Fast growing countries: energy demand,technology and social change
Joyashree Roy
Bangabandhu Chair Professor
Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand
February, 13, 2020
@ALPS International Symposium, Tokyo
Organised by RITE

Outline• Fast Growing Economies• Two countries–India–Bangladesh• Demand, Technology and Policy• Social ChangeGDP: the dominant progress indicator
GEA 2012
showed how
GDP and Wellbeing
Indicators
diverge forhigh incomecountries

Fast growing economy• GDP of an economy growing at an average
7-10 % annually.
• Bangladesh now growing at ~7% targets 810% annual growth until 2041.
• India was growing at ~7% during last twodecades• China, Singapore, South Korea & Malaysia
were growing at 7-10% over last four decadesof last century

India’s emission status
Total emission~3002 million ktCO2eq(as in 2012)

Per capita emission (Totalemission/ Population)

2.37 tCO2eq(as in 2012)

Share in global emission

5. 61%(as in 2012)

Share in global population

17.86%(as in 2012)17.81%(as in 2018)

Source: World bank (2019)

FACTORS THAT HAVE HELPED INDIA TO
KEEP ON A LOW EMISSION TRAJECTORY

Structural advantage
Agriculture
Industry
Electricity, Gasand Water
SupplyConstruction

16%
19%

200960%Share in GDP

1%4%

ServicesIndian manufacturing industries werethe leaders in EE

Based on Annual Survey of Industries, India 1973-74 – 2010-11
Dasgupta and Roy (2017)

What industries have been doing?

Exportability

ConsumerdemandPrice consideration

Influence of policy
pathwaysCompetitiveness1. Driving forces behind undertaking actions

2. Emission reduction steps
Recycling (water, metal, dust, blending of inferior raw
materials, putting back scrap materials to the furnace, using of
rejected pipes and slags in the plants again)
Source: Chakraborty & Roy 2012

Energy Conservation Awards (since 1991)
Participation (voluntary) increased from 123 units in 1999 to 773 in 2012Investment energy conservation in 2012 = INR. 1948 Crores
Monetary saving achieved in 2013 = INR. 2886 Crores in 2013
A payback period of 8 months

Electrical energy saving in terms of equivalent avoided Capacity in MW
Bureau of Energy Efficiency, Government of India, 2014

Initiatives ranged from low to high cost•achieving near‐zero emission intensity levels in the industry sector
would require additional realization of long‐term step‐change
options and these options are associated with higher cost

Source: IPCC 2014. Roy,Dasgupta, Chakraborti (2017)

Behavioural Response
Inter-factor substitutability of inputs and own price elasticity of energy input
Factors

1973-74 to 201011

1973-74 to 1985-86

1986-87 to 1999-00

2000-01 to 201011

Capital- Labour

Complement

SubstituteComplement

Substitute

Capital - Material

SubstituteSubstituteSubstituteComplement

Capital-Energy

SubstituteSubstituteComplement

SubstituteLabour- Material

SubstituteSubstituteSubstituteSubstituteLabour- EnergySubstituteSubstituteSubstituteSubstituteMaterial- Energy
Own priceelasticity ofenergy

SubstituteSubstituteSubstituteSubstitute

-0.22

-0.60

-0.74

-1.22

 Technological progress evolved to substitute energy input, especially by material inputs

 But, this along with a technological bias towards material input seeks attention
 Own price elasticity of energy input is negative with an increasing magnitude
 Price based intervention is expected to be effective to pull down the energy use further with far
reaching implications towards reduction of emission as well.

Dasgupta and Roy 2015, Energy Policy , 83, 1-13

Roy, Ganguli, Chakravorti (2016)

WBGT: Human workability locus

GCP-JUAS ON 2015: NO WORK ZONE

• KOLKATA: 357 DAYS
• DELHI: 343 DAYS
• MUMBAI: 362 DAYS
• CHENNAI: 345 DAYS

Levels and cost of Adaptation
20000

no adaptation
cost of clothing

10000
cost of shadecost of providing indoor
work space

5000

cost of providing AC
007142128
354249
56
63
70
77
84
91
98(0,0) is thepoint ofinaction

Cost of Adaptation in Rs.

15000

Productivity

1122kWh6%
8%

326.83 GW

1.36 Kwh

16 GW

Total Installed Capacity (GW)Per capita Consumption (kWh)Source: Various issues of Annual Report of Central Electricity Authority

Per-capita consumption (kWh)Total installed capacity (GW)

Sector that needs special attention is: power sector

Fuel mix in installed capacity, as on March 2017

Gas
8%

Nuclear
2%

SHP
1%

Hydro
14%
Wind
10%

RES
17%

Biomass
2%

Coal
59%
Solar
4%

Source: CEA, 2017

Share of different fuel and technology in generationin 2017

Capacity expansion

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%20%
10%0%CoalGasHydro

Installed capacity as on March 2016
Capacity addition during 2017-2022
Source: CEA, 2016

NuclearSolar

Wind

Other Res

Capacity addition during 2016-17

Share of different fuel and technology in generation
NDC Scenario in 2050

Bangladesh fast-growing in thisdecade: what are the takeaways
Economic Growth 6-10% aspiration till 2041
Energy Consumption Growth ~ same
The energy efficiency story : technology, policy, market,
investment is missing (much remains to be done )However, social sector has been doing very well overpast decade

How are the social indices?
Birth per woman% of population

Poverty Rate
60504030201001995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

Fertility Rate
5432101990

1995

2000

100
8060
40
202000

2005

Year

2015

2020

2015

2020

Maternal Mortality Ratio

120

2010

2015

2020

Per 100,000 live
Birthper 1000 live birth

Infant Mortality Rate

1995

2010

Year

Year

01990

2005

600
500
400
300
200
10001990

1995

2000

2005

2010

Year

(WB, 2019)

Bangladesh’s emission status
Total emission~183 million ktCO2eq(as in 2012)

Per capita emission (Total 1.21 tCO2eq
emission/ Population)(as in 2012)
Share in global emission
Population share

Source: World bank (2019)0.34%(as in 2012)2.13%(as in 2012)2.27%(as in 2018)

Energy mix: Other Asian countries
economies
China Energy Mix

100.00%

Malaysia Energy Mix

100.00%80.00%
72.50%

76.83%

87.03%

74.68%

73.45%

63.59%

60.42%

40.00%

20.00%

20.00%
8.44%
1965
Oil

21.93%

17.12%

18.34%

1975

1985

1995

Gas

Coal

Nuclear18.57%

19.05%

19.42%

2005

2015

2017

Hydro

24.29%

29.23%

29.16%

65.26%
50.21%

OilGas1985
Coal

Nuclear41.88%

36.96%

42.04%

37.89%

36.99%

20052010

2017

88.88%
65.55%

57.11%

1995
Hydro

Gas

1975
Coal

1985
Nuclear

1995
Hydro

Other Renewables

Singapore Energy Mix

48.45%

42.42%

43.69%

2005

2010

2017

20.28%
1975

93.96%

Oil

77.22%

1965

46.12%

1965

Other Renewables

18.69%
41.33%

63.07%

33.94%

0.00%

S Korea Energy Mix
35.26%

26.65%

60.00%

40.00%

100.00%90.00%
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%

5.05%

80.00%

60.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Other Renewables

100.00%90.00%
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

3.66%

99.90%

99.98%

99.91%

96.13%

196519751985

1995

OilGas

Coal

NuclearHydro

11.27%

10.45%

12.22%

88.48%

89.34%

87.03%

2005

2010

2017

Other Renewables

10Bangladesh vis-vis others in the region
70000

Energy Use Per GDP

GDP per Capita

60000

1600
1400

ktoe/M USD

Current USD

50000
40000
30000
20000

1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
1960

10000

1970

1980

1990

01965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Year
Bangladesh

China

Korea, Rep.

Bangladesh
Malaysia

200020102020

Year
China

Korea, Rep.

Malaysia

Singapore

SingaporeBangladesh Energy Mix
100.00%90.00%
80.00%
70.00%

29.28%

53.67%

60.00%

67.45%

70.99%

50.00%

71.39%

69.30%

40.00%
30.00%

59.39%
41.09%

20.00%

29.70%

24.95%

20.50%

22.69%

1985

1994

2005

2015

2017

Coal

Nuclear10.00%
0.00%
1975
OilGasHydro

Other Renewables

11

Dimension

1990

2000

2015

Overall

0.45780.4424Social

0.40820.4724

Economic

0.40800.41880.3687

Environment

0.69180.63500.5297

PCA results: Bangladesh, Althoughsocial sustainability in increasing.
Unsustainable in both economic &environmental dimension.

0.8

Composite Sustainability Index

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.40.3
1990

1995

2000
OverallSocial

2005
Economic2010
Environment

2015

2020

31

Challenges can be seen as opportunity: case of Bangladesh• To meet reliable supply of electricity alongwith space cooling demand increase• What can be the leapfrog technologicalsolution• To solve trilemma of Just transition, Increasing
demand and nationwide ready infrastructureand skilled human resource in gas sector

IIn Hindu Kush Himalaya Region Challenges and Opportunities are there

EnergyPoverty
500 GW

80% rural

population inhydroHKH countries
potential =lacks access toenergy forclean energy
half a billion
for cooking
homes
Energy development policy in theHKH too strongly focused on supply
and growth—and not yet on
sustainability, despite region’s huge
potential for renewables.
Regional energy cooperation is
critical to achieve both rapid
development and energy selfsufficiency.

HIMAP, 2019

Key Issue
Inequalities of multiple kinds a barrier to(among many things) sustainable
development and political participation.
(world social sciences report 2016)
In reality going forward globally some will
deliver absolute decoupling while others willcontinue with relative decoupling?

Need some clear goal
• In sustainable development context• Income growth vs. Wellbeing growth for all?
• Wellbeing growth is widely accepted goal
(GEA, Stiglitz, Dasgupta, Arrow,…..) which does
not see monotonically increasing income as anecessary condition.
• Energy demand Implications remains to beseen

Thank you

Acknowledgement
Bangabandhu Chair Researcher @AIT, Thailand
andGlobal Change Programme Research Team
Jadavpur University, India