From: bloem.voss [mailto:@.ec.europa.eu]
Hi,
you are lucky that I have it with me here in Brussels
Find attached two *.png
One all energy, the other one on RE for buildings.
When and if I find time I will make one with more recent data.
Best regards,
It would be interesting (although possible impractical) to try and reproduce the sankey diagram but with an additional step named “useful energy” or similar placed after the “used energy”, taking into account the potential for energy reduction with energy efficiency measures at the user end and modal change (e.g. bike/train rather than car) – this would reveal a whole other level of waste energy – has anybody in the group attempted to do this?
Nick N
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Claverton _ Energy Discussion (main Claverton group)" group.
To post to this group, send email to energy-disc...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to energy-discussion...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/energy-discussion-group?hl=en.
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1209 / Virus Database: 1500/3542 - Release Date: 03/31/11
> It would be interesting (although possible impractical) to try and
> reproduce the sankey diagram but with an additional step named �useful
> energy� or similar placed after the �used energy�, taking into account
> the potential for energy reduction with energy efficiency measures at
> the user end and modal change (e.g. bike/train rather than car) � this
> would reveal a whole other level of waste energy � has anybody in the
> group attempted to do this?
No, but as a crude rule-of-thumb, I'd go for an 80-50-20 : 80%
efficiency savings theoretically possible; 50% technically possible now;
20% with a positive NPV now.
i.e. the underlying energy service demand is about 20% of current energy
demand - 80% savings are theoretically possible.
Technically we could halve our current energy demand without changing
energy service demand - 50% savings are technically possible.
And 20% energy efficiency is sitting there waiting to happen for free
(or cheaper), like fivers on the pavement; except that there are hidden
costs, transactional costs, satisficing behaviour, market inertia, etc.
- which is why they aren't happening currently.
Regards,
Andrew
Dear Nick
http://www.bartlett.ucl.ac.uk/markbarrett/Teaching/SEE_7%20Electricity_MBarrett%20120210.pptx
Slide 112-14 show animated Sankey diagram including ‘useful’ energy after final conversion, though useful is a slippery concept.
Such diagrams are generated automatically from SEEScen model used for this study of EU energy: http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk/13088/1/13088.pdf
Unfortunately I did not produce Sankeys for most countries, nor for the EU as a whole.
Best wishes
Mark
Dr Mark Barrett, Senior lecturer
UCL Energy Institute, Central House , 14 Upper Woburn Place
London WC1H 0NN
Location map: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/energy/contact-us/UCL_Energy-Institute_Map
Web site: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/energy/
Email: Mark.B...@ucl.ac.uk
Personal site : www.bartlett.ucl.ac.uk/markbarrett/Index.html
Tel UCL: +44 (0)20 3108 5983
Tel Mobile: +44 (0)7837 338297
Tel Home: +44 (0)1206 542596
Skype: MarkAlexBarrett (Mark Barrett)