Discrepancy originated from intensity vector in embodied energy accounting

Global climate change has made human pursuit of sustainable development goals more urgent and specific, with increasing studies focused on environmental embodiment or footprint issues. As a key link in embodied energy accounting, energy intensity vector has received little attention although its variants can lead to huge discrepancies in interpreting results and the corresponding policy implications. This work performs a comparative study to inform the choice of energy intensity vector in input-output modelling. We construct 4 energy intensity vectors varying from methodology and data source, and compare their performances in terms of sectoral and regional responsibility, energy embodied in international trade both in an original and uniform framework. It is concluded that the choice of energy intensity is a process of determining system boundary, and trade-off should be made between detailed actual energy flow and implication about energy-economy nexus. Energy sectors dominate the generation of intensity vector, processing of exogenous energy data, especially the part from household direct use and transformation efficiency loss may cause a huge accounting deviation. Although different vectors may give varying sectoral embodied energy, the discrepancy in regional total, in particular, consumption-based accounting is much less. Our discussion can be further applied to other embodied resource accounting or environmental extension.

Automated summary

This study compares 4 different energy intensity vectors to inform the choice in input-output modeling, highlighting the importance of selecting the appropriate energy intensity for interpreting results and policy implications. The selection of energy intensity is a process of determining system boundary, requiring a trade-off between detailed actual energy flow and implications about the energy-economy nexus.