Required as well as continued support for phasing out

This preview shows page 271 - 276 out of 717 pages.

required as well as continued support for phasing out fossil fuels. Withinthe Nordic countries the main barrier to continued improvement inenergy efficiency is the slow rate of turnover of the building stock, aswell as the difficulty in improving energy efficiency (space heating andcooling) of older buildings. For example, the turnover rate of building
stock has been slow in Denmark, which has, in turn, slowed down theimprovements in energy efficiency. Because new buildings are ingeneral much more energy efficient than older buildings, moreemphasis should be given to retrofitting older buildings. The SwedishMillion Programme offers a summary of the possible difficulties inimproving the energy efficiency of buildings. Initially, the programmewas set up by the Swedish Parliament with the goal of building 100 000dwellings per year between 1965 and 1974. These buildings need to beretrofitted due to their age and could provide an opportunity for furtherenergy savings. However, various barriers exist preventing this fromhappening. Energy efficiency improvements do not reduce the operatingcosts of these buildings and, therefore, rents must be raised. Theseapartments are in low-income areas and the residents might not be
able to pay the higher rent. It is, therefore, very hard for the housingcompanies to reduce the energy consumption in their buildings, while atthe same time maintain the bottom line (Swedish Association of PublicHousing Companies, 2011). Therefore both financial and social factorscan sometimes prevent energy savings. Another barrier is the lack ofawareness about efficient technologies. Homeowners and firms maysimply not be aware of energy efficient technologies nor the financial orenvironmental benefits they can bring. Governments can increaseawareness through campaigns and by publishing reliable information.Nordic countries are similar in many ways, but differ particularly interms of access to energy sources. Iceland, for example, has access togeothermal energy and Norway has historically used a higher share ofelectricity than other countries in the region due to its abundant
hydropower resources and low electricity prices. The buildings stock isalso quite different among the five countries. Consequently, criticalchallenges differ depending on the different resources available andcharacteristics of the building stock. Chapter 7 Nordic EnergyTechnology Perspectives Chapter 7 Conclusions 149 © OECD/IEA, 2013.Conclusions The Nordic Energy Technology Perspectives (NETP)describes three possible scenarios for the Nordic energy system in 2050,each of which is greatly decarbonised, more efficient and has a highshare of renewable sources. All three scenarios describe a region that isa significant electricity exporter and carbon capture and storage (CCS)practitioner, and has a completely revolutionised transport sector. KeyFindingsThe NETP scenarios provide a valuablecontext to assess thepotential of current national targets. The Carbon-Neutral Scenario (CNS)
offers a cost-effective pathway to an energy system with no net

Upload your study docs or become a

Course Hero member to access this document

Upload your study docs or become a

Course Hero member to access this document

End of preview. Want to read all 717 pages?

Upload your study docs or become a

Course Hero member to access this document

Term
Spring
Professor
N/A
Tags
Energy development, World energy resources and consumption, Peak oil, International Energy Agency, Nordic Energy Technology

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture