French Agency for Environment & Energy Management

Dutch Agency for Innovation & Sustainable Development

General Directorate for Energy ResourcesSurveys & Development Administration

Energy savings potential Energy savings potential assessment in Turkeyassessment in Turkey

Dr Didier BOSSEBOEUF Dr Didier BOSSEBOEUF (ADEME)(ADEME)

Erol YALErol YALÇÇIN, Ersoy METIN, Ersoy METİİN N (E(EİİE)E)

OUTLINE

OBJECTIVES : why do we need an energy saving potential potential assessment?

METHODOLOGIESEnergy efficiency indicatorsSurveys on energy consumption and technologiesThe MED-PRO model : a summary description

RESULTSEnergy efficiency trends in TurkeyThe alternative scenario to 2030

CONCLUSION

MAIN OBJECTIVESMAIN OBJECTIVES

To monitor and evaluate energy efficiency trends, energy savings potential and performed a energy demand forecast at detailed levels by end- uses sectors (industry, building, transport etc.) through the use of appropriate methodologies

To enhance the domestic capacity building for developing, carrying out, interpretating and disseminating the monitoring of energy efficiency

DEFINITION OF ENERGY SAVING DEFINITION OF ENERGY SAVING POTENTIALPOTENTIAL

Estimate of the additional energy saving stock (reserves) realizable for a given periodTechnical versus economic potential (exploitation rate)Static or dynamic potentialThe adoption of efficient technologies or practices decrease the potential, the R&D increases it as well the economic growth

WHY DO WE NEED AN ENERGY SAVING POTENTIAL ASSESSMENT?

For target settingFor action plan and policies designFor monitoring energy efficiency

HOW CAN WE ASSESS HOW CAN WE ASSESS THE ENERGY SAVING POTENTIAL ?THE ENERGY SAVING POTENTIAL ?

Three main methodologies ; Benchmarking through energy efficiency indicators (macro analysis) at sectoral and end-uses levelTechnologies characterization and penetration relying on field surveys and audits (micro analysis) Comparison between a reference scenario and a scenario with EE measure using techno-economic modelling (MEDPRO)

These 3 methods are chained and should be coherentThey are based on a similar basic methodological framework called «bottom-up or techno-economic approach »

THE DEVELOPMENT OF A THE DEVELOPMENT OF A TECHNOTECHNO--ECONOMIC DATA BASEECONOMIC DATA BASE

These 3 mains steps are chained through the data collection and the interpretation of the results

Development of an energy demand techno-economic data base

IN INDUSTRY, THE BEST WORLD PRACTICES IN INDUSTRY, THE BEST WORLD PRACTICES ARE NO LONGER FOUND IN THE MOST ARE NO LONGER FOUND IN THE MOST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES DEVELOPED COUNTRIES

Average energy consumption per ton of steel (2004)

USA

BrazilRussia

EU

Egypt

Japan

Thailand

ChinaIndia

Taiwan Mexico

Turkey

Korea

Ukraine

AustraliaArgentina

Canada

South Africa

0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

0,8

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

% electric steel

toe/

t

World benchmarkDistance to benchmark: energy savings potential

Comparison should be made at similar process mix

Source: Enerdata

COMPARISON OF SPECIFIC CONSUMPTION IN COMPARISON OF SPECIFIC CONSUMPTION IN CEMENT INDUSTRY BY BENCHMARKINGCEMENT INDUSTRY BY BENCHMARKING

3,92

3,57

3,48

4,39

3,58

3,99

0,00

3,61

4,23

4,11

3,57 3,

844,

353,

883,

92 4,03

0,00

3,89

4,48

4,34

3,90 4,

223,

784,

594,

013,

58 3,66

0,00

3,86

4,30

3,92

0,00

3,66 3,78

0,00

3,48 3,53 3,66

0,00

0,00

6,00

Ç1

Ç2

Ç3

Ç4

Ç5

Ç6

Ç7

Ç8

Ç9

Ç10

Ç11

Ç12

Ç13

Ç14

Ç15

Ç16

Ç17

Ç18

Ç19

Ç20

Ç21

Ç22

Ç23

Ç24

Ç25

Ç26

Ç27

Ç28

Ç29

Ç30

Ç31

Ç32

Ç33

Ç34

Ç35

Ç36

Ç37

Ç38

Ç39

GJ/

ton

cem

ent

3,83

Energy Saving Potential

THE POTENTIAL CAN BE ESTIMATED THE POTENTIAL CAN BE ESTIMATED IN COMPARING SCENARIOSIN COMPARING SCENARIOS

Impacts of energy savings on final energy consumption

0

50

100

150

200

2000 2005 2013 2020 2030

M to

e

Reference scenario Energy efficiency scenario

1. The benchmark approach 1. The benchmark approach through the use of indicatorsthrough the use of indicators

ENERGY EFFICIENCY INDICATORSENERGY EFFICIENCY INDICATORS

-- PURPOSEPURPOSE--

to monitor the targets determined at national and to monitor the targets determined at national and internationalinternationalto evaluate the energy efficiency programsto evaluate the energy efficiency programsto make action plansto make action plansto provide data for Modelsto provide data for ModelsInternational comparison International comparison

50 EE and C02 indicators 50 EE and C02 indicators Approximately 750 time series in the data bank

ENERGY EFFICIENCY INDICATORS ENERGY EFFICIENCY INDICATORS

Energy/ CO2 intensities, that relate the energy used in the economy or a sector to macro-economic variables (GDP, value added, …)Unit consumption and emission, that relate the energy consumption to activity or equipment)Adjusted intensities to allow the comparison of indicators (adjustments for differences in climate, general price level with power purchasing parities, fuel mix, industry and economic structure…)Benchmark unit consumption to compare each country with reference values (best country values within the EU, best 3 values, best plant, most efficient buildings )Energy efficiency indices (ODEX indicators) /energy savings by sector and for the whole economy

VARIATION OF PRIMARY AND FINAL ENERGY INTENSITIES IN EU-15 COUNTRİES (1990-2004)

Decreasing energy intensities

-2%

-1%

0%

1%

%/y

ear

Net

h erl

ands

EU

15

Bel

gium

Ger

man

y

UK

Swed

en

Fran

ce

Gre

ece

Ital

y

Spai

n

Tur

key

primary final

Primary intensity decreases more than final intensity (or increase less ) reduction of losses in energy transformations

at normal climate

COMPARISON OF UNIT ENERGY CONSUMPTION FOR CLINKER : TURKEY VERSUS EU (2004)

00.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.09

0.10.110.12

Turk

ey(a

vera

ge)

Turk

ey(b

est

prac

tice) UK

Por

tuga

l

Bel

gium

Fran

ce

Ger

man

y

Italy

toe/

ton

Turkey (average) Turkey (best practice) UKPortugal Belgium FranceGermany Italy

World best world practice

UNIT CONSUMPTION PER HOUSEHOLD

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

toe/

dwel

ling

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

kWh/

dwel

ling

total total (normal climate) heating (normal climate) electricity

UNIT ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION PER HOUSEHOLD FOR ELECTRICAL APPLIANCES AND LIGHTING

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Tur

key

Ger

man

y

Italy

Fra

nce

EU

-15

Spa

in

Gre

ece

UK

kWh/

dwel

ling

1990 2004

UNIT CONSUMPTION PER EMPLOYEE IN SERVICE SECTOR

0,0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1,0

1,2

1,4

1,6

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

toe/

em

ploy

ee

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

kWh/

empl

oyee

totalelectricity

2. The micro2. The micro--economic approach economic approach using on using on -- field surveys and field surveys and audits audits

THE ENERGY CONSUMPTION SURVEY FOR HOUSEHOLD

Adapted questionnaire (Survey for 500 on-site visits in dwelling with measurements in 4 cities will be done).

Energy consumption for households and transport by fuels,end-uses and appliances

Thermal performances of the envelop (level of insulations penetration of double glazing, windows to wall ratio etc.)

SURVEYS IN INDUSTRY

Questionaire design, post-mailing and internet, data checking and first analysis to determine the energy savings potential in the sugar (32), glass (9), textile and paper (37) industries.

On-site visits aiming at : characterising the technologies (age, performance, maintenance, monitoring etc), assessing the penetration rate and the investment strategy in 3 textile companies and 2 paper companies.

3. Comparison of long term energy Comparison of long term energy demand scenarios using demand scenarios using technicotechnico--economic modelling.economic modelling.

MED MED -- PROPRO

A decision-supporting tool to address medium and long term energy planning issues and related energy efficiency and GHG mitigation issues

Sectoral/end-use model, for energy demand, load forecast and green house gases

Relevant for impact evaluation of energy efficiency and CO2 abatement strategies and measures

MEDMED--PRO: a summary descriptionPRO: a summary description

The goal of the project is to deliver methodology and tools to analyse energy policy issues.

Preliminary outputs of the model built with expert from EIE and ENERDATA.

Further work has to be done by EIE in coordination with an enlarged community of Turkish experts.

INSTITUTIONS MADE COOPERATION INSTITUTIONS MADE COOPERATION WITH DURING PROJECTWITH DURING PROJECT

MENRSPOTURKSTATTEDASDG of PETROLEUM AFFAIRSDG of HIGHWAYSTCDDTURKISH HARDCOAL INSTITUTIONSBOTASIRON-STEEL PRODUCER ASSOCIATIONTURKISH CEMENT MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION PULP AND PAPER PRODUCER ASSOCIATIONTURKISH SISECAM FACTORIES

MEDMED--PRO DATA REQUIREMENTSPRO DATA REQUIREMENTS

Energy balances and sectoral energy consumption accounts

Indicators for socio-economic needs and production activities are part of usual statistics

Data on specific energy requirements are in technical documentation or provided by surveys

MAIN DRIVERSMAIN DRIVERS

GDPPopulationProduction in industriesBuildings constructionBehaviours (heating, etc.)Trends in transport

In the framework of the Twinning project, European experts have complemented the set of socio economic indicators, in consistency with observations and experience gained in works done in similar countries.

REFERENCE SCENARIO

Projections for 2013, 2020, 2030Final consumption : x 3.8Transport, comm. sector : main driversGas and electricity : growing demandEnergy demand = 2 toe/capitaCO2 emissions : from 0.7 to 2.3 tC/capitaDrivers : welfare and economic growth

REFERENCE SCENARIO

MAIN ASSUMPTIONS:GDP & Population

0

200

400

600

800

2000 2005 2013 2020 2030

GDP

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

mill

ions

inh.

GDP (GTL2000) Population

TRENDS : FINAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION

020406080

100120140160180200

2000 2005 2013 2020 2030

Mto

e

Industry Residential Tertiairy Transport Other

CO2 EMISSIONS (Excl. Elec. Prod.)

- 50.00

100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00 300.00 350.00 400.00 450.00

2000 2005 2013 2020 2030

MtC

O2

Industry Households Com. Sector Transport

ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO: ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO: ENERGY EFFICIENCY POTENTIALSENERGY EFFICIENCY POTENTIALS

Industry:Benchmarking with Turkish plantsBest practices in Europe

Buildings:2000 building codes

70 kWh/m2 as unit consumption target40% of existing buildings to be retrofitted

Progress in electrical appliances (EU targets)

Transport:technological progress (EU targets for road vehicles)

COMPARISON BETWEEN TWO SCENARIOS

Impacts of energy savings on final energy consumption

0

50

100

150

200

2000 2005 2013 2020 2030

M to

e

Reference scenario Energy efficiency scenario

TRENDS : SUB-SECTORS ENERGY CONSUMPTION

Energy consumption in industry (by sector)

0.02.04.06.08.0

10.012.014.0

2000 2005 2013 2020 2030

Mto

e

food textýle chemýcals metal-eqpt mýnerals paper-pulp

TRENDS : SUB-SECTORS ENERGY CONSUMPTION

Energy consumption in households (by sector)

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

2000 2005 2013 2020 2030

Mto

e

Space heating Hot water Cooking Elec specif., air cond

DIFFICULTIESDIFFICULTIESMedMed--ProPro

Energy statistics to be improved:Transport: stock of vehicles, consistency with en. balanceBuildings: stock of building, specific energy consumption, commercial buildings.

EE policies impact assessment to be improved:List of actions per sector (including non techn.)Assessment of EE potentials and costsUsing model (such as MEDPRO) gives a comprehensive view

DIFFICULTIESDIFFICULTIES

--DATADATA-- IndustryIndustry

Constant price and VAD not available. Numbers calculated from production index given by TURKSTAT.

Some production indexes not available according to NACE standard in sub-sectors have been combined.

Fuel consumption in sub-sectors has been estimated for some years, and when inconsistency of General Energy Balance Table other sources are used

MAIN OUTPUTS

Detailed database (1990 – 2004 ) ongoing for 2005-2006

First comprehensive report on energy efficiency trends in Turkey

Questionaire to assess energy saving potential

Alternative energy efficiency scenario through modelling

CONCLUSIONS

Providing of methodologies and tools

Training of experts

Sharing of assumptions and expertise

Take advantage of this capacity building