Energy and Emissions Matrix
Project: Supply of Instruments for Evaluating the Emission of the Greenhouse Effect Gases Coupled to the Energy Matrix - Final Report - Executive Summary
Energy Emissions Matrix
The use of the coefficients adopted in the elaboration of the Brazilian communication concerning the emissions inventory permits to transform the final energy consumption data into emissions of greenhouse effect gases. By applying the coefficients adopted in 1999 for each sector, the following consolidated table of projected emissions was obtained:
Emission by Energy Source and by Sector
a) CO2 Emissions
CO2 Projected Emissions in Gg/year
(*) Non-accounted for values because they result from the use of biomass (renewable)
Results are shown in graphic of Figure 23.
Figure 23: CO2 emissions due to final energy use (historical and projected) in Gg/year. The “punched” values correspond to non-accounted for emissions due to biomass (renewable)
b) CO Emissions
CO Projected Emissions in Gg/year
(*)Non-accounted for values because they result from the use of biomass (renewable)
CO emissions, historical and projected, are shown in Figure 24.
Figure 24: Historical and Projected CO emissions. The “punched” values correspond to non-accounted for emissions due to biomass (renewable)
c) CH4 Emissions
CH4 Projected Emissions in Gg/year
In Figure 25 we show the evolution of emissions, historical and projected, of methane, due to the final use of energy.
Figure 25: CH4 emissions due to the final use of energy.
d) NOx Emissions
NOx Projected Emissions in Gg/year
Values for NOx emissions are presented in Figure 26.
Figure 26: NOx historical and projected emissions.
e) N2O Emissions
N2O Projected Emissions in Gg/year
The values N2O emissions are presented in Figure 27.
f) NMVOCs Emissions
NMVOCS Projected Emissions in Gg/year
Figure 28 shows the historical and projected results of emissions of other hydrocarbons, excluding methane.
Figure 28: NMVOCs emissions due to the final use of energy, historical and projected values
Emissions by Sector
When we focus our attention on the gas that is most relevant for the calculation of the greenhouse effect, CO2, we can verify the evolution of contribution to this effect of the different sectors. We observe that the transport and industrial sectors predominate in the CO2 emission. In Figure 29 we show the evolution of the emission of this gas in the period from 1970 to 2020, resulting from the final energy consumption. The renewable fuels are not included since they must not be accounted for in what concerns the greenhouse effect.
In Figure 30 we show the contribution of the sectors taking into account the indirect emissions from electricity generation. These indirect emissions are becoming more relevant since it is foreseen a non-negligible participation of thermal power plants using gas for electricity generation.
Figure 29: CO2 emissions without renewable sources
Figure 30: CO2 emissions without renewable sources and including those from electricity generation
In Figure 31 we show separately the emissions due to final consumption of energy without renewable sources, the non-accounted for emissions due to the use of renewable sources and the emissions resulting from electrical energy production. These emissions, in the graphic of Figure 5 ,were distributed among the sectors according to their electricity consumption.
The CO2 emission by GDP unit supplies an interesting measure for evaluating the evolution of emissions.
Figure 32: CO2 emissions by sector by GDP unit .
In Figures 32 and 33 we can observe the contribution of the GDP growth to the emissions of each sector. It is simply the division of the data shown in the graphics 30 and 31 by the global GDP. The effect can be observed, in the transport sector of the alcohol program, since it decreases the emission during the period of the petroleum crises. The trend to growth in some sectors at the end of the period is under the influence of using thermal plants, of the increase of energy intensity already previously mentioned and of the reduced use of biomass.
The petroleum crisis has reduced the CO2 emissions by GDP unit because of the use of renewable sources. The trending behavior that oriented the present run of the Energy Matrix means a considerable increase in the CO2 emission by product unit. The observed trend in the nineties would continue in the two decades to follow it.
Brazil does not have an Energy Matrix that expresses the National Energy Policy. The Country does not have a long term Economical Planning. The best approximation to that was the work carried out by the former Secretariat of Strategic Matters SAE/PR for which the first version of our macroeconomic model was developed.
The present work cannot itself represent this expression of National Will, for which it is necessary a consensus mechanism that should be able as well to go beyond one government administration.
What we present here is a mechanism for creating this consensus and the values found should be considered, in the economic part, as the possible economic growth in the present situation and assuming the resuming of internal saving and a moderate remuneration for the external capital (real 4.3% annually). In the energy part the results should be considered as resulting from the presented economic scenario and the continuation of the presently adopted - not explicitly - energy policy. Namely: introduction of natural gas both for direct use or thermoelectric generation; small participation of alcohol vehicles in the market and maintenance of the gasoline mixture policy; decreasing biomass use, as historically observed, while preserving some specific niches and conservation policy that incorporates the already available technologies.
This implicit policy - whose boundaries can be seen in different ways - practically substitutes a more explicit energy policy. However, it does not prevent one to fall into "market traps" that may induce long term decisions based on short term prices. This is aggravated when the Government - directly or indirectly - guarantees profits which exempts the investor from a correct evaluation of future risks.
There is no responsible country without an energy policy that takes into account the strategic aspects of this input. Countries capable of projecting external force, like the United States, have opted for political and military actions that guarantee the external supply of petroleum. They are also concerned about their strategic reserves. One of the first preoccupation of the W. Bush administration was to order to a high level commission to carry out a study about the energy future of the United States.
At the same time, countries with less influence have opted for paying an over price through measures that induce conservation. Some examples are: the high price of liquid fuels for the European consumer - with taxes that form a "cushion" that absorbs external variations - and the nuclear option adopted by France, Japan and South Korea. Option against nuclear, like that of Germany and Sweden, is also an attitude concerning policy.
The results of the present "run" of the energy and emission matrix for an average growth of 3.0% of the GDP indicated an average annual growth of 3.9% for electricity, 2.9% for mineral coal and its products and 3.4% for petroleum products and natural gas. The use of natural gas would grow 8.75 annually and that of biomass only .3% annually.
The CO2 emissions, the main gas that causes the greenhouse effect and a new strategic aspect to be considered, would grow about 3.4%. Considering the CO2 from electricity generation, instead of 0.5 kg of CO2 emission per dollar (values of 1994) of the GDP, in 1999 one would have almost 0.6 kg of CO2/US$(1994). At the end of the eighties, this factor was slightly above 0.4 kg CO2/US$(1994) when the petroleum substitution policy produced its maximum effect. The scenario presented here could be considered as an inertial scenario in what concerns CO2 emission for the purpose of alternative policies.
Finally we should point out that the methodology permits with relative ease to study alternative scenarios for economic growth and energy use.
(*) Part of the economic analysis of the present work is included in the PhD Thesis of Aumara Feu in the Economy Department of the Brasilia University.
Graphic Edition/Edição Gráfica:
Tuesday, 11 November 2008.