Why do countries’ greenhouse gas (GHG) intensities differ? How much of a country’s GHG intensity is set by inflexible national circumstances, and how much may be altered by policy? These questions are common in climate change policy discourse and may influence emission reduction allocations. Despite the policy relevance of the discussion, little quantitative analysis has been done. In this paper we address these questions in the context of the G7 by applying a pair of simple quantitative methodologies: decomposition analysis and allocation of fossil fuel production emissions to end-users instead of producers. According to our analysis and available data, climate and geographic size - both inflexible national characteristics - can have a significant effect on a country’s GHG intensity. A country’s methods for producing electricity and net trade in fossil fuels are also significant, while industrial structure has little effect at the available level of data disaggregation.
AngB.W. (2004). “Decomposition analysis for policymaking in energy: which is the preferred method?” Energy Policy32(9): 1131-1139
2.
AngB.W. (2005). “The LMDI approach to decomposition analysis: a practical guide.” Energy Policy33(7): 867-871
3.
AngB.W.LiuF.L. (2001). “A new energy decomposition method: perfect in decomposition and consistent in aggregation.” Energy26(6): 537-548.
4.
AngB.W.LiuF.L.ChungH.S. (2004). “A generalized Fisher index approach to energy decomposition analysis.” Energy Economics26(5): 757-763.
5.
AngB.W.ZhangF.Q. (2000). “A survey of index decomposition analysis in energy and environmental studies.” Energy25(12):1149-1176.
6.
BoydG.A.RoopJ.M. (2004). “A Note on the Fisher Ideal Index Decomposition for Structural Change in Energy Intensity.” The Energy Journal25(1): 87-101
7.
CornillieJ.FankhauserS.(2004). “The energy intensity of transition countries.” Energy Economics26(3): 283-295.
8.
DiewartW. (1978). “Superlative index numbers and consistency in aggregation.” Econometrica46(4): 883-900.
9.
GreeningL.DavisW.SchipperL.KhrushchM. (1997). “Comparison of six decomposition methods: application to aggregate energy intensity for manufacturing in 10 OECD countries.” Energy Economics19(3): 375-390.
10.
KrackelerT.SchipperL.SezgenO. (1998). “Carbon dioxide emissions in OECD service sectors: the critical role of electricity use.” Energy Policy26(15): 1137-1152.
11.
LeeK.OhW. (2005). “Analysis of CO2 emissions in APEC countries: A time series and a cross-sectional decomposition using the log mean Divisia method”. Energy Policy (In Press, Corrected Proof).
12.
LiuF.L.AngB.W.(2003). “Eight methods for decomposing the aggregate energy-intensity of industry.” Applied Energy76(1-3): 15-23.
13.
NanduriM. (1998). An assessment of energy intensity indicators and their role as policy-making tools. Master of Resource and Environmental Management Research Project No.232. School of Resource and Environmental Management, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver.
14.
NanduriM.NyboerJ.JaccardM. (2002). “Aggregating physical intensity indicators: results of applying the composite indicator approach to the Canadian industrial sector.” Energy Policy30(2): 151-163.
15.
Office of Energy Efficiency (2004). “Energy Efficiency Trends in Canada: 1990-2002.” Natural Resources Canada.
16.
PadfieldC. (2001). “The Canadian decomposition experience: From 10 to 54 industries.” Paper presentation, The 2001 ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Industry, Proceedings Vol. I, July: 621-630.
17.
SchipperL.HaasR.SheinbaumC. (1996). “Recent Trends in Residential Energy Use in OECD Countries and Their Impact On Carbon Dioxide Emissions: A Comparative Analysis of the Period 1973-1992.” Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change1(2): 167-196.
18.
SchipperL.Marie-LilliuC. (1999). Carbon Emissions from Transport in IEA Countries: Recent Lessons and Long-Term Challenges. Stockholm: Swedish Board for Communications and Transportation Research.
19.
SchipperL.MurtishawS.UnanderF. (2001a). “International Comparisons of Sectoral Carbon Dioxide Emissions Using a Cross-country Decomposition Technique”. The Energy Journal, 22(2): 35-75.
20.
SchipperL.MurtishawS.KhruschM.TingM.UnanderF. (2001b). “Carbon emissions from manufacturing energy use in 13 IEA Countries: long term trends through 1995.” Energy Policy29(9): 667-688.
21.
SchipperL.SchollL.PriceL. (1997). “Energy Use and Carbon from Freight in Ten Industrialized Countries: An Analysis of Trends form 1973 to 1992.” Transportation Research — Part D: Transport and Environment2(1): 57-76.
22.
SunJ. (1998). “Changes in energy consumption and energy intensity: A complete decomposition model.” Energy Economics20(1): 85-100.
23.
UnanderF.KarbuzS.SchipperL.KhruschM.TingM. (2000). “Manufacturing Energy Use in OECD Countries: Decomposition of Long-Term Trends.” Energy Policy27(13): 769-778.
24.
United States Department of Energy (2004). “Energy Indicators System: Index Construction Methodology”. http://intensityindicators.pnl.gov/documents/index_methodology.doc, 12/06/04
25.
ZhangF.Q.AngB.W. (2001). “Methodological issues in cross-country/region decomposition of energy and environment indicators.” Energy Economics23(2): 179-190.
