Executive summary
Energy efficiency is a central element of achieving carbon-neutral energy transitions. It also brings important co-benefits such as job creation, energy security, higher productivity, improved air quality, savings on energy bills, and improved comfort and wellbeing. Tracking efficiency progress is only possible with detailed data – at end-use level – and indicators that allow the disentangling of the effects of different energy consumption drivers (e.g. activity, structure and efficiency). Efficiency indicators serve many different purposes, for example in policy making, monitoring targets, making energy projections, developing scenarios and planning, and benchmarking. The collection of end-use data and the development of energy efficiency indicators is not a straightforward process for any country around the globe. It should be grounded on a robust and detailed data collection process and based on international methodologies in order to allow for comparability and interpretation across countries.

Schematic disaggregation of total final consumption into sectors and sub-sectors or end uses

While acknowledging that at a national level the indicators to be developed will depend on the country’s specific priorities, such as policy tracking, a number of efficiency indicators are typically highlighted internationally (e.g. the IEA Energy Efficiency Indicators Framework). Hence, achieving full coverage according to the roadmap represents a position where the efficiency indicators often seen in international frameworks or widely targeted by countries have been achieved. Of course, there is always room for further improvement and scope to develop more detailed indicators where there is the will, interest and resources to do so.

Framework for assessment of a country’s status in the development of energy efficiency indicators

To better understand this assessment framework, the example in the following figure shows the case for an imaginary country: “Statisland”. It assesses the country’s current stage and indicates the pathways for improved indicator coverage. In this case, Statisland is at the stage where the country has partial indicators for some sectors. Looking in closer detail, we can imagine that for the residential sector data are available for some end uses (space heating, water heating, cooking, and lighting and appliances are reported together), but not all. With regard to activity, data on population and occupied dwellings are available, but not residential floor area or appliance stocks. In the case of the transport sector, activity data are available for rail and air transport (pkm and tkm), but not for road or water transport. Similarly, for energy use, no data are available by segment or vehicle type. Statisland has data available on total consumption by mode from its national energy balances. The services sector is the sector with least coverage. Data on energy consumption by end use/sub-sector are not available, and for activity, services value added is only available as a total.

Finally, for industrial energy consumption a similar breakdown to the one from the energy balances is available, but there is no additional detail on specific industries such as rubber and plastics, or cement. As for activity data, information is available on value added with a similar breakdown by economic activity to that of energy, as well as physical production data for steel and cement. Once the starting point has been assessed for the country, in this case Statisland, the staff responsible for the enhancement of the indicators can identify gaps and set priorities. For instance, we can imagine that the cement sector is highly relevant for the country, but available data are not sufficient to monitor trends and facilitate efficiency in the industry. Therefore, Statisland officials can follow the path described in Chapter 4 to create the indicators needed.

Example of application of the assessment framework to the country of Statisland

Developing a roadmap for energy efficiency indicators at the national level Previous sections made the case for the importance of energy efficiency indicators for policy design and evaluation, energy projections and forecasting, benchmarking and efficiency tracking at large. Following an initial assessment of a country’s situation on energy efficiency indicators, and where it wants to get to according to its needs and priorities, this section proposes a work flow to help guide national statisticians and policy makers through this journey.

Roadmap implementation steps for the development of energy efficiency indicators

At present, most countries are able to develop energy balances (with varying levels of detail and accuracy). Because energy end-use data are not available in energy balances, additional efforts are needed to collect such data. The existence of sound national energy balances is not considered an absolute prerequisite for the development of energy efficiency indicators. Still, it is an important milestone and the existence of more aggregated data at the sectoral level very much facilitates the process. It is also important that the end-use data collected are consistent with more aggregated data from balances (this is further explained in the Check and Act sections of the roadmap implementation).

In addition to the NGER Act, the Australian government legislated to establish a mandatory reporting programme for petroleum sector data. From 2018 onwards this mandatory programme replaced the voluntary survey conducted to collect monthly Australian petroleum data. DCCEEW is responsible for administering mandatory reporting of petroleum sector data. The Department of Industry, Science and Resources (DISR) is in charge of publishing the Resources and Energy Quarterly report, which covers forecast and historical statistics on energy commodity production and trade; DCCEEW is in charge of administering programmes and legislation related to energy use and energy efficiency, which also collect data (e.g. on appliances, equipment, buildings and energy use). There is no additional funding or specific resources allocated to energy efficiency indicators. Several other Australian government agencies collect energy data according to legislation and make data available either through data sharing agreements or in publications, such as CER, or via the ABS. The CER collects energy data and makes them available to DCCEEW through a memorandum of understanding. These data are an important input when compiling: the AES, the national GHG inventory, projections and reporting under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Kyoto Protocol and Paris Agreement, etc.

Annex XIII: Results from the Menti survey Of the 11 countries listed in the annexes above, one has only provided written responses (without interview) and hence no Menti responses were collected for it, and for another country the Menti was not run due to time constraints. The Menti results shown below refer to the remaining nine countries in total. What drove the development of energy efficiency indicators in your country (more than one answer is possible)? We can see from the figure below that most countries/territories identify national policy design and tracking efficiency progress in general as the main drivers for the development of energy efficiency indicators. Despite international reporting also playing an important role, none of the respondents identified international policy monitoring a key factor.

Most countries do have some type of regulatory framework for statistical data collection; most of the existing frameworks have specific provisions for energy, but in most cases energy efficiency indicators or end-use data are not specified. This may relate to the fact that energy efficiency is a more recent concern in political agendas than other energy topics, such as access or security. How important (0-10) is the existence of a regulatory framework enabling the collection of end-use data?

Despite most countries considering the existence of a regulatory framework as important, a minority does not think it is relevant because their system works well on an informal basis. Who is/could be in charge of energy end-use and efficiency indicators in your country?

Despite the relatively even distribution of responsibilities among different types of national institutions, energy ministries seem to be the most common entity in charge of developing energy efficiency indicators at a national level. Statistical offices also play an important role either directly or indirectly, and certainly energy efficiency agencies have also been responsible for energy efficiency indicator work in many countries.

Source:http://IEA