned electric utilities. The United Nations Statistical Office, UN's Development Programme, or the World Bank may also publish data for each country. 

Fraction of households with access to electricity in 1990 = and 1998 = .

Enter the following data:

Number of households (or population) with access to electric power = X = in 1990 and = in 1998.

Total number of households (or population) = Y = in 1990 and = in 19 .

Calculating the vector value:

Full access to electricity by households means a vector value of "0"-the center of the Star, whereas zero percent is the "1" circle. All other values fall in between.

Formula: 1.000 - (X ¸ Y).

Actual calculation of the vector:

1.000 - (households with access to electricity in 19 divided by total households of in 19 ) = 1.000 - ( - ) = 1.000 - ( ) 
= .

Optional vector calculation for 1990:

1.000 -households with access to electricity in 1990 divided by total households of in 1990 = 1.000 - ( - ) = 1.000 - ( ) 
= .

An example:

Indicator 4: Investment in Clean Energy (a proxy for employment)

• 1 : 1990 investment in clean energy as a fraction of total energy investment 
• 0 : 95% of total energy investment is in clean energy 

Certainly, energy investment should be guided by least-cost planning criteria, hopefully including social and environmental costs, which typically suggests much greater investment in end-use efficiency first, then many renewable options (including off-grid, grid-connected, and micro-grid generation systems). SEW decided not to include pollution-prevention and similar "clean-technology" programs in its definition of clean energy even though such investments help protect the health and welfare of workers, affected people "downstream," and the environment.

Drawing a clear line between "clean" and "dirty" energy technologies is not easy. Some would argue that natural gas is a plentiful and clean-burning low-carbon fuel and must be used as a practical bridge to even cleaner fuels in the future. Displacing wood and charcoal cooking with gas or solar cookers, or replacing kerosene lighting with coal-fired electric lighting greatly reduces indoor human health impacts. Investing in "clean coal" technologies, improving the conversion efficiency of thermal powerplants, and reducing the losses in electric transmission and distribution systems are all ways to improve overall system efficiency and should be considered progress toward sustainability. Manufacturing of renewable energy systems have environmental costs, too, and large hydropower facilities can devastate local ecosystems and cultures. The nuclear industry argues that zero-carbon nuclear powerplants are the only safe, environmentally responsible way to satisfy ever-expanding demand for electricity. 

All of these arguments have some merit. But SEW decided to not include energy technologies that are partially sustainable or a bit more sustainable than other options. SEW carefully weighed all sides of the issue and decided to measure investment in renewable energy and all cost-effective end-use and supply efficiency. For the sake of clarity, SEW adopted the classification of the International Energy Agency and excluded investment in large hydro, since deep concern for its unsustainability characteristics is prevalent. Observer-Reporters will therefore exclude any hydroelectric dams over 100 MW. 

Instructions:

Where to get data:

The required data is typically published by national governments, natural resource agencies, energy ministries, petroleum and power sector trade associations, electric boards, or government-owned electric utilities. The United Nations Statistical Office, United Nations Development Programme, International Energy Agency, or the World Bank may also publish data for each country. Include international financing assistance from the World Bank, regional development banks, and other multilateral assistance. The objective is to calculate clean energy investment as a fraction of total energy investment.

Calculating the vector value:

This indicator's vector is defined as follows: the 1990 investment in clean energy as a fraction of total energy-related investment is the standard or "1" value. The sustainability objective-the "0" at the center of the Star-is defined as clean energy investment reaching 95% of total energy-related investment. The vector value is more complicated, since the difference between the base year 1990 and the sustainability objective is different for each country. The vector's value is not simply the fractional improvement but is divided over the 1990 value and the 95% objective. See the example below for clarification and instruction. 

Enter the following data:

Country's total investment in clean energy in 1990 = and in 19 = .

Country's total energy-related investment in 1990 = and in 19 = .

Clean energy investment in 19 divided by total energy investment in 19 = X = .

Clean energy investment in 1990 divided by total energy investment in 1990 = Y = .

Formula: (0.950 minus X) / (0.950 minus Y) = .

Actual calculation of the vector: 

(0.950 minus ) / (0.950 minus ) equals country's vector = in 19 .

Optional vector calculation for 1990:

(0.950 minus ) / (0.950 minus ) equals country's vector = in 1990.

An example:

Take a hypothetical country called Elbonia. With assumed total energy sector investment of $10 billion in 1990 and $13 billion in 1998 and investment in clean energy (renewables, energy efficiency) of $560 million in 1990 and $820 million in 1998. The fraction in 1990 = 0.056 (5.6%) and 0.063 in 1998. Since the 1990 fraction is defined as the "1" vector value and a 95% (0.950) investment fraction as the "0" value, the length of the unit vector is 0.950 minus 0.056 = 0.894. Hence the improvement to 0.063 clean energy investment in 1998 represents a vector position of (0.894 minus (1998 minus 1990))/0.894, which equals (0.894 - (0.063 - 0.056))/0.894 = (0.894 - (0.007))/0.894 = 0.887/0.894 = 0.992. 

top of file

Energy import-dependent countries:

Vector:

• 1 : 100% non-renewable energy imports divided by non-renewable energy consumption (in joules) 
• 0 : zero% non-renewable energy imports divided by non-renewable energy consumption (in joules) 

Vector:

• 1 : 100% non-renewable energy export value divided by value of total exports (in currency units) 
• 0 : zero% non-renewable energy export value divided by value of total exports (in currency units) 

Declining prices may be a boon to economic growth in importing countries, but they also lead to increased consumption, import reliance, pollution, poor capital investment decisions, and adverse health impacts. The perception of lowered energy vulnerability coupled with lower prices also decrease investment in domestic resources, in energy efficiency to wring more useful work from the energy used, and in local renewable energy supplies. For all of these reasons, exports and imports of non-renewable energy is a valuable indicator of economic sustainability.

Separate metrics were selected for import-dependent and export-dependent countries. In order to provide a sustainability incentive for net energy importers without pessimising imports of renewable energy, imports of non-renewable energy are measured as a fraction of non-renewable energy consumption. Importing countries can therefore improve sustainability by reducing either imports or consumption of non-renewables or increasing imports or consumption of renewable energy. The units are in petajoules.

For export-dependent countries the currency value of exported non-renewable energy is calculated as a fraction of the value of total exports. The path to sustainability for energy exporters is to increase the production and export of renewable energy. 

SEW decided to not complicate the data-gathering and vector calculations by not including exports and imports of energy services and capital equipment in addition to the trade of fossil, nuclear, and renewable fuels and electricity.

If there is doubt about whether your country is export-dependent or import-dependent, refer to the Manual's Appendix E.

Instructions:

Enter the following data:

For energy import-dependent countries (in petajoules, PJ):

1. Total non-renewable energy imports in 1990 = and in 19 = = X_im.

2. Total non-renewable energy consumption in 1990 = and in 19 = = Y_im.

3. The metric is therefore #1 divided by #2, and equals: in 1990 = and in 19 = .

Please also provide the following additional data if available:

4. Total renewable energy imports in 1990 = and in 19 = .

5. Total energy consumption in 1990 = and in 19 = .

For energy export-dependent countries (in Euros or your currency):

6. Total value of non-renewable energy exports in 1990 = and in 19 = = X_ex.

7. Total value of all exports in 1990 = and in 19 = = Y_ex.

8. The metric is therefore #6 divided by #7 and equals: in 1990 = and in 19 = .

Please also provide the following additional data if available:

9. Total value of renewable energy exports in 1990 = and in 19 = .

Calculating the vector value:

For energy import-dependent countries:

This vector equals the metric calculated in point #3 above, namely #1 divided by #2.

Formula: (X_im ¸ Y_im)

For energy export-dependent countries:

This vector equals the metric calculated in point #8 above, namely #6 divided by #7.

Formula: (X_ex ¸ Y_ex) 

Actual calculation of the vector:

For energy import-dependent countries:

19 : (X_im ¸ Y_im) = ( ¸ ) = .

Optional vector calculation for 1990:

1990: (X_im ¸ Y_im) = ( ¸ ) = .

For energy export-dependent countries:

19 : (X_ex ¸ Y_ex) = ( ¸ ) = .

Optional vector calculation for 1990:

1990: (X_ex ¸ Y_ex) = ( ¸ ) = .

Examples:

For an energy import-dependent country:

Non-renewable energy imports into the United States totaled 23.51 EJ in 1997 (23.66 EJ minus 0.15 EJ hydro imports from Canada), and non-renewable energy consumption totaled 82.53 EJ (plus 6.77 EJ of renewables). Hence, (23.51 ÷ 82.53) = 0.285 is the 1997 vector value for the United States.

Norway exported $17 billion worth of crude oil, petroleum products, and natural gas in 1998 and $2.6 billion worth of hydroelectricity. Total value of all exports was $47 billion. Hence, non-renewable energy trade accounted for $17 billion ÷ $47 billion = 0.362 or 36.2% of total exports, making Norway's reliance on fossil fuel exports low among energy exporting countries. Norway's hydroelectric capacity is also an opportunity to increase international sales of renewable electricity by improving domestic electric efficiency.

Saudi Arabia exported $43.8 billion worth of oil and petroleum products in 1997, while total exports were $50.1 billion, for a vector value of 0.874, indicating high vulnerability to price and demand fluctuations.

top of file

Vector:

• 1 : 10% of government investment in non-renewable energy as a fraction of GDP 
• 0 : 0% of government investment in non-renewable energy as a fraction of GDP 

This indicator compares government investment in non-renewable energy supply to total Gross Domestic Product as a measure of the burden of energy development on the economy. The primary purpose of this indicator is to get public funds out of the energy supply sector and to incentivise investment in cost-effective renewable energy supplies and end-use efficiency. Government enterprises and deals with private entities tend to shift scarce resources into capital-intensive buys. Such investment should either decrease or be shifted to the private sector or both.

In this indicator all government-Federal, provincial, regional, municipal, and local-energy-sector expenditures and investments in non-renewables are included. Only government expenditures for energy consumed in its own buildings, facilities, and operations are not included. All investment on behalf of the non-renewable energy supply and distribution industries are to be counted, such as research and development, regulatory agencies, powerplant construction, transmission and distribution systems, oil and gas extraction and refinery operations, coal mines, energy commodity transport systems, decommissioning and related investments using either domestic public funds or current-year investments by multilateral lending institutions. Direct expenditures-typically published in government budgets-as well as indirect expenditures-such as tax incentives, loans, loan guarantees, off-budget programs, and related government investments-are included to the extent data are available.

Include investment by national, state or provincial, and local governments as well as budgets of state enterprises. The required data is typically published by national governments, state electricity and fuels enterprises, energy ministries, petroleum and power sector trade associations, electric boards, or government-owned electric utilities. The United Nations Statistical Office, United Nations Development Programme, the International Energy Agency, and the World Bank publish some of the required data for each country. Include international financing assistance from the World Bank, regional development banks, and other multilateral assistance. Since so many government entities and programs are involved, and since the limited amount of time available for research will reveal only portions of the total investment by government agencies, the Observer-Reporter must carefully note what type of investments are included. It is expected that the accounting will in fact be incomplete; future Observer-Reporters will need to know the details of what has been included as well as useful sources and contacts, etc.

Instructions:

Enter the following data:

1. Government investment in non-renewable energy = X = in 1990 and in 19 .

2. Total gross domestic product (GDP) = Y = in 1990 and = in 19 .

3. Divide #1 by #2 to derive the burden of government investment in non-renewable energy supply as a fraction of total GDP.

Calculating the vector value:

The vector value-since the unit vector goes from zero to 10 percent of GDP, with zero being the sustainability objective-is the fraction of government investment in non-renewables multiplied by 10 (ten).
 
 

Formula: (X ¸ Y) x 10.

Actual calculation of the vector:

19 government investment in non-renewable energy of ($ or your currency) divided by your country's 19 GDP of ($ or your currency) = x 10
= .

Optional vector calculation for 1990:

1990 government investment in non-renewable energy of ($ or your currency) divided by your country's 1990 GDP of ($ or your currency) = x 10
= .

An example:

The government of India (including multilateral aid) invested $13.7 billion in nuclear and coal-fired powerplants, coal mines, related research and development, oil and gas fields, processing and refineries, and commodity transportation systems in 1995. The government also invested an additional $3.4 billion in large-scale hydroelectric and windpower facilities, which are not counted here. Dividing $13.7 billion by India's 1995 GDP of $319.7 billion = 0.0429 (4.29%), then multiply by ten = 0.429; hence India's 1995 vector equals 0.429.

top of file

Vector:

• 1 : 10.64 MJ primary energy consumed/$GDP (1990 global average) 
• 0 : One-tenth of the 1990 global average: 1.06MJ/$GDP)

This indicator measures each nation's progress in terms of obtaining more economic activity per unit of energy consumed. Many nations already track such progress (including by the OECD), and the World Bank, United Nations, and International Energy Agency publish periodic comparative reports. 

This simple task is complicated by a number of factors. The available data compare economies with widely different geography, economic development, climate, and level of industrialisation. Some sources compare indices of energy efficiency (fuel economy of personal vehicles, for example), others compare specific sectors (industrial energy use per dollar of industrial output), while others aggregate the nation's economy. Only consumption of commercial energy is typically counted, thus ignoring large quantities of "traditional" fuels such as wood, charcoal, bagasse, and other biomass fuels in many countries. Consistent definition of what is meant by economic output is not clear-cut either; the convention of counting GDP output at current exchange rates works better for comparing industrialised countries than developing nations. In the latter cases, purchase power parity accounts of GDP are more appropriate. 

Hence, the table below shows both approaches: in the first set (three left-hand columns) we adopt the standard methodology and divide each nation's total consumption of commercial energy by their gross national product. In the second set we add consumption of commercial and traditional energy and divide by each nation's GDP as measured in purchasing power parity. Energy consumed per dollar of gross domestic product (GDP) varies greatly among nations, ranging from less than 4 to more than 120 MJ/$GDP. Most OECD nations have a higher yield of GDP per million joules of energy consumed than both the 1995 global average of 12.54 MJ/$ and most developing economies. The wasteful (i.e., opportunity-rich) United States, Canada, and Russia are in stark contrast to their more productive trading competitors. Counting biomass energy consumption and purchasing power parity rather than exchange rates reduces the range from 1:36 to 1:14 in terms of the most- to least-efficient economies. 

	Energy Productivity in Selected Countries, 1995
	Com'l energy / GNP (atlas)¨			Com'l + conv fuels / GDP (PPP)(c)
	Energy use	GNP US $	MJ/$GNP	Energy use	GDP US $	MJ/$GDP
	PJ, 1995	(billion, 1995)	-1995	PJ, 1995	(billion, 1995)	-1995
Japan	18,711	4,963.6	3.77	18,816	2,742.7	6.86
Germany	13,511	2,252.3	6.00	13,611	1,641.7	8.29
France	9,045	1,451.0	6.23	9,143	1,230.6	7.43
Cameroon	56	8.6	6.50	278	30.3	9.16
Brazil	4,249	579.8	7.33	6,201	874.6	7.09
United Kingdom	9,08	1,094.7	8.29	9,185	1,120.9	8.19
Australia	4,126	337.9	12.21	4,283	350.7	12.21
United States	92,275	7,100.0	13.00	96,128	7,206.8	13.34
Canada	9,404	573.7	16.39	9,461	643.9	14.69
South Africa	3,659	130.9	27.95	3,81	217.3	17.53
India	10,513	319.7	32.89	13,578	1,319.2	10.29
China	34,31	744.9	46.06	36,422	3,624.1	10.05
Russia	29,444	331.9	88.70	29,725	715.6	41.54
World	347,262	27,687.3	12.54	372,203	na	na

¨ Gross National Product is the sum of gross domestic product and net income from abroad. World Resources Institute (1998), World Resources 1998-1999, Table 6.1, pp. 236-37. GNP estimates are based on the World Bank Atlas methodology in which GNP in local currencies is converted to U.S. dollars using three-year average exchange rates to smooth out exchange spikes. Energy consumption in this column includes commercial fuels and electricity only. World Resources 1998-1999, Table 15.1, p. 332.

(c) Using conventional GNP or GDP estimates based on exchange rates misses the greater relative purchasing power of many local currencies. In this calculation we use Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) based on World Bank and United Nations System of National Accounts. World Resources Institute (1998), World Resources 1998-1999, Table 6.1, p. 236. In order to account for the high relative use of traditional biomass fuels in many developing countries we add commercial and traditional fuels consumption in this column. World Resources 1998-1999, Table 15.1, p. 332.

Instructions:

Enter the following data:

1. Your country's total energy consumption = in 1990 and = in 19 .

2. Your country's total GDP = in 1990 and = in 19 .

3. Divide #1 by #2 to derive energy productivity = X = in 1990 and in 19 .

Calculating the vector value:

The "1" circle equals the 1990 value = 10.64 MJ/$GDP .

The center, the "0" sustainability objective, equals one-tenth of 1990 = Y = 1.06 MJ/$GDP.

Hence the 0 to 1 segment, the unit vector, equals 10.64 minus 1.06 = Z = 9.58 MJ/$GDP. 

Formula: (X - Y) ¸ Z.

Actual calculation of the vector:

(X - Y) ¸ Z Þ ( - 1.06 MJ/$GDP) divided by 9.58 MJ/$GDP = in 19 .

Optional vector calculation for 1990:

(X - Y) ¸ Z Þ ( - 1.06 MJ/$GDP) divided by 9.58 MJ/$GDP = in 1990.

Two examples:

Canada's energy productivity in 1995 was 16.39 MJ/$GNP, substantially lower than the 1990 global average of 10.64. Canada's vector value if therefore (16.39 minus 1.06) ¸ 9.58 = 1.600. To calculate how much more energy Canada consumed per dollar of economic output compared to the global average, divide 16.39 by 10.64 = 1.540, or 54% higher. 

Israel's energy productivity in 1995 was 6.12 MJ/$GNP, far better than the 1990 global average of 10.64. Israel's vector value is (6.12 minus 1.06) ¸ 9.58 = 0.528.

Vector:

• 1 : 1990 renewable energy as a fraction of world primary energy 
• 0 : 95% of country's primary energy consumption is renewable 

Global use of renewable energy is growing faster than the use of fossil fuels and electricity. Globally, windpower capacity is increasing by 25% per year. The use of photovoltaic cells-semiconductor devices that turn solar radiation directly into electricity-is expanding nearly as fast as windpower. Fossil fuels and nuclear power-heavily subsidised and politically favored for decades-still generate a large fraction (79.6%, according to Worldwatch data) of the world's electricity. Yet the market is changing, as is both political and popular support, and renewable costs are falling rapidly and therefore competitive without counting the multiple benefits of clean, environmentally superior power. India, Germany, and Denmark are now leading the world in installed windpower capacity. 

	World Net Generation of Electricity  by Type of Generation, 1996
	Billion kWh	Percent
Fossil fuel	8,035	62.0
Nuclear electric	2,28	17.6
Hydro-electric	2,526	19.5
Renewable electric ¨	119	0.9
Total	12,961	100.0

1. Total renewable energy consumption in 1990 = and in 19 = .

2. Total primary energy consumption in 1990 = and in 19 = .

3. Divide #1 by #2 to derive the renewable energy fraction = Y = .

Calculating the vector value:

The 1995 global renewable energy fraction of 8.64% equals the vector value of "1," and the sustainability goal of 95% renewable energy in each country is "0." The unit vector therefore equals 0.9500 minus 0.0864 = 0.8636, meaning that each renewable energy percentage point (0.01) equals 1.000 ÷ 0.8636 = 1.1579.

The center, the "0" sustainability objective, 95% renewable energy = X = 0.9500.

The "1" circle equals the 1990 (1997 prelim; get 1990 data) value = 8.64% renewable energy.

Country's renewable energy fraction this year = Y = .

Hence the 0 to 1 segment, the unit vector, equals 0.9500 minus 0.0864 = Z = 0.8636.

Since no country can have a value of less than zero percent renewable energy, the zero level of renewable energy consumption converts to a vector value of (0.950 - 0.000) ÷ 0.8636 = 1.1004.

Formula: (X - Y) ¸ Z.

Actual calculation of the vector:

(X - Y) ¸ Z Þ (0.9500 - ) divided by 0.8636 = in 1998.

Optional vector calculation for 1990:

(X - Y) ¸ Z Þ (0.9500 - ) divided by 0.8636 = in 1990.

Two examples:

Cameroon uses 278 PJ of total primary energy, of which 222 PJ is "renewable," principally biomass fuels in the residential and rural sectors. The renewable energy fraction is simply 222 PJ ÷ 278 PJ = 0.7986, or 79.86%. Cameroon's 1995 vector becomes the 0.950 (95.0%) target value minus Cameroon's renewable energy fraction of 0.7986 equals 0.950 - 0.7986 = 0.1514; divide 0.1514 by 0.8636 = 0.1753, a value quite close to the sustainability objective. 

Japan's primary energy production totaled 23.387 EJ in 1997. Renewable energy production totaled 1.001 EJ, yielding a renewable energy fraction of 0.0428, or 4.28%, which is well below the global average of 8.64%, the "1" vector value. Japan's vector value for 1997 equals 0.9500 minus Japan's renewable energy fraction of 0.0428 divided by 0.8636 = 0.9072 ÷ 0.8636 = 1.0504. 

Thirty-seven percent of Brazil's rural households have access to electric power. The vector is 1.000 - 0.370 = 0.630.