Benjamin Sovacool "The Nordic Low-Carbon Transition: Implications and Insights for Researchers and Practitioners" Keynote Energy Cultures Conference 2016

1. The Nordic Low-Carbon Transition:
Implications and Insights for
Researchers and Practitioners
Invited Keynote Address to the Energy Cultures Conference
“Sustainable Energy Figures: Understanding Behavior and
Supporting Transitions,” Wellington, New Zealand, July 6-7,
2016
Benjamin K. Sovacool, Ph.D
Professor of Energy Policy
Director of the Sussex Energy Group
Director of the Center on Innovation and
Energy Demand

5. Primary data sources:

6. The need for better
energy systems

7. Global Final Energy Consumption, 2012
Amount = 5,600 mtoe Amount = 22,000 TWh Amount = 89 mbd
Renewable energy is largely the “other”!
A diversification challenge

8. Major Global Energy Reserves for 16 Leading Energy
Nations, 2012
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
BillionBarrelsofOilEquivalent
Shale Gas
Uranium
Coal
Natural Gas
Oil
A geopolitical problem

9. Life Expectancy of Proven Fossil Fuel and
Uranium Resources, 2012
9
Proven
Reserves
Current
Production
Life Expectancy (Years)
0% Annual
Production
Growth
Rate
1.6%
Production
Growth
Rate
2.5%
Production
Growth
Rate
Coal 930,400
million short
tons
6,807
million short
tons
137 85 61
Natural
Gas
6,189 trillion
cubic feet
104.0 trillion
cubic feet
60 42 37
Petrole
um
1317 billion
barrels
30.560
billion
barrels
43 33 30
Uraniu
m
4,743,000
tons (at
$130/kgU)
40,260 tons 118 67 56
A resource depletion problem

10. An environmental challenge

11. Are there any young children
in the room?

12. An environmental challenge

13. The Nordic perspective

15. Nordic Energy Flows

16. Primary energy production in Nordic countries;
share of production by fuel, 2011

17. The four pillars of the Nordic
energy transition

18. #1: Renewable electricity
(but mostly bio-energy and
hydro)

19. Primary renewable energy production in
the Nordic countries, 2011

20. Nordic total primary energy supply in the
Carbon-Neutral Scenario

21. The import of a diversified, services-oriented
portfolio

22. #2: Energy efficiency in
buildings

23. Energy intensity in the Nordic region, and globally

24. Final energy consumption per capita, Nordic countries and
OECD average

25. Buildings need energy efficiency
improvements

26. Buildings need energy efficiency
improvements – how?

27. Buildings need energy efficiency
improvements – how?

28. Buildings need energy efficiency
improvements – how?

29. Net zero homes and energy efficiency

30. The first ZERO+ house in Denmark to produce more
energy than it consumes.

31. #3: Transportation
(hydrogen, biofuels, and
EVs)

32. Nordic energy use in transport

33. 2050 energy use in transport

34. EV share of total Nordic (passenger) car sales

35. Sønderborg’s leadership

37. #4: Carbon Capture and
Storage (CCS)

38. Carbon capture and storage is key
“Carbon capture and storage (CCS) represents the most
important option among new technologies for reducing industrial
CO2 emissions after 2030. Currently, great uncertainties exist as
to how to deploy CCS, and therefore both CCS demonstrations
and closer Nordic collaboration would be needed to overcome
the barriers.”

39. CCS utilization in industry by 2050

40. Five implications for
analysts

41. #1: The transition won’t be rapid

42. • It will still take
decades (until 2050)
for the Nordic region
• These are courtiers
are already anomalies
• Relatively small
• Wealthy
• Strong
environmental
ethic
• High fuel and
electricity prices
#1: The transition won’t be rapid

43. • It will depend on
technological
breakthroughs, but these are
not necessarily obvious:
• Bioenergy
• Hydro
• CCS
• EVs
• (conventional) Nuclear
power
• Energy efficiency
• Energy storage
• Political goals may not be
achieved due to lack of
technological innovation
#2: Even for Nordic countries, the
transition is contingent
Sketch of the Norwegian hydropower
system Sira-Kvina

44. … and, even political goals can rapidly
change (“allies” vs. “interests”)

45. • It will involve not only changing technical systems, but also social attitudes – the
human software along with the technological hardware, the notion of a
“seamless web” from Thomas P. Hughes
#3: The transition is socio-technical

46. #4: If true, we need a better understanding of energy
behavior and consumption, or “EUED”

47. User motivations are complex and
heterogamous
Stern, Paul C. and Elliot Aronson, Energy Use: The Human
Dimension (New York: Freeman & Company, 1984).
• The investor regards energy as a cost that is carefully considered in
making purchases such as equipment and capital, and views energy
technologies as durable ways to recover costs over their useful life.
• The consumer thinks of their homes and automobiles as consumer
goods that provide pleasures and necessities.
• The conformer sees energy technologies as a way to belong to a
particular social group or attain status.
• The crusader sees energy use as an ethical issue and conserves
energy as an expression of self-reliance and environmental
stewardship.
• The problem avoider treats energy as no more than a potential
source of annoyance or inconvenience, doing nothing about it until
technologies break down and services cease.

48. User motivations are complex and
heterogamous

49. User motivations are complex and
heterogamous

50. User motivations are complex and
heterogamous

51. User motivations are complex and
heterogamous

52. User motivations are complex and
heterogamous
(1) User-producers create new technical and organizational
solutions
(2) User-intermediaries shape the needs and desires of users as well
as products, infrastructures, and regulatory frameworks
(3) User-citizens engage in politics of regime shift lobbying for a
particular niche
(4) User-legitimators shape the values and worldview of niche
actors
(5) User-consumers appropriate products and services and thus
producing meaning and purpose, and testing new systems

53. • The blueprint will
most certainly not
be adopted globally
• United States
and its partisan
politics?
• China and its
energy
scramble?
• India and its
energy poverty?
• It only gets us
partway where we
need to go
#5: The transition won’t be universally
replicated
Phases of decarbonization (from IIASA)

54. In sum, even the Nordic energy transition—
perhaps the exemplar for the world—is
politically contested and technologically
contingent

55. Contact Information
Benjamin K. Sovacool, Ph.D
Professor of Energy Policy
University of Sussex
Jubilee Building, Room 367
Falmer, East Sussex, BN1 9SL
UK: 01273 877128
International: +44 1273 877128
B.Sovacool@sussex.ac.uk