|  |
Energy Efficiency Trends in Canada, 1990 to 2003
Chapter 2. Total End-Use Sector
Definition: The total end-use sector refers to an aggregation of the following five end-use sectors: residential, commercial/institutional, industrial, transportation and agriculture.
| Between 1990 and 2003, secondary energy use – the energy that Canadians use to heat and cool their homes and workplaces and to operate their appliances, vehicles and factories – increased 22 percent, from 6950.8 to 8457.3 petajoules (PJ). As a result, secondary energy-related GHGs (including GHGs related to electricity) increased 23 percent, from 407.9 to 501.8 Mt. |
One petajoule is the amount of energy consumed by a small town of about 3700 people in a year for all uses, from housing and transportation to local services and industry. |
As Figure 2.1 indicates,if there had not been significant ongoing improvements in energy efficiency in all end-use sectors, secondary energy use would have been 13 percent higher in 2003 than it actually was. These energy savings of 883.3 PJ are roughly equivalent to 84 percent of the energy used by all cars and light trucks in passenger transportation.
Figure 2.1 Secondary Energy Use, With and Without Energy Efficiency Improvements, 1990-2003 (index 1990 = 1.0)
Figure 2.2 indicates that the following influenced the change in energy use and related GHGs:
- a 35 percent increase in activity (comprising commercial/institutional and residential floor space, number of households, passenger- and tonne-kilometres, industrial gross output, physical production and gross domestic product [GDP]) resulted in a 2356.5 PJ increase in energy and a corresponding 136.7 Mt increase in GHG emissions;
- the winter of 2003, which was 5 percent colder than the winter of 1990, and the summer, which was 24 percent warmer, led to a 71.3 PJ increase in secondary energy demand and a resulting 4.0 Mt increase in GHG emissions;
- changes in the structure of most sectors in the economy increased energy use; however, these increases were completely offset by a shift in the industrial sector towards industries that are less energy intensive – the net result was savings of 148.2 PJ and reductions in GHG emissions of 4.6 Mt;
- changes in the auxiliary equipment service level (i.e.increased use of computers, printers and photocopiers in the commercial/institutional sector) raised energy use by 70.9 PJ and increased corresponding GHG emissions by 4.2 Mt; and
- improvements in energy efficiency saved 883.3 PJ of energy and 52.3 Mt of GHG emissions.
Figure 2.2 Impact of Activity, Weather, Structure, Service Level and Energy Efficiency on Energy Use, 1990-2003 (petajoules)
| Overall, when GHGs related to electricity production are included, increased secondary energy use resulted in increased GHG emissions. The GHG intensity of the energy changed little over the period as fuel switching towards less GHG-intensive fuels offset a higher GHG intensity in electricity production. As Figure 2.3 shows, GHG emissions from secondary energy use were 23 percent, or 93.9 Mt, higher in 2003 than in 1990. |
The emissions of one tonne of carbon dioxide (CO2) would fill the volume of two average-sized houses in Canada – meaning that one megatonne would fill about 2 million average-sized houses. |
Figure 2.3 Influence of Secondary Energy Use and GHG Intensity on the Change GHG Emissions, Including Electricity-Related GHG Emissions, 1990-2003 (megatonnes of CO2 equivalent)
When electricity-related GHG emissions are excluded, GHG emissions from secondary energy use rose by 19 percent, or 60.7 Mt (Figure 2.4). A 2 percent decrease in the GHG intensity of energy was the result of a relative increase in the consumption of biomass and natural gas and a decline in the use of heavy fuel oil, coke and coke oven gas.
Figure 2.4 Influence of Secondary Energy Use and GHG Intensity on the Change GHG Emissions, Excluding Electricity-Related GHG Emissions, 1990-2003 (megatonnes of CO2 equivalent)
Figures 2.5, 2.6 and 2.7 show how the increase in energy use and GHG emissions 1990 and 2003 (megatonnes of CO2 equivalent) between 1990 and 2003 was distributed across all end-use sectors of the economy. The increase is to be expected, given the substantial growth of activity (GDP, floor space, etc.) in the various sectors.
Figure 2.5 Energy Use by Sector, 1990 and 2003 (petajoules)
Figure 2.6 GHG Emissions, Including Electricity-Related Emissions, by Sector, 1990 and 2003 (megatonnes of CO2 equivalent)
Figure 2.7 GHG Emissions, Excluding Electricity-Related Emissions, by Sector, 1990 and 2002 (megatonnes of CO2 equivalent)
The following chapters describe how changes in activity, weather, structure, service level and energy efficiency influenced changes in energy use, as well as how energy use and the GHG intensity of fuels affected changes in energy-related GHG emissions for each end-use sector.
The OEE Energy Efficiency Index
|
In this report, the impact of energy efficiency on energy consumption is estimated for the residential, commercial/institutional, industrial¹ and transportation sectors over the 1990-2003 period. These variations in energy efficiency are aggregated into a single index of energy efficiency for Canada,which is called the OEE Energy Efficiency Index.
|
Over the 1990-2003 period, the Index presented in Figure 2.8 trended upward, growing by about 1 percent per year. As a result, energy efficiency improved by 13 percent over the period. This translates into energy savings of 883.3 PJ and GHG savings of 52.3 Mt in 2003. A flattening of the index between 2001 and 2003 is mainly due to the industrial sector, where energy efficiency improvements were checked by increases in energy intensity in some industries, fuel switching and lower levels of capacity utilization.
|
Figure 2.8 The OEE Energy Efficiency Index, 1990-2003 (index 1990 = 1.0)
|
|
The OEE Energy Efficiency Index provides a better estimate of changes in energy efficiency than the commonly used ratio of energy use per unit of GDP (energy intensity). This ratio captures not only changes in energy efficiency, but also other factors such as weather variations and changes in the structure of the economy. Figure 2.9 illustrates the differences between the two indices. The energy efficiency effect is the mirror image of the OEE Index presented in Figure 2.8; the line was transposed so it can be more easily compared to the index for energy intensity.
|
Figure 2.9 Changes in Energy Intensity and the Energy Efficiency Effect, 1990-2003 (index 1990 = 1.0)
|
|
As illustrated in Figure 2.9, intensity underestimates the efficiency effect in Canada in the early 1990s and overestimates its impact in the latter part of the period. Before 1998, intensity improvements appear to be modest because colder weather (1992-1997) and a shift towards more energy-intensive industries (1990-1993) masked energy efficiency progress. In 2000, the intensity index dipped below the index for the energy efficiency effect. A switch to less energy-intensive industries, which began in the mid-1990s, combined with energy efficiency improvements accelerated the observed decline in energy intensity.
|
¹ In the industrial sector, NAICS-based data for some industries are not available from Statistics Canada between 1991 and 1994. For these years, the energy efficiency effect was estimated using analysis (data was based on the Standard Industrial Classification System) from the 2000 report to calculate growth rates, which were then applied to the 1995 data point to backcast missing years. These results were calibrated to NAICS-based activity and intensity data.
|
|
OEE Home
